Anarcho-Pacifism & Anarcho-Primitive

[TheAnarchist]

So I was wondering if any folks on Revleft were Anarcho-Pacifism or Anarcho-Primitive. I know a little about these but it would help if you would shed some light on these.

Thanks.

[The Feral Underclass]

So I was wondering if any folks on Revleft were Anarcho-Pacifism or Anarcho-Primitive.

I highly doubt it.


I know a little about these but it would help if you would shed some light on these.

They are both reactionary ideas that should be opposed.

[Sasha]

peter gelderloos said everything i would ever want to say on pacifism infinitely better than i ever could: http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-how-nonviolence-protects-the-state

on primitivism; while i see a full collapse of current civilization as one of the very possible scenario's of the future and there for think that we revolutionaries should think about and prepare for that possibility it shouldnt be something to actively strive towards.

[stefanbl]

Surely Primitivism is restrictable?

Its an ideology that is explicitly for the death of billions.

[blake 3:17]

I've sympathies for anarcho-pacifism. During the period -- about ten years ago -- the two friends I respected you were long time pacifists, stopped being pacifists. I'd meant to study it.

I got to another really great pacifist since then -- but all three of them will defend the violence of the oppressed. One has become has become quite pro-Naxalite -- he's in mid 70s, and this after more than 50 years of pacifist political action.

[o well this is ok I guess]

Surely Primitivism is restrictable?

Its an ideology that is explicitly for the death of billions. Primitivism is restrictable. That's why there's none here.

[G4b3n]

I wrote a short essay on bourgeois morality which includes pacifism if you would like to give it a look (http://www.revleft.com/vb/bourgeois-morality-t182661/index.html?p=2651907#post2651907). I would say they are both reactionary and undesirable.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

There should be a distinction drawn between "pacifism" as a personal conviction in the cases of, for example, Christian radicals who chain themselves to nuke silos, and "pacifist" peace-police assholes whose "pacifism" is a stance in relation to the media, bourgeois legality, and appealing to a fictional "public". Generally, one would expect any mature "anarcho-pacifist" to fall in the former camp: again, particularly various religious anarchists. As a further distinction, I'd note that most of these people who I'd think of sincere pacifists have no objection to property destruction, unlike their peace-police-liberal-fake-anarchist counterparts.


If you think moderation's going to pave the way to peace...
You're already dead, You're already dead.
What good is moderation 'gainst the army and police?
You're already dead, You're already dead.
We're not promoting mindless violence, keep that for the fools,
We're simply saying be prepared to break their laws and rules,
Let them know the bigger they come, the harder they will fall...
They're already dead, They're already dead.

They're already dead, They're already dead,
They're already dead, They're already dead.

If they're going to play it dirty, so are we...
They're already dead, They're already dead.
They can keep their lies about the land of the free...
They're already dead, They're already dead.
We've allowed them too often to use their iron fist,
But there's one little detail they appear to have missed...
You don't have to be PASSIVE just because you're a PACIFIST...
They're already dead, They're already dead.

They're already dead, They're already dead,
They're already dead, They're already dead.
vNYD4AxiivA


*French portmanteau, from "pacific" meaning peaceful and "flic" meaning cop.

[bcbm]

So I was wondering if any folks on Revleft were Anarcho-Pacifism or Anarcho-Primitive. I know a little about these but it would help if you would shed some light on these.


i haven't encountered a lot of anarcho-pacifism in real life or even online, but from what i understand it is most common among christian anarchists and draws influence from the work of leo tolstoy. there was also the 'peace punk' stuff in the 70s and 80s from bands like crass. basically they believe all violence is a form of oppression and so contrary to the aims of anarchism. i can't recommend any key texts or anything like that but the wikipedia page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-pacifism) seems pretty thorough after a brief glance, though.

anarcho-primitivism also isn't all that popular these days; it was more prominent in the 1990s and early 2000s. its based on the works of authors like jacques camatte, fredy perlman and john zerzan who argue that the end of gatherer-hunter societies and the emergence of agricultural and civilization mark the beginning of class and hierarchy and in order to have a truly liberated society we must destroy civilization, which generally includes the destruction of technology and a return to a 'neo-primitive' lifestyle based on reconnecting with nature. 'why primitivism (http://www.johnzerzan.net/articles/why-primitivism.html)' by john zerzan is a good basic introduction, while 'against his-story, against leviathan (http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/fredy-perlman-against-his-story-against-leviathan)' by fredy perlman is a more in-depth classic work in primitivist thought. the archives of green anarchy (http://greenanarchy.anarchyplanet.org/) magazine would also be a good place to find more information.

hope this helps!



Surely Primitivism is restrictable?

Its an ideology that is explicitly for the death of billions.

no it isn't

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

Against His-story! Against Leviathan! isn't explicitly primitivist . . . and it's actually a pretty engrossing / novel read. Think "Ishmael" minus the awful liberal bullshit at the end.

[Glitchcraft]

Surely Primitivism is restrictable?

Its an ideology that is explicitly for the death of billions.

I'm in no way a primitivist, I looked at the wiki page (i know I know wikipedia sucks etc)
But what I'm asking is:
Is it blatantly for the death of Billions? Like do the Primitivists know this?
Or are they just dumb and don't realize that if their program was actualized it would cause the death of Billions.

Do they actually want Billions to die, cuz I could not find that on the wiki.
Are they considered a hate group? Or reactionaries?

Just curious.

[Glitchcraft]

Wow thanks bcbm, I guess I missed your post while I was typing or something.
The John Z article has totally educated me on primitivism.

Civilized man is a “petty creator against Nature.”
Ok that is enough for me to dismiss it.

maybe they should move to Free Detroit. They can have "ample free time, considerable gender autonomy or equality, an ethos of egalitarianism and sharing, and no organized violence. "
I guess until some petty creator starts a community garden or something.

[bcbm]

I'm in no way a primitivist, I looked at the wiki page (i know I know wikipedia sucks etc)
But what I'm asking is:
Is it blatantly for the death of Billions? Like do the Primitivists know this?
Or are they just dumb and don't realize that if their program was actualized it would cause the death of Billions.

Do they actually want Billions to die, cuz I could not find that on the wiki.
Are they considered a hate group? Or reactionaries?

Just curious.

returning to a pre-civilized lifestyle of gathering and hunting on a mass scale would only be a possibility with far fewer people on the planet. however outside of a few wingnuts most primitivists do not advocate billions of people dying so they can achieve this goal. the general views lean towards voluntary depopulation (reducing birth rate, etc) or they believe a civilizational collapse is inevitable and will result in many people dying. in either case nobody is wishing to send billions to death camps or anything of that sort.


Wow thanks bcbm, I guess I missed your post while I was typing or something.

no problem, glad i could help.

[The Feral Underclass]

I knew a Christian anarchist once. He was a pretty decent guy. He was part of a group called Jesus Radicals and would often come and document direct actions to have a record of how police responded. They also engaged in direct action of their own. I remember at the third runway protests at Heathrow, they manage to get onto the runway and staged a mass prayer.

I think there is definitely a distinction to be made between Christian anarchists who retain a pacifist outlook predicated on their faith but use their convictions to compliment other tactics, than the kind of pacifists who actively undermine other tactics to the point where they collude with the state. I've see that happen before too.

Despite my anti-theism, I have quite a soft spot for the Jesus Radicals.

[Art Vandelay]

As many others have already pointed out, there needs to be distinctions drawn between pacifists (religious, critically supportive of the violence of the oppressed, etc.) with the peace police types of pacifists. Pacifists generally made me lose my damn mind, cause of their inability to see that they are not only the best friends of the state, but also have a limited definition of violence (most don't include people starving to death amid a surplus of food as violence). There politics tend to come down to 'lets wait for the bourgeoisie to grow a conscience.' As for the primmies, their politics are equally misguided, but a distinction needs to be made between those wish to bring about the destruction of civilization (ie: those who are insane) and those who simply see the destruction of civilization as inevitable. We've got a number of post-leftists on the site (some admins, mods, and former mods as well) which have sympathies to primitivism.

[bcbm]

a distinction needs to be made between those wish to bring about the destruction of civilization (ie: those who are insane)

i don't think they are insane and i think it depends on what you consider 'civilization' as well, there are many anti-civ anarchists who are not necessarily primitivists, such as wolfi landstreicher.

[RedHal]

Anarcho Pacifism might be the most utopian ideology around, absolute rubbish. How easy will it be for the group with the biggest gun to take control. You'll be having Ghandian protests everyday if you don't use force to defend your revolution :laugh:

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

i don't think they are insane and i think it depends on what you consider 'civilization' as well, there are many anti-civ anarchists who are not necessarily primitivists, such as wolfi landstreicher.

Augh. Except that Wolfi Landstreicher is the fucking worst. As far as I can tell he appeals almost exclusively to rich white boys who needed something edgier when Nietzsche stopped being sufficient to impress teenage girls they wanted to bang. Further, in Wolfi, they finally found a theoretical voice telling them, "It's OK, people don't dislike you because you're a pompous asshole, it's because they're pathetic sheeple who lack the will for total freedom." It's like, no dude, they don't like you becaue you're a pompous asshole.

Anyway, in terms of anti-civ/not-necessarily-primitivist, Fredy Perlman, Camatte, or even the Invisible Committee are waaaaaaay less terrible.

[The Douche]

Augh. Except that Wolfi Landstreicher is the fucking worst. As far as I can tell he appeals almost exclusively to rich white boys who needed something edgier when Nietzsche stopped being sufficient to impress teenage girls they wanted to bang. Further, in Wolfi, they finally found a theoretical voice telling them, "It's OK, people don't dislike you because you're a pompous asshole, it's because they're pathetic sheeple who lack the will for total freedom." It's like, no dude, they don't like you becaue you're a pompous asshole.

Anyway, in terms of anti-civ/not-necessarily-primitivist, Fredy Perlman, Camatte, or even the Invisible Committee are waaaaaaay less terrible.

What?

[Art Vandelay]

i don't think they are insane and i think it depends on what you consider 'civilization' as well, there are many anti-civ anarchists who are not necessarily primitivists, such as wolfi landstreicher.

Truth be told primitivism wasn't something that I was in anyway interested in, even back in my post-leftist days, so I can't be sure what you mean when you say anti-civ anarchists who aren't primmies. That being said, I do think most anti-civ anarchists are terribly misguided and don't have a proper understanding of what the complete collapse of civilization and the end of technology would entail. I mean no one can know for sure, but its needless to say that it would entail death on a genocidal scale. And quite frankly as a Marxist, I'd say its too late to turn back to a previous way of life, evolution went in a different direction. Even saying all of that, however, I still think they have interesting points to make at times. I remember reading a Zerzan article that touched on some points about mental health issues in modern society and I can remember quite liking it.

[Ele'ill]

Augh. Except that Wolfi Landstreicher is the fucking worst. As far as I can tell he appeals almost exclusively to rich white boys who needed something edgier when Nietzsche stopped being sufficient to impress teenage girls they wanted to bang. Further, in Wolfi, they finally found a theoretical voice telling them, "It's OK, people don't dislike you because you're a pompous asshole, it's because they're pathetic sheeple who lack the will for total freedom." It's like, no dude, they don't like you becaue you're a pompous asshole.



did you accidentally read some mis-authored texts or something because I didn't really get this from reading wolfi landstreicher. which texts didn't you like, which one was the worst because there was one that I read which I hated because the topic was sloppily approached

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

There is a fantastic collection of neckbeard-worthy outbursts titled "Against The Logic of Submission". I was under the impression it was one of his more widely available works. His essay on "Free Love" (perhaps given the personal nature of the matter) is a particularly blatant example of self-righteous bullshit that reads like borderline date-rape apologia.

That said, I sometimes appreciate his taste in translations. The Os Cangeceros material is fantastic (including their distinctly communist writing on various millenarian revolts).

[bcbm]

Augh. Except that Wolfi Landstreicher is the fucking worst. As far as I can tell he appeals almost exclusively to rich white boys who needed something edgier when Nietzsche stopped being sufficient to impress teenage girls they wanted to bang. Further, in Wolfi, they finally found a theoretical voice telling them, "It's OK, people don't dislike you because you're a pompous asshole, it's because they're pathetic sheeple who lack the will for total freedom." It's like, no dude, they don't like you becaue you're a pompous asshole.


i never got the impression from his works. also i don't think it is fair to blame an author for how some random people who like his stuff act.


so I can't be sure what you mean when you say anti-civ anarchists who aren't primmies. That being said, I do think most anti-civ anarchists are terribly misguided and don't have a proper understanding of what the complete collapse of civilization and the end of technology would entail. I mean no one can know for sure, but its needless to say that it would entail death on a genocidal scale. And quite frankly as a Marxist, I'd say its too late to turn back to a previous way of life, evolution went in a different direction.

well when i say anti-civ but not primitivist that generally means they are not for 'the end of technology' or 'turn(ing) back to a previous way of life.' for those that are primitivist though, i don't think anyone has any illusions about what the collapse of civilization would look like but they tend to think preparing for it now will minimize the damage more than just waiting for it to happen.