Why I Disagree with Primitivism

[Apoi_Viitor]

Don't know if this has been posted, but...

7OMLSs8t1ng

[trivas7]

Reason magazine has stories along these same lines all the time. The statistics the speaker sites at the beginning of his talk are the reason why there will be no socialist revolutions any time soon and barring a global catastrophe, global capitalism will in some form or another limp along.

[Havet]

thanks for posting

[Bud Struggle]

What he says is so true. There is a cultural backlash against science and as Specter admits it isn't entirely unjustified--star wars, weapons of mass destructions, etc. But a good number of people, well educated people, have turned their backs altogether on what science does do for good.

Another proof in it's way that human being are basically irrational creatures.

[danyboy27]

i dont like primitivism beccause i think my life expectency should exceed the 40 year old.

also, candle and oil lamp are definitively less practical than lightbulb.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

There are many good reasons for opposing "Primitivism" - being a sucka liberal who can't get over the so-called "enlightenment" is not one of them.

[danyboy27]

What he says is so true. There is a cultural backlash against science and as Specter admits it isn't entirely unjustified--star wars, weapons of mass destructions, etc. But a good number of people, well educated people, have turned their backs altogether on what science does do for good.

Another proof in it's way that human being are basically irrational creatures.
well buddy, you are wrong on this issue.
the problem isnt science, the problem is who use it.

the roman didnt had any weapon of mass destruction but they sure wiped out clean a fews countries with the use of verry primitive weapon like the spear and the sword.

if a EMP bomb would wipe out any functionnal technology on earth, we would still kill eachother , and i bet its gonna be more gruesome and horrible than ever.

[danyboy27]

There are many good reasons for opposing "Primitivism" - being a sucka liberal who can't get over the so-called "enlightenment" is not one of them.

is that attack dirrected at me?

[Bud Struggle]

well buddy, you are wrong on this issue.
the problem isnt science, the problem is who use it.

the roman didnt had any weapon of mass destruction but they sure wiped out clean a fews countries with the use of verry primitive weapon like the spear and the sword.

if a EMP bomb would wipe out any functionnal technology on earth, we would still kill eachother , and i bet its gonna be more gruesome and horrible than ever.

I wasn't saying that the people are distrustful of science because of WMDs, etc. are right, I was just quoting Specter in saying that this is what these people think. :)

[ComradeMan]

well buddy, you are wrong on this issue.
the problem isnt science, the problem is who use it.

the roman didnt had any weapon of mass destruction but they sure wiped out clean a fews countries with the use of verry primitive weapon like the spear and the sword.

if a EMP bomb would wipe out any functionnal technology on earth, we would still kill eachother , and i bet its gonna be more gruesome and horrible than ever.

I don't think that Bud meant that science was the problem, I think he meant the perception of science was the problem- the evil Dr Strangelove stereotype and so on.

Ignorance is the primary weapon of mass destruction.

[Skooma Addict]

I have seen no such cultural backlash against science.

[danyboy27]

I have seen no such cultural backlash against science.

that beccause you never talked to a new age hippie or a PETA activist.

''Science is evil, destroying the environnement, mother earth and fluffy teddy bear, remember nagasaki, we are a filthy species, using technology that kill us to build giant building, and dont forget that mind control device they are building in the desert of nevada!''

[Robert]

I have seen no such cultural backlash against science.

Who is this guy preaching to? Overgrown hippies?

On this board I have recently seen whole threads against the murder of Africans by a Belgian monarch and his mercenaries, the objectivism of Ayn Rand, and now a thread against ... Luddites, I guess.

Coming soon: "Leeches will not cure rickets!"

[Ele'ill]

I agree with several aspects of primitivist critique- but I am not a primitivist because those critiques are not unique to primitivism.

[ComradeMan]

that beccause you never talked to a new age hippie or a PETA activist.

''Science is evil, destroying the environnement, mother earth and fluffy teddy bear, remember nagasaki, we are a filthy species, using technology that kill us to build giant building, and dont forget that mind control device they are building in the desert of nevada!''

Not all new age hippies are like that.... and they do tend to make nice vegetarian food and herbal tisanes.:lol:

I think some people feel that "science", which should not be reified such but anyway often is, works more for the interest of big business and capitalism etc instead of human progress on an egalitarian basis. I'm not personally saying that it is so, but there is a perception out there.

[electro_fan]

i'm against primitivism because if it was implimented it would lead to the deaths of most of the population

[Jimmie Higgins]

I have seen no such cultural backlash against science.Creationism, Postmodern Philosophy, Healing through Prayer (both christian and new age), are all examples of an anti-science streak in post WWII Western capitalism.

[Dimentio]

The problem isn't technology, but the fact that the social system that is utilised today is based on the belief that those with least ability to survive should have the hardest time to do so. That is the main similarity between capitalism and fascism.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

I think some people feel that "science", which should not be reified such but anyway often is, works more for the interest of big business and capitalism etc instead of human progress on an egalitarian basis. I'm not personally saying that it is so, but there is a perception out there.

I don't think there's much denying that profit is the major motive behind the vast majority of scientific research and development. The amount pharm companies pour into allowing men to get it on is great and I fully support it, but not when it comes at the expense of development of vaccine and such.

The only group I see that's really put resources behind projects without the profit motive has been the military, and I don't just mean the usa of course. Obviously, the motive there has been much more bloodthirsty, some would say, but I very much like things like the internet, safe and fast air travel, and nuclear power.


By the way, I think I might choose to go to the past, when the guy has the time machine scenario at the begining. I don't really miss the past like old folks do (probably because I'm not that old...do miss the 90s tho. At least there's portland haha) but I feel I could impart a lot of knowledge on some people.

"So, because he's running a fever, you're going to cut him up and remove 2his blood. For real yo?"

[ComradeMan]

Creationism, Postmodern Philosophy, Healing through Prayer (both christian and new age), are all examples of an anti-science streak in post WWII Western capitalism.

Healing through Prayer (both christian and new age)

This seems to have some scientific foundation- even if a hardened materialist would just say it's a placebo. It's not anti-scientific either- most medical doctors also recognise psychosomatic therapies/treatments.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Healing through Prayer (both christian and new age)

This seems to have some scientific foundation- even if a hardened materialist would just say it's a placebo. It's not anti-scientific either- most medical doctors also recognise psychosomatic therapies/treatments.

I'm not talking about people praying as their loved one goes through treatment, I mean prayer or all these other pseudo-science things like tinctures or crystals or whatnot instead of regular medical treatment. IMO in the US it comes largely comes from skepticism and dissatisfaction with our medical system. People get poor treatment and they blame modern medicine rather than a dysfunctional health-care system that prioritizes viagra and happy-pills on the pharm side while on the care side, poor people are left to die in emergency waiting rooms and overworked medical professionals miss signs of illness due to hospitals/insurance companies discouraging them from doing more expensive, but thorough testing.

[ComradeMan]

I'm not talking about people praying as their loved one goes through treatment, I mean prayer or all these other pseudo-science things like tinctures or crystals or whatnot instead of regular medical treatment.

Okay, I understand.

Isn't that stuff illegal? It is in Italy. You can sell crystals and things but you can't claim unproven stuff- every now and again some charlatan or other is arrested for conning poor and desperate people for such things.

I have a cool bawaajige nagwaagan- but I am not going to sue someone if I suffer from insomnia though! ;)

[Jimmie Higgins]

Isn't that stuff illegal? It is in Italy.Well people can't sell "medicine" as a treatment without government testing, but I don't know what the laws are for prayer or other forms of "alternative treatment". But I don't think it's illegal considering that the venue where I work just hosted a conference on healing through prayer. I've never had so many people tell me to have "a blessed day" in my entire life. I haven't had a cold since, so I guess it works:lol:

[Robert]

It's "fraud" and yeah, it's illegal, but proving it is more trouble than it is worth for prosecutors dealing with burglary, rape, theft, drug dealing, and murder. Also, the defendant will be able to produce witnesses iike Jimmie (yes, I know you were joking about the cold) who will truthfully claim that their tumors shrank after they started taking the potion or wearing a copper bracelet or whatever. The government cannot prove that the treatment had no effect on the cancer or jimmie's cold.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

all these other pseudo-science things like tinctures

Y'know, a lot of traditional medicine is actually extremely effective - often times, pharmaceuticals are just shitty artificial imitations of natural cures.
Of course, traditional cultures didn't necessarily come on these things by capital-S Science, but, y'know, god-fucking-forbid, maybe Science doesn't have a monopoly on knowledge?
(Gasp! Heresy! Not our sacred cow!)

Seriously though, I cured a staph infection with a tincture. Shit works.

[Bud Struggle]

Y'know, a lot of traditional medicine is actually extremely effective - often times, pharmaceuticals are just shitty artificial imitations of natural cures.Actually, no. Sciencetific cures like completely different than natural cures. Now that being said they may use similar or the same ingredients, but how they work is often completely different.


Of course, traditional cultures didn't necessarily come on these things by capital-S Science, but, y'know, god-fucking-forbid, maybe Science doesn't have a monopoly on knowledge?
(Gasp! Heresy! Not our sacred cow!) You know VMC it seems you are the guy Specter is talking about in the video. While science doesn't have a monolopy on knowledge it has a really good understanding of how the body and drugs work. Tribal medicines have just pot lock on their side.

And on (some) Miracle Healing:

tVG1x-rh6FE

[#FF0000]

Postmodern Philosophy...anti-science

Can you explain this? I don't really know much about PoMo so I'm curious.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

You know VMC it seems you are the guy Specter is talking about in the video. While science doesn't have a monolopy on knowledge it has a really good understanding of how the body and drugs work. Tribal medicines have just pot lock on their side.


Surprise! Disagreement between bourgeois liberal journalists who are in love with progress, and committed anarchists? Never woulda seen that coming.

It's funny how so-called revolutionary leftists can be so absolutely spellbound by the foundational myths of the society they claim to be aiming to destroy.

Srsly, this is the mentality that justifies colonization, and destruction of traditional cultures. Straight-up settler bullshit.

(And, no, this is not a defense of primitivism - but it is a defense of the right of indigenous cultures to autonomy and forms of life other that are incompatible with the notion that there is only one correct way of knowing)

[Apoi_Viitor]

Can you explain this? I don't really know much about PoMo so I'm curious.

To give a short explanation, Modernists (like Chomsky) believe that rationality can solve most of our problems, that society moves in patterns or structures which are intelligible to the human observer (Marxism and Structuralism), and that generally speaking, history moves in a linear manner of increasing progress.

Post-Modernism denies overarching patterns in human history (claiming that these exclude other truths and lead to totalitarianism), they deny the idea that human society is ultimately progressing forward, and they doubt that science and rationality can solve our social dilemmas.

[ComradeMan]

And, no, this is not a defense of primitivism - but it is a defense of the right of indigenous cultures to autonomy and forms of life other that are incompatible with the notion that there is only one correct way of knowing)

I agree, but let's not assume that indigenous cultures are necessarily "primitivists" either.

[Bud Struggle]

Su
Srsly, this is the mentality that justifies colonization, and destruction of traditional cultures. Straight-up settler bullshit.

(And, no, this is not a defense of primitivism - but it is a defense of the right of indigenous cultures to autonomy and forms of life other that are incompatible with the notion that there is only one correct way of knowing)

A true can of worms you opened up here. So Amazon NAs culture is the same as modern USA culture. OK, no problem. What about devout Catholic culture with Scientific Athiest culture?

What about Islamic culture that stones women for adultry? Is that equal to modern democratic society? The list goes on.

[Havet]

Post-Modernism denies overarching patterns in human history (claiming that these exclude other truths and lead to totalitarianism), they deny the idea that human society is ultimately progressing forward, and they doubt that science and rationality can solve our social dilemmas.

I do like postmodernism in music. There is no longer objectively good and bad music. Its all a matter of taste! And everybody should respect each other's taste

[ComradeMan]

I do like postmodernism in music. There is no longer objectively good and bad music. Its all a matter of taste! And everybody should respect each other's taste

Except yours which is shit! LOL!!

It's not a postmodern idea at all- de gustibus non est disputandum- it's quite an old concept.

[Havet]

Except yours which is shit! LOL!!

You cannot objectively prove that assertion :)


It's not a postmodern idea at all- de gustibus non est disputandum- it's quite an old concept.

Sure, but there seems to be a revival.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

I certainly don't think societies are equal - but I don't think their adherence (or lack thereof) to the rationalist faith is a good basis for judging a society . . . I'm much more interested in questions about relationships of autonomy, solidarity, etc. than I am in infant mortality rates or industrial capacity.
Mind you, not that there is much to be gained from passing judgments on societies in which are not, ourselves immersed, or at least in some sort of direct relationship.
Point being: the liberal-technocratic society in which I live is a prison. Destroying said prison is my priority.


I agree, but let's not assume that indigenous cultures are necessarily "primitivists" either.

I agree, wholeheartedly. This is one of the things the frustrates me so much about primitivism - it is always a projection of the "Civilized" imagination.

[Jimmie Higgins]

I do like postmodernism in music. There is no longer objectively good and bad music. Its all a matter of taste! And everybody should respect each other's tasteYeah there is a lot of great post-modern art and interesting ideas in post-modern thought. But I think the general emphasis on language is anti-materialist and idealist. There is little to no post-modern "hard-science" because it just wouldn't work and there's a famous hoax where someone used pomo-jargon to describe a science experiment that was meaningless and important academic journals published it anyway.

For the good things about po-mo art and thought, there is also an anti-enlightenment and misanthropic streak in it that I find repulsive and think only serves to unite the intelligentsia to ruling class ideology. Rather than argue that the staus-quo is great, Po-Mo academics just argue that objective social change is impossible anyway so it has the same effect as being a pro-establishment academic anyway.

I think if you look at Po-Mo from a historical materialist perspective it is simply the result of demoralization among academics following things like the failure of socialism in Russia to achieve... well a socialist society, the rise of fascism, the holocaust and the A-bomb, increased repression in western democracies and so on. The holocaust was industrial genocide and so that obviously stings a bit if you were a modernist academic who thought that industry by its own virtue was going to perfect human society. The USSR is obvious in its demoralizing effect. The A-bomb makes science scary.

Some po-mo ideas started after WWI, but the majority of intellectuals and artists were drawn to pseudo-fascist ideas or the promise the Russian Revolution. So it wasn't until after WWII that Po-Mo really became more dominant - probably peaking in the 1970s/80s. Now I think it's a dead set of ideas and is more of a marketing tag than a real progressing philosophy.

I think we'll probably see a return of many modernist concepts as class struggle intensifies and I think we are already seeing some po-mo backlash that wants to more fully re-examine ideas about objectivity, materialism and so on. I don't know much about them but there's the "Speculative Realists" in philosophy that seem to be trying to bridge some Postmodernism with a materialist view of the world.

[Jimmie Higgins]

I do like postmodernism in music. There is no longer objectively good and bad music. Its all a matter of taste! And everybody should respect each other's tasteRight and I think that's why POMO works for art and poetry but not for anything really material. Yeah maybe someone likes Death Metal and I like Garage Punk and we equally hate the other person's music... so it's all subjective. But, on the other hand, organization of society is not as subjective. Sure subjectively Bill Gates is helped by capitalism and likes it while subjectively I don't like it and am hurt by it, but there are objective ways to measure the value of the system by various measurements. So POMO would say that a Tea-Partier is correct in his own belief that America is has the best health-care system in the world... a materialist would have to disagree (unless maybe the criteria for "best" was makes the most profit for the bosses). POMO equates creationist theory with evolutionary theory, but on a material level, they are totally different because one can be objectively tested and the other is only based on subjective ideas.

[Lt. Ferret]

I certainly don't think societies are equal - but I don't think their adherence (or lack thereof) to the rationalist faith is a good basis for judging a society . . . I'm much more interested in questions about relationships of autonomy, solidarity, etc. than I am in infant mortality rates or industrial capacity.
Mind you, not that there is much to be gained from passing judgments on societies in which are not, ourselves immersed, or at least in some sort of direct relationship.
Point being: the liberal-technocratic society in which I live is a prison. Destroying said prison is my priority.



I agree, wholeheartedly. This is one of the things the frustrates me so much about primitivism - it is always a projection of the "Civilized" imagination.


then why are you on the internet and not living in some jungle in Chiapas eating slugs to make your dick hard?

lets see where you go when you get ill, the doctor or the hippie stoner who lives in the trendy part of town?

[Ele'ill]

then why are you on the internet and not living in some jungle in Chiapas eating slugs to make your dick hard?

lets see where you go when you get ill, the doctor or the hippie stoner who lives in the trendy part of town?

I think you're misinterpreting the abolishment of 'liberal-technocratic'

[Lt. Ferret]

I'm certainly not, its a stupid, baseless position and its usually supported by anarchists who have a million apps on their iPhones.

[Ele'ill]

I'm certainly not, its a stupid, baseless position

Explain the position.




and its usually supported by anarchists who have a million apps on their iPhones.

Oh jesus christ :rolleyes: this shows your misunderstanding.

[Lt. Ferret]

i dont know what textbook definition you'll accuse me of not knowing, but primitivism as iv always understood it is a rejection of modern technology and civilization, because it is harming mankind, the environment, or the cosmos, or karma, or whatever it is that civilization is harming.

Fact is, most people like technology, they like making life comfortable, they like working less and achieving more with their labor. they like being entertained.

i live better than any monarch from 300 years ago or beyond. the only thing they have on me is blind obedience or power over others, and i have no desire for it.

ill keep my internet and computer and hwne my head hurts ill take some modern medicine and when i need a pick me up in the morning ill take pure B12 vitamin pills.

the alternative is a harsher, more violent and unproductive life. the people who espouse primitivist ideals are priviliged masochists, and the people who live a natural, primitivist lifestyle are generally reactionary as fuck.

and no those tribal people are not interested in Marxist dialectics.

[Ele'ill]

i dont know what textbook definition you'll accuse me of not knowing, but primitivism as iv always understood it is a rejection of modern technology and civilization, because it is harming mankind, the environment, or the cosmos, or karma, or whatever it is that civilization is harming.

Fact is, most people like technology, they like making life comfortable, they like working less and achieving more with their labor. they like being entertained.

i live better than any monarch from 300 years ago or beyond. the only thing they have on me is blind obedience or power over others, and i have no desire for it.

ill keep my internet and computer and hwne my head hurts ill take some modern medicine and when i need a pick me up in the morning ill take pure B12 vitamin pills.

the alternative is a harsher, more violent and unproductive life. the people who espouse primitivist ideals are priviliged masochists, and the people who live a natural, primitivist lifestyle are generally reactionary as fuck.

and no those tribal people are not interested in Marxist dialectics.

No, of 'liberal-technocratic' which you are defending and he was attacking.

[Jimmie Higgins]

i dont know what textbook definition you'll accuse me of not knowing, but primitivism as iv always understood it is a rejection of modern technology and civilization, because it is harming mankind, the environment, or the cosmos, or karma, or whatever it is that civilization is harming.

Fact is, most people like technology, they like making life comfortable, they like working less and achieving more with their labor. they like being entertained.

i live better than any monarch from 300 years ago or beyond. the only thing they have on me is blind obedience or power over others, and i have no desire for it.

ill keep my internet and computer and hwne my head hurts ill take some modern medicine and when i need a pick me up in the morning ill take pure B12 vitamin pills.

the alternative is a harsher, more violent and unproductive life. the people who espouse primitivist ideals are priviliged masochists, and the people who live a natural, primitivist lifestyle are generally reactionary as fuck.

and no those tribal people are not interested in Marxist dialectics.

Yeah I think you and Mari3L are talking cross-purposes. But anyway, I don't disagree with most of what you state here. For me, technology in of itself is neural, the more important factor is how the technology is used, who controls its use, and for what purpose. I think what the Primitivists miss is that while industry has created major problems, it is the profit motive that makes it a relentless and remorseless way of producing things.

Even with little modern technology, the slave societies ruined huge stretches of fertile land because their society was based on slave labor and cheep land, so they just kept moving onto new fertile land as they used up the old. Advanced technology was not needed to destroy agriculture in Ireland, causing a famine that killed 25% of the population... the cattle industry and monoculture did that: potatoes only became a main crop for the poor because the best land was used for cattle grazing for beef exports by British rulers.

There are any number of ways existing technology could be used to both make life better for people and have an eye on the long-term stability and sustainability of production... but not if the goal of production is undemocratically controlled and focused on next Quarters profits.

[ComradeMan]

then why are you on the internet and not living in some jungle in Chiapas eating slugs to make your dick hard?

lets see where you go when you get ill, the doctor or the hippie stoner who lives in the trendy part of town?

Do you really think indigenous people are a bunch of savages with bones through their noses who have no technologies/medicines and cultures of their own?

San (Bushmen) elders for example (with no written language) know up to 4-500 medicinal plants, their uses and their seasons etc all by memory. There are still some peoples around the world who have had no contact/little contact and especially in the field of ethno-botany they could possess knowledge we could all benefit from.

An Australian Aboriginal might consider you or someone else from the modern world pretty ignorant and stupid when you're dying of thirst/hunger in a desert full of water and food or you don't know how to make a fire.

We shouldn't make value judgements.

At the same time we shouldn't be doing the "noble savage" thing either- indigenous peoples around the world also like new technologies and development- but at their own pace and in their own way which is usually what they don't get when their forest has been bulldozed/cut down and they are forced to live in slums where alcoholism and drug abuse are rife. So much for being primitive! What's more primitive than "you've got something I want so I'll take it by force?".

I don't agree with primitivists (nor do I disagree) on every single issue, but the problem I have with a lot of "western" primitivists is that their primitivism also relies on being within an island of scientific and technological advance.