In the real world

Thanks for the advice but like I said before, I have a hard time believing that even half the people who call themselves primitivists feel this way and of those who do wish we could ALL go back to primitive living, less than half actually would know what the hell that would entail. If there IS such a group, which was the basis of my last post, they must be a very tiny sect of humans. I wouldn't say that my post descended "into inane ravings on how evil the other guy is". As I said, if people want to live primitively, that's their business so long as they don't try and fuck with anyone else. I'm far from taking "up the banner of a decades old blood feud between red anarchists and primmos". What I was "critically analyzing" was the idea of the described sect in question, not an ideological tendency. Also, just because I'm new on this site doesn't make me a newb, unless you were referring to my time spent on this forum alone or to the feud between red anarchists and "primmos".

www.seasol.net

edit: jesuithitsquad beat me to it. Groups like SeaSol, LCAP, etc. are relatively easy to set up and a directly relevant way that people can use their collective power to impose their will on bosses and landlords. - anarchism in action.

Trust me, they're no tinier than the sect on this forum; or any of the sects in the radical milieu. Just don't turn into a shrieking, moralistic type who spends all their free time exclaiming the virtues of your ideology and the evilness, impracticality, and stupidity of the other tendency. I'm not a big tent type, but I'm also not an evangelist either. Repudiating the murderous, vile nature (lmao) of primitivism will not make your ideas more appealing to people outside the milieu. I'd say the leftists are more of a threat to the human species than the primmos. You can find decent analysis and critiques among those who analyze civilization in an antagonistic way (unless you're stuck in the 1980's and your still wanking off to See Sharp Press's catalogs of Xtreme atheism!!11!!). The left-wing just wants you to go to the nearest movie theater and spend $20 on their totally awesome anti-capitalist documentaries -- and vote yes for progress, while you're at it!! Or maybe they want you to grab a gun and fight for some nationalist nutjobs. Or maybe they want you to stop striking and get back to work. Etc, etc.

Critique takes more effort than moral conjecture. Primitivists are not a threat. They're just like any utopianist tendency. There's no more of a chance for the utopias of communists than there is for primmos. Neither of them are realizable. Primmos will not sneak up and genocide you in teh pooper. Most pro-revolutionaries are incredibly tame. Like, turtle neck sweater, sitting by the fireplace, eating homemade apple pie tame. Or, 'dude, I'm so fucked up on this OC and I think I might die', tame. Etc, etc.

Oh hai Bisc!! Long time no see. I really have no idea what you're on about as your above posts, while well written and full of decent enough ideas (minus the little anti-organizational slogan) make no fucking sense. What was your point? You've gone away a couple of times and come back as a couple of different things so what is it now? A primmo apologist? I really don't think so, but if not what are you trying to accomplish in your post except to score a few points off the new guy?

There is a difference you know between off-topic and thread drift and if you bothered to read the thread in its entirety you'd understand how we got to that point. There was no moralizing involved on my end only drawing the anti-civ stuff to the logical conclusion if applied. Not even the primmo boss has a clue how to reconcile his theory with reality:

Of course anti-civs aren't a threat. It's just a fucking terrible idea. Period.

As for your use of the term "leftist," last time you were here (which admittedly was a few months ago and it seems that is a lifetime in the world of Bisc's political development) you seemed to have an appreciation for Dauve so can we use him as a common denominator as I'm a big fan too? Dauve, iirc has used leftist to refer to the left wing of capital and those who wish to manage others' struggles. In what way have you seen anyone here advocate for either. We are for the abolition of work as a separate activity, internationalism, for the working class's self-emancipation, and direct democracy which doesn't exactly sound like the program of those looking to install themselves as a new ruling class.

I think the whole problem is anarchists like the us crimethink lot.

i think that they are basically irrelevant and the problem is that most people have no direct experience of workplace organisation effectively delivering improved wages or conditions.

I agree with this. I think that most people, especially younger anarchists have not been involved in as many industrial disputes as say in the 70s or 80s. This has in turn along with individualism diminished class consciousness in the United Kingdom anyway. I do think crimethink and people like them are also a problem as, they don't seem to understand that class struggle is more important than jumping in bins. I also think its alot easier for rich middle class people to 'drop out' of capitalism than for the majority.

I've been critical of Crimethinc in the past for one reason alone. I saw it as more a call to run off and hide from the problems that effect us all as opposed to standing up in opposition to the authority that perpetuates those problems. Even I have to admit, though, that there are some people within the Crimethinc camp (for lack of a better word) who do more than just drop out and dumpster dive, who realize that for real social change to take place they have to do more than just drop off the grid and so I think it's a bad idea to make blanket statements about groups like them, not to say that Crimethinc is a membership based organization, but you catch my drift. The following article found in the Crimethinc archives pretty well sums up the difference between the ideas put forth by Crimethinc and the sub-culture that is generally associated with Crimethinc. http://crimethinc.com/texts/pastfeatures/purged.php

This paragraph in particular opened my eyes, to an extent, about the the real (espoused) purpose of crimethought:

"Crimethought is not any ideology or value system or lifestyle, but rather a way of challenging all ideologies and value systems and lifestyles—and, for the advanced agent, a way of making all ideologies, value systems, and lifestyles challenging. It is not crimethought just to survive without a job by dumpstering, squatting, and hitchhiking; it is crimethought to realize that this lifestyle provides resources that can be used to revolutionize demonstration activism, or underground literature. It is not crimethought simply to distribute propaganda attacking the monotony and limited options of traditional employment; it is crimethought to create situations in which both workers and ex-workers benefit from each others’ different experiences, and consequently discover new options and new adventures that were previously obscured."

Any thoughts?

Huh? I never even implied Libcom was a leftist site. What the fuck are you bitching about? It's obvious that this shit hole (out of the collective shit hole, anarchist forums on teh internetz) is where the cool, ultra-lefties go to hang out and whine about primmos and talk about cool, ultra-left communist stuff. You need to take a breath, man. This isn't 1985. You're not Chaz Bufe. So let's try not to go into a RAGE any time someone says 'primitivist' or 'leftist'! 'Kay?

...and Crimethinc = progressive politics cloaked in half baked Situationist rhetoric. They're not even worth critiquing. It's only worth critiquing something or someone when you know you're going to get something out of it intellectually. But hey, what do I know, right? I'm just a 'primitivist apologist'.

well bisc i guess that was the point of my post. you spent like 10 paragraphs and i was none the wiser when i finished what the hell you were trying to get at. why bring up leftists if it wasn't directed as a slur? talk about off-topic.

rage? i didn't even bring up TEH GUNSHOW!!!!1111

You've got to admit, he's got us there.

~J.

Indeed. Not to say this site being a shithole is anything special. Mostly everything to do with the radical milieu is shitty and hole-y. Sometimes I feel thankful that I don't actually, personally know any radicals. The horror stories are abundant.

You have a very nice library.

bisc why are you acting like a butthurt spaz? no one here is consumed with hatred for primmos, nor have said primmos been a subject of discussion for a while now. Fair enough about "radical milieus" but it seems to me you spend a lot of time reading up on the very "cool ultra-left communism" you deride above.

I wasn't deriding anything. I was poking fun at Libcom, not at ultra-left communist theory. And yeah, I do enjoy ultra-left literature. It's better than listening to some activist yarn about social change, 'real alternatives', and the evil bankers. It's nice to take a breather from the populism of the anarchist milieu.

As for primmos; I would say it's difficult for many people outside of the very small, tight knit Libcom clique to step into this place and get cozy with the atmosphere and popular ideas of it's users. Whether you're aware of it or not, some circles outside of Libcom think this site is filled with bloodthirsty anti-primmos. Just as @news is regarded as the 4chan of anarchist websites, Libcom is regarded as the snarky, British anarchist website that is generally hostile to anyone who doesn't fit the bill of an ultra-left communist. You're either cool, a loser lifestylist, or a crazy, obscure individualist who doesn't know what the fuck they're talking about. Can't say I necessarily agree with that, but this site is definitely a niche site, like Anti-Politics or the recently revived Red and Anarchist Action Network forum. So not everyone's going to be happy with it. It's impossible to please everyone even with general sites.

I came onto this thread and saw another comment about how primmos want to kill everyone, and it pissed me off, yeah. It's like when I hear some douchebag painting communists, and communist theory, as totally irreconcilable with anarchism. As if there's some huge chasm between the two tendencies. These arguments are fallacies. And worst yet, they're fallacies that have been proven to be so time and time again, but there's always some jerk with too much time on their hands making shit arguments and spurring on age old ideological skirmishes (although, can't say I can portray myself as not guilty of doing so). It's inane and it's annoying. So I spoke up. I'll leave it at that and won't say anything more.

.../end of rant

As far as I can tell no one's said that the primmos will as a group intentionally kill off 98% of the earth's population. What's been argued is that the logical outcome of primmo thought (hunter gatherer society) is that most people would have to die off. As far as I know only a tiny tiny minority of primmos actually advocate stuff like releasing sarin gas in the Tokyo subways.

"thinking that people should fuck off and die" is different from releasing sarin gas in subways.

these just people with ideas...

OK so in the Real World!

Is it worth our creating a framework for after the revolution or not until after it?

In the real world, we have children to feed, need somewhere to live, need to learn & have something useful to contribute, and a way of socializing.

Apart from the strong arguments for & against groups,. I'd like to see some suggestions for those, OK if you want for after the revolution.

Workers coops go without saying, its classic stuff. How would we transfer food to & from other countries? Would these other 'countries' also have to be anarchist? I ask this for a time when one 'country' might have reached an anarchistic system. I remember when butter was handed out after a glut in the '80s, that kind of food distribution could work really well.

I really do think we all pretty well agree on the ends.

Is it worth today saying to people in situations where we need to feed, house & clothe ourselves, how it can be done better? Some people see the point of what I am saying & others don't.

Who is looking after you today (if someone else is)? Have you asked them what they think?

no, they really don't.

to be honest i literally have no idea what you're actually asking...

you seem to be assuming the posters here are "a bit utopian" whilst advocating pie-in-the-sky things like charity minibusses and free public transport. the real world is one where it makes absolutely no difference what 'anarchist solutions' you dream up because we have no power to implement them. what is important is increasing the power we have over our own lives, i.e. class struggle, not fantasising about how great free busses would be.

i mean a list of stuff my organisation (Solidarity Federation) has been involved in in the last 12 months: supporting strikes across the country, workplace organising, practical support for factory and school occupations, confronting fascists and preventing them from openly organising, supporting migrant workers' self-organisation, picketing in support of victimised workers and comrades, organising public meetings and so on. all these things are practical, everyday expressions of anarchism, and unlike free busses or anarchist ambulances, actually exist in the real world.

ah, this explains a lot. infoshop is 'big tent' anarchism, for clowns. it's par for the course there to describe critical thought as 'sectarianism' and try and unite all self-described anarchists in a nice big ghetto where nobody can question their ideas. it's not sectarian to point out my politics share nothing in common with primitivists, the ELF, ALF, national liberation cheerleaders, individualists, insurrectionists, mutualists, NAMBLA-ites and so on. but Dead End has already addressed that nonsense masquerading as a debunking of nonsence.

Thank you Joseph.

Solidarity Federation has done a lot of good work as you say & I have a lot of respect for that.

It was opinions I was after & suggestions for creating what we can today for the future we want tomorrow.

Most people here seem to think there isn't much point doing that at this stage and that is a definite view, which is fine, it was views & ideas I was after.

The busses were just an example of something positive & concrete that would help others to see the point of it all, sometimes there can be a lot of emphasis on fighting & destruction which turns a lot of people away when they'd agree with what we wanted if they stayed around to find out. That's just my opinion.

Of course a lot of people couldn't care less, and thats why people need to be politicized so they can think for themselves. Also in my opinion.

Thanks!

The discourse that uses phrases like "myths", "debunk" and "real world" is generally a device to dismiss all objections to an idea by implying there are no serious arguments against it, that anyone objecting is akin to a UFO fanatic.

Of course, this is the way that states, corporations and social workers frame their ideas but that should be a clue we shouldn't approach things that way...

i think the thing is it doesn't matter what "positive & concrete" things you want to create since we're in no position to do so. that's capitalism, and therefore anti-capitalist activity is that of struggle against the prevailing conditions; class struggle. that doesn't necessarily mean "fighting & destruction" by any means either, although the state tends to repress anything it sees as a threat, be that picket lines or whatever.

don't you think it's a bit patronising to assume people don't think for themselves already?

just to note my posts above were edited to reflect my idiotic conflation of zerzan and bey. one primitivist is too many for me to keep track of apparently. thanks to waslax.

A key point here is that we actually want to change the world.

If all we want is the same shit world but with a free anarchist minibus which goes to a hospital, then why don't we all just give money to charity. Or just pay our taxes and like the state - because the state provides far more useful services and free minibuses than anarchists ever could.

Also, going back to an earlier point, primitivists are just people with ideas, just like you and me when the smoke and cameras disappear.

Joseph,

Of course some people do think for themselves. I do know some people who never think about the situation we're all in & I would only encourage them to think about the issues & what they'd like to do about it.

Anyway, thanks.

Sorry this is super delayed, i'm still learning how this website works and it's not letting me delete this post now that I've realized it's way too late, but...

Dear BigLittleJ, maybe this isn't pertinent, but could you please explain that "UAW on strike" photo as being under the headline of "workers resistance still happens"? Last time I checked, Union bosses are still bosses, but probably worse because unions still give some illusion of subversion or resistance in the workplace.

Feel free to redirect me somewhere else if this is derailing this thread, or something.

Hey,

Yes, union bosses are still bosses, but no, I don't agree that unions 'give some illusion' of workplace resistance. What unions do is to take workplace existence and try to recuperate it, that is, express it in a left-wing way rather than a revolutionary way.

Workers within unions do actively resist capitalism in their workplaces. In the current climate individual workers pretty much have to fight inside the unions because they're the only organisations which are immediately around. While I would always advocate a strategy of mass meetings instead where this is possible, in most cases in britain today there won't be high enough levels of struggle for this to happen right away.

Does that make sense?

~J.