SavagePostModern

[SavagePostModern]

How can I describe myself? Well I'm a anarchist first of all.............

I would describe myself as a apocalyptic anarchist who views that the only form of genuine independence can only come about from the destruction of all governments and all representational authorities.

You might say that in today's post-modern world such destruction might only come about with the destruction of current global civilization and society which I'm also against.

( Hence why I call myself a apocalyptic anarchist because I view genuine change only coming with the destruction of current global society and civilization.)

My understanding of anarchism is heavily influenced by Max Stirner but I am also heavily influenced in understanding anarchism by understanding human prehistory where a state of anarchism was the norm for ancient humans in the paleolithic era.

I'm also a nihilist, pessimist, cynicist, fatalist, and existentialist when it comes to philosophy.

I'm also heavily influenced by evolutionist ideas in that I view myself to be a naturalist.

( I practically admire Charles Darwin on just about everything and many evolutionists after him.)



Nice to meet everybody here. I'm sure I'll be a thorn in the side of communists here with my dystopic personal.

[Q]

So, back to the trees to solve our social problems? I think that's the exact opposite way of a solution.

Welcome.

[SavagePostModern]

So, back to the trees to solve our social problems? I think that's the exact opposite way of a solution.

Welcome.

I just embrace the natural instincts of human beings along with the primordial nature we have forgotten about with our current embrace of cult-ure.

I'm not a full blown anarcho-primitivist in that I'm not against technology although I certainly do understand and support some of their motives or aims.

( Many of their critiques of civilization.)

(I'm sure you have had anarcho-primitivists here in the past.)

[Q]

I think class society is a necessary step in our evolution as a species. To keep it succinct our technological level was at the time of the agrarian revolution, 10 000 years ago, not sufficient to create a superabundance. It was sufficient though to create a surplus. But this then naturally also created a class society.

Now however, after 10 000 years of technological and social evolution, we are arrived at the point of superabundance, making it possible to abolish class society once and for all. Simply dismissing society and striving for a primitive society is not solving anything, it just brings us back at the dawn of civilisation. Besides, I think you have a somewhat romanticised picture of hunter-gatherer communities if you seriously advocate that way.

The solution is not going back to primitive communism, but to solve the class society and progress towards modern communism.

[OneNamedNameLess]

Welcome :)

[revolution inaction]

( I practically admire Charles Darwin on just about everything and many evolutionists after him.)


have you read kropotkin's Mutual Aid (http://libcom.org/library/mutual-aid-peter-kropotkin)? its about how mutual aid is an important factor in evolution.

[SavagePostModern]

To Radical Graffiti:

No I haven't. I haven't read anything written by Kropotkin

Most communist writings I'm familiar with are written by Marx, Engels, Trotsky,Stalin, Mao, and Guevara.


Mutual aid is only beneficial when it is reciprocal.

From my observations very few social interactions are reciprocal at all.

It doesn't help the case for reciprocity when human nature tends towards individual self interest which complicates a great deal of many things.

[SavagePostModern]

I think class society is a necessary step in our evolution as a species. To keep it succinct our technological level was at the time of the agrarian revolution, 10 000 years ago, not sufficient to create a superabundance. It was sufficient though to create a surplus. But this then naturally also created a class society.

Now however, after 10 000 years of technological and social evolution, we are arrived at the point of superabundance, making it possible to abolish class society once and for all. Simply dismissing society and striving for a primitive society is not solving anything, it just brings us back at the dawn of civilisation. Besides, I think you have a somewhat romanticised picture of hunter-gatherer communities if you seriously advocate that way.

The solution is not going back to primitive communism, but to solve the class society and progress towards modern communism.


I think class society is a necessary step in our evolution as a species.

Whenever someone speaks of somthing for the entire specie I can't help but feel they are generalizing in that our specie is made of differing individuals not a single collective hive mind.

How can one man or ideal speak for all individuals and persons?

The mistake of many who study social human interactions in our present is to oberve us as a single conscious or hive mentality when clearly we are not like that of ants and other insects.

Necessary for whom? Clearly class society is necessary for the upper classes who takes advantage of the lower classes through fear, coercion,threat, and manipulation.

Is class society necessary for the lower classes? I would definately think the perspective of the lower classes would greatly differ from the perspective of the upper classes on the subject who feel the yoke of subjugation.


To keep it succinct our technological level was at the time of the agrarian revolution, 10 000 years ago, not sufficient to create a superabundance. It was sufficient though to create a surplus. But this then naturally also created a class society.

I don't believe in historicism.

I don't believe in a straight arrow of time or progression when it concerns cultures, civilizations, and nations.

I don't believe in final destinations.



Now however, after 10 000 years of technological and social evolution, we are arrived at the point of superabundance, making it possible to abolish class society once and for all.


And just how do you plan on dismantling or dealing with hierarchy that manifests those sort of things that you wish to get rid of?

All animal species have hierarchies. How do you plan on dismantling hierarchy within the human specie?

Why is it that humanity seems to think it can liberate itself from hierarchy?



Simply dismissing society and striving for a primitive society is not solving anything


Exactly because I don't believe anything needs to be solved.

I believe nature and the world around us is perfect just the way it is.

Those that feel that they need to modify or tamper with the natural order of things I believe are those that create most of the problems in the world.

Those that feel that they need to modify the natural order of things exasperate things further.



it just brings us back at the dawn of civilisation.


Are you familiar with eternal reoccurence? I view existence to be circular.

What do you have against being at the dawn of civilization? Why must civilization exist?



Besides, I think you have a somewhat romanticised picture of hunter-gatherer communities if you seriously advocate that way.



Not really. I look at existence especially that of nature being cruel, inequal, and brutal.

Although at the same time I also view hunter gather pre-civilized communities having less inequality than their civilized counterparts who seem create more inequality with their growth and advancement of civilization even when they promise to lessen them but never do.

Inequality has always existed but it existed in a lesser degree I believe in pre-civilized humans than it does with civilized forms of living that we live in today.



The solution is not going back to primitive communism, but to solve the class society and progress towards modern communism.


You believe and find comfort in salvaging the current system of existence we have. You believe it can be saved.

I do not.

I believe it is unsalvageable and better off abandoning or destroying so some newer form of existence can come through.