What does this forum mean by "left"?

[wizard135]

The name is Revolutionary Left .Com , so why is it that Communism seems to be the defacto ideology? Despite the appearence of leftist-unty and comaradery between the groups some are left behind- why is that Anarcho-primitivism is included in the discription of the "Opposing Ideologies" forum? See the "anarcho"? That means it is a branch off anarchy. See the "A" at the top of your window? That shows that this site obviously places anarchy in the left, so why the hypocrisy? The point of this not to create an argument between myself and someone who feels that they have been chosen to protect reveleft's honor, nor do I dispute revleft's nuetrality simply to find some way of criticizing it. I find this site very interesting, a place I may find myself haunting for some time- you see. I define myself as staunchly socialist. So please, will someone explain the disparity between ideologies and post whether or not this site has a bias. Thank You.

[OneBrickOneVoice]

yeah why is anarcho-capitalism and opposing idealogy, see the "anarcho"? That means its a branch off anarchy...

[wizard135]

you havent exactly attempted to answer my question...

[Janus]

See the "anarcho"? That means it is a branch off anarchy.
Just because they claim to be anarchists and oppose the state does not necessarily make them comrades of ours. Anarcho-capitalists also claim to be anarchists but they're not accepted by the social anarchists here either.


So please, will someone explain the disparity between ideologies and post whether or not this site has a bias.
Well, of course this site has a bias towards the radical leftist spectrum as you have guessed based on the forum title.

[wizard135]

"anarcho-capitalists are not our friends", well thats nice. But I was speeking about Anarcho *Primitivism*, becuase it is primitivists that are included in "opposing ideologies, right after preachers.

[Janus]

that is twice someone has said that anarcho-capitalists are not our friends
I was providing another example of other types of anarchists that don't belong on here.


But I was speeking about Anarcho *Primitivism*, becuase it is primitivists that are included in "opposing ideologies, right after preachers.
Re-read my above post, I answered that question. The practical manifestation of anarcho-primitivism would result in the deaths of millions of people thus making it an extremely reactionary ideology.

[ComradeRed]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11, 2007 03:49 pm
Despite the appearence of leftist-unty and comaradery between the groups some are left behind- why is that Anarcho-primitivism is included in the discription of the "Opposing Ideologies" forum? See the "anarcho"? That means it is a branch off anarchy. See the "A" at the top of your window? That shows that this site obviously places anarchy in the left, so why the hypocrisy?
Why is it nazis are banned?

They&#39;re national socialists...see the "socialists" <_<

[People&#39;s Councillor]

Then again, a definition of "left" might be a good thing...

The most basic definition of "left" that I can imagine is: "the ideological spectrum whose goal it is to bring about universal equality through collective ownership and democratic management of the means of production."

I&#39;m not too sure what anarcho-primitivism is, so I won&#39;t comment on that, but it seems to me that an ideology that doesn&#39;t fit that definition, or some more appropriate one that someone else comes up with, is not "left," and hence belongs in "opposing ideologies."

[Dr Mindbender]

national bolshevism is a branch off bolshevism and nazbols are banned too, and rightly so.

[Don't Change Your Name]

Somebody explain how primmies are "revolutionary leftists".

[Demogorgon]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12, 2007 12:01 am
"anarcho-capitalists are not our friends", well thats nice. But I was speeking about Anarcho *Primitivism*, becuase it is primitivists that are included in "opposing ideologies, right after preachers.
Well call me picky about who my comrades are, but wanting to see the world&#39;s population reduced by around five billion and have those of us remaining scrabbling around in the dirt for survival does not strike me as a world view compatible with my own.

We are a fairly broad church here though. We have quite a variety of anarchists, communists and other assorted socialists here.

[Goatse]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11, 2007 11:51 pm
yeah why is anarcho-capitalism and opposing idealogy, see the "anarcho"? That means its a branch off anarchy...
It also means it&#39;s a branch of capitalism...

[MolotovLuv]

Originally posted by Demogorgon+June 13, 2007 07:11 pm--> (Demogorgon &#064; June 13, 2007 07:11 pm)
[email protected] 12, 2007 12:01 am
"anarcho-capitalists are not our friends", well thats nice. But I was speeking about Anarcho *Primitivism*, becuase it is primitivists that are included in "opposing ideologies, right after preachers.
Well call me picky about who my comrades are, but wanting to see the world&#39;s population reduced by around five billion and have those of us remaining scrabbling around in the dirt for survival does not strike me as a world view compatible with my own.

[/b]
Although we will never be able to revert back to the primitive, it would just be impossible with the level of technology our society has reached, there are society&#39;s and people that want to live that way and they should be allowed and not "opposed." Before we advanced so quickly our ancesters were "scrabbling around in the dirt" and in many ways they were/are far more knowledgeable than we are. That is how we survived so don&#39;t belittle indigenous cultures.

[Joby]

Originally posted by El Infiltr(A)[email protected] 13, 2007 06:53 pm
Somebody explain how primmies are "revolutionary leftists".
someone explain how a forum makes a "revolutionary leftist"

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13, 2007 09:21 pm
Before we advanced so quickly our ancesters were "scrabbling around in the dirt" and in many ways they were/are far more knowledgeable than we are.
:o You what? More knowledgeable than us, about what exactly? (Also "are" would never apply if you&#39;re talking about ancestors - our ancestors are nothing (except dead). They were far less knowledgeable than us.).

Stop to think before you belittle progress.

[MolotovLuv]

Originally posted by Jazzratt+June 13, 2007 10:02 pm--> (Jazzratt &#064; June 13, 2007 10:02 pm)
[email protected] 13, 2007 09:21 pm
Before we advanced so quickly our ancesters were "scrabbling around in the dirt" and in many ways they were/are far more knowledgeable than we are.
:o You what? More knowledgeable than us, about what exactly? (Also "are" would never apply if you&#39;re talking about ancestors - our ancestors are nothing (except dead). They were far less knowledgeable than us.).

Stop to think before you belittle progress.[/b]
What exactly makes up "progress?" Faster computers, more pollution, funnier sitcoms? Yes, unless your an idiot creationist, we share common ancestry, yes they are dead (when I used the word "are" it was a mistake, I meant to say the cultures that are still living off the earth which we are wiping out again with more "progress"), but we all meet our "end" sooner or later. They knew how to medicate naturally, build shelter and gather food naturally. There have been people found to be living into their hundreds in these "primitive cultures" which shows you they are smart enough to live well. Are you really that proud of our so called "progress"? Are you happy the native americans were wiped out? I bet you celebrate the shit out of columbus day. Basically you owe your life to those who came before us. You wouldn&#39;t be here if they hadn&#39;t survived so how can you come off acting superior to other cultures that came BEFORE you? Progress is what you make of it I suppose. Thanks to progress we get to work 40plus hours a week to barely make it. YAY PROGRESS&#33;&#33;

[Avtomat_Icaro]

Hmm they will probably restrict you now and even accuse you of being a primitivist :P

Personally Im not too big a fan on how sometimes "progress" is defined. So on that level I could agree with MolotovLuv. While yes we have great technology which enables us to live longer and with more luxery, we have also becomes zombified weaklings who need all sorts of crap to stay alive and would probably die off whenever some shit happens. Maybe we should introduce survivalism classes in school, dump kids in the jungle for a month or something :lol:

[People&#39;s Councillor]

Originally posted by Avtomat_Iarco
Personally Im not too big a fan on how sometimes "progress" is defined
Here&#39;s a definition of that too. "Progress" is achieved when the relations of production are changed and the capacities of production are increased. Primitivism as I understand it from a few cursory glances seeks to change the relations of production to be more humane but to severely limit the capacities of production. However, that is not progress. Similarly, capitalism can never be "progressive" because, although it steadily increases the capacity of production, the relations of production remain unchanged. I believe, and I&#39;m guessing most people here would agree with me, that it is possible to make the relations of production more humane while at the same time advancing the capacities of production, and that these goals can be achieved by collective ownership and democratic management of the means of production by the working class.

Whew, long sentence.

[Demogorgon]

Originally posted by MolotovLuv+June 13, 2007 09:21 pm--> (MolotovLuv @ June 13, 2007 09:21 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 13, 2007 07:11 pm

[email protected] 12, 2007 12:01 am
"anarcho-capitalists are not our friends", well thats nice. But I was speeking about Anarcho *Primitivism*, becuase it is primitivists that are included in "opposing ideologies, right after preachers.
Well call me picky about who my comrades are, but wanting to see the world&#39;s population reduced by around five billion and have those of us remaining scrabbling around in the dirt for survival does not strike me as a world view compatible with my own.


Although we will never be able to revert back to the primitive, it would just be impossible with the level of technology our society has reached, there are society&#39;s and people that want to live that way and they should be allowed and not "opposed." Before we advanced so quickly our ancesters were "scrabbling around in the dirt" and in many ways they were/are far more knowledgeable than we are. That is how we survived so don&#39;t belittle indigenous cultures. [/b]
Well if people want to live like that, that is their perogative. Human diversity means there will always be some people who are happiest in decidedly non mainstream lifestyles. But it is very small minority who would want to, and they are welcome to go and live like that. I have a problem with those who want the rest of us to join in, well those of us who aren&#39;t killed off to reach a sustainable level of people for a primitivist society.

[Chicano Shamrock]

Originally posted by MolotovLuv+June 13, 2007 02:42 pm--> (MolotovLuv @ June 13, 2007 02:42 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 13, 2007 10:02 pm

[email protected] 13, 2007 09:21 pm
Before we advanced so quickly our ancesters were "scrabbling around in the dirt" and in many ways they were/are far more knowledgeable than we are.
:o You what? More knowledgeable than us, about what exactly? (Also "are" would never apply if you&#39;re talking about ancestors - our ancestors are nothing (except dead). They were far less knowledgeable than us.).

Stop to think before you belittle progress.
What exactly makes up "progress?" Faster computers, more pollution, funnier sitcoms? Yes, unless your an idiot creationist, we share common ancestry, yes they are dead (when I used the word "are" it was a mistake, I meant to say the cultures that are still living off the earth which we are wiping out again with more "progress"), but we all meet our "end" sooner or later. They knew how to medicate naturally, build shelter and gather food naturally. There have been people found to be living into their hundreds in these "primitive cultures" which shows you they are smart enough to live well. Are you really that proud of our so called "progress"? Are you happy the native americans were wiped out? I bet you celebrate the shit out of columbus day. Basically you owe your life to those who came before us. You wouldn&#39;t be here if they hadn&#39;t survived so how can you come off acting superior to other cultures that came BEFORE you? Progress is what you make of it I suppose. Thanks to progress we get to work 40plus hours a week to barely make it. YAY PROGRESS&#33;&#33; [/b]
I agree with letting people live the way they want to live and I am a descendant of the Tongva tribe from the LA area. But we have progressed much. Maybe in the mainstream it doesn&#39;t mean much like ipods, cellphones, playstations, TV&#39;s. But in knowledge in specific areas we have progressed vastly. In the knowledge that goes into making a TV work we have come a long way. In being able to edit sound waves we have progressed. In being able to use sound waves as a medical tool we have progressed. In the airplane we have progressed. What would have taken years to travel before can now take days.

[Avtomat_Icaro]

Originally posted by People&#39;s Councillor+June 14, 2007 12:21 am--> (People&#39;s Councillor @ June 14, 2007 12:21 am)
Avtomat_Iarco
Personally Im not too big a fan on how sometimes "progress" is defined
Here&#39;s a definition of that too. "Progress" is achieved when the relations of production are changed and the capacities of production are increased. Primitivism as I understand it from a few cursory glances seeks to change the relations of production to be more humane but to severely limit the capacities of production. However, that is not progress. Similarly, capitalism can never be "progressive" because, although it steadily increases the capacity of production, the relations of production remain unchanged. I believe, and I&#39;m guessing most people here would agree with me, that it is possible to make the relations of production more humane while at the same time advancing the capacities of production, and that these goals can be achieved by collective ownership and democratic management of the means of production by the working class.

Whew, long sentence. [/b]
So progress only relates to production? You would assume that a society would improve on more levels than merely the relations of production.

While this might be progress, lets us not forget our becoming more and more dependent on various forms of technology, with the digitalisation of everytihng you are totally tracable, you cant move around without somebody tracing you down, just look how these things go with the internet and stuff like banking. Primitivism might see itself as liberation from that, to be free from the restraints that technology has forced upon us.

This doesnt mean I totally disagree with you, I dont want us to becoming primitivists, however they make a good point and progress is more than mere relations of production.

[joser03]

I view progress in terms of how the human mind has evolved; technology is simply a byproduct of our progress. In those terms, we have progressed. Our ancestors, homo erectus for example, did not have the same or near the same mental capabilities homo sapien (HS) has achieved. HS created tools, noticed beauty and art, asked questions, formed ideas and theories. Television, factories, 40-hour work weeks, iPods, weapons of mass destruction, pollution, etc., these are all byproducts of homo sapien nature. We wonder. We attempt to solve mysteries. Perhaps that is how religion came to be. Even if we somehow reverted back to a primitive state, it wouldn&#39;t last very long. It is not in our nature to live a simple life. Our brains are not simple. It happened once and it would happen again. Our progress could have manifested in other ways, but the way I see it, we are part of the Kingdom Animalia and we behave as such, obviously much more complicated and with much more drastic results when compared to lions and bears.

I have no problems comparing 2007 to our ancestors of the past. We are intellectually superior. We have art, music, knowledge of the cosmos, of nature, of the human body and mind. Unfortunately, other byproducts of our evolution has brought pain, misery, and death.

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13, 2007 10:42 pm
What exactly makes up "progress?"
A greater understanding of the world around us (an actual understanding as well not some mysticist bullshit about "nature spirits") and the ability to use that knowledge to make life more comfortable.


Faster computers, more pollution, funnier sitcoms?

A small aspect, yes, is faster computers and funnier sitcoms. Pollution is not a necessity for progress.


Yes, unless your an idiot creationist, we share common ancestry, yes they are dead (when I used the word "are" it was a mistake, I meant to say the cultures that are still living off the earth which we are wiping out again with more "progress"),

Oh for god&#39;s sake, you&#39;re one of those types. The really patronising ones that want people to continue living in squalor with poor medical technology because they&#39;re so arrogant as to assume other cultures cannot adapt to progress.


but we all meet our "end" sooner or later.

...and? Everything ends, any action taken by anyone or anything is ultimately futile in light of the fact that nothing lasts forever but so what? What does that prove exactly?


They knew how to medicate naturally,

Let me tell you something about natural medicine: If we relied upon it many of my friedns and I would not be here. "Natural" medicine does nothing for cancer, "Natural" medicine does nothing for a child born with a hole in their heart, "Natural" medicine does nothing for a burst appendix - do you get the point. Many of these "natural" remedies don&#39;t even recognise things as basic as the need for sterility.


build shelter and gather food naturally.

Yeah and we do it unnaturally. Guess who makes more food? Guess who has the bigger, warmer and more impressive shelters?


There have been people found to be living into their hundreds in these "primitive cultures" which shows you they are smart enough to live well.

Really? Where?


Are you really that proud of our so called "progress"?

Yes, this doesn&#39;t mean I don&#39;t recognise the downsides (for example the downside of the invention of the internet is that I have to encounter people like you).


Are you happy the native americans were wiped out? I bet you celebrate the shit out of columbus day.

1) I&#39;m not *happy* that the native american genocide occured, don&#39;t be so fucking obtuse.

2) What the fuck is columbus day?


Basically you owe your life to those who came before us.

Yes, so? I live a better life than them, just as I expect my descendants to live a better life - that is the nature of progress.


You wouldn&#39;t be here if they hadn&#39;t survived so how can you come off acting superior to other cultures that came BEFORE you?

Because we are doing more than merely surviving in nature, we are understanding and changing it.


Progress is what you make of it I suppose. Thanks to progress we get to work 40plus hours a week to barely make it. YAY PROGRESS&#33;&#33;

Yeah, thank fuck I&#39;m not toiling some field or out a&#39;hunting and a&#39;gathering. Fuck that shit; I got a cold beer, a warm house and running water that&#39;s free from parasites.

joser03


Unfortunately, other byproducts of our evolution has brought pain, misery, and death.

Pain misery and death have always been their, our technologies however tend to lessen them.

[Avtomat_Icaro]

Pain misery and death have always been their, our technologies however tend to lessen them.
Hmm, I think we see more misery, pain and death on our world today due to these technologies...just look at Africa for example.

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14, 2007 09:26 pm

Pain misery and death have always been their, our technologies however tend to lessen them.
Hmm, I think we see more misery, pain and death on our world today due to these technologies...just look at Africa for example.
Which part? The parts which are impoverished due to capitalism (not technology) or the parts that have advanced through a mixture of capitalism (diamonds being sold from Botswana for example) and technology (again looking at Botswana as an example).

[MolotovLuv]

I don&#39;t have much time to respond to most of what was said. (i&#39;m going camping, oh my god, i&#39;m going to be in nature I must be a primitivist :rolleyes: ) The only point I want to make is we are not superior to past cultures because they also had knowledge of the cosmos, art, music, dance, celebration and knowledge of the human body but through different means. Why do you think researchers went to the Amazon and collected samplings of plants used in their medicines and rituals? Wow what a shock, we might have gotten some of our knowledge from "savage primitivists" :lol:

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14, 2007 09:36 pm
I don&#39;t have much time to respond to most of what was said. (i&#39;m going camping, oh my god, i&#39;m going to be in nature I must be a primitivist :rolleyes: )
The funny thing is that camping is fairly removed from nature. Unless you&#39;re going sans tent, gas stove, travel ready food and all the rest.


The only point I want to make is we are not superior to past cultures because they also had knowledge of the cosmos,

How much knowledge of the cosmos? Could they tell you what types of star there are? Could they even tell how many planets are in our solar system? Did they know of the galaxy in which our primary star resides or that there are many galaxies beyond it?


art, music, dance,

Everyone has art, music and dance but even that has evolved over time - even in isolated cultures.


celebration

Oh come on, knowing how to have a piss-up isn&#39;t really saying much.


and knowledge of the human body but through different means.

If by "through different means" you mean "they knew less than we do" you would be correct. Again I ask a list of some fairly basic things: Can they explain how digestion works? Do they understand the workings of the lungs? How a brain works? Could they explain what causes disease in people, for example cancers?


Why do you think researchers went to the Amazon and collected samplings of plants used in their medicines and rituals?

Because those plants may well contain an active chemical that, if refined and made into a pill, could become a useful medicine. No self respecting medical professional sets store by mysticism however and would probably do away with a lot of the ritual and unnecessary (often harmful) ingredients used in primitive "natural" healing.


Wow what a shock, we might have gotten some of our knowledge from "savage primitivists" :lol:

It&#39;s not really that shocking. It&#39;s mildly surprising that we still do it considering how little it&#39;s really turned up. The main problem with using these healing methods as a base of research is that it takes a lot of time sorting the mumbo-jumbo from the viable medicine and while that is happening a lot of unfortunate ill people are losing out on treatment because they still really on quacks and medicine men.

[Kami]

Jazzratt raises a good point. Part of progress is when we find "natural" medicines that are prooved to work, we make use of how they work in far more sensible ways. I prefer taking penicillin to sticking mouldy bread on my leg, personally.

[Chicano Shamrock]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14, 2007 01:50 pm


[QUOTE] The only point I want to make is we are not superior to past cultures because they also had knowledge of the cosmos,

How much knowledge of the cosmos? Could they tell you what types of star there are? Could they even tell how many planets are in our solar system? Did they know of the galaxy in which our primary star resides or that there are many galaxies beyond it?
Well the Mayans were very knowledgeable about astronomy and such. Far more than most of us that aren&#39;t scientists.

http://www.michielb.nl/maya/astronom.html