"Primitivism is a pipe dream - it offers no way forwards in the struggle for a free society. Often its adherents end up undermining that struggle by attacking the very things, like mass organisation, that are a requirement to win it. Those primitivists who are serious about changing the world need to re-examine what they are fighting for."
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/85c47/85c47ba88a796af149877575d5493eec263549a5" alt=""
For a long time now I have been thinking about the actual meaning behind the "anarcho" in "Anarcho-primitivism". Also, I have asked myself why have I given an ideology that i do not subscribe to so much thought? It all comes down to the conclusion that primitivism and primitivists have nothing to do with anarchism, ideologically speaking.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/86968/8696860aeb9adcc954bd4814557fa5abf161cf4e" alt=""
It would seem that the movement/idea/current mainly housed within the US is an interesting intellectual question that wastes a lot of time trying to pass itself off as an anti-mass movement social movement, which recruits within the autonomous/anti-parliamentary left while claiming to not be left but still is left, somehow, and hopes to do all these things with out us or them realizing the contradictions looming overhead. As libcom's article will adress, I was sold on anti-civ ideology until I could not explain to myself what to do with some 5 billion human-beings and what that question and answer have to do with anarchism or the social liberation from work, can you?
With that being said, I would like to state being against primitivism does not make you an enemy of "nature". Primitivists do not have a monopoly on eco-defense.
Libcom.org on Primitivism:
Anarcho-Primitivism?