Can anyone tell me what is wrong with anarcho-primitivism?

Yes.

You start.

Because higher-order social structures tend to dominate lower order ones. So anarcho-whatevers get crushed by the collectivists.

Societies succeed and fail based on their ability to beat up other societies, not based on whether their members are happy. That's life, buddy.

Then why do you want to change?

>mother dies during birth
>die at age 5 from a cold

It's too late, we need technology to get out of the mess we made within technology. You can't stop the increase of complexity.
The only answer is radical Luddism and deep ecology.

This is something that Marx understood and every dumb revolutionary (including anprim) didn't. New social systems cannot be invented by someone and then simply imposed upon everyone. It's just not going to work, too many people will be against it, and social systems that are entirely man-made, rather than having arisen through a sort of social evolution, won't be adapted to all the problems they will have to face. Feudalism arose "naturally", and so did capitalism. Say what you will about their quality, but they were successful, "evolutionarily" speaking. Communism and anprim, on the other hand, are like your SPORE animal that somehow came to life and escaped into the wilderness. It's going to fucking die no matter what. (Actually, anarcho-primitivism would probably just be stillborn.)

any emergentist understands much better than Marx who didn't into complex adaptive systems

Stop wearing glasses

she's using make up

>this argument again
>implying everyone in the world has the freedom and right to just live inna woods
Computers and internet are just another form of addiction created by the modern system.

People with bad vision get killed off in the wild.
Babies born with diseases/disorders die instantly
People with allergies simply die.
This is why people hate the idea that nature is good. A lot of people are going to have to die before all is made well again.

Then why the fuck are you posting on the internet of modern society is so bad?

the culture of fixing every little and big problem with technology grooms weakness. today's "top" men of the "top" societies wouldn't be able to survive or lead in the wild in case of necessity

>i can't do it
Yes you can on other countries. The unique requisite to support an ideology is practicing it, anything else is the same as communists using capitalist products.
>made well
Those people keep being born, retard. There is no "purge" method.

0/10

nature is the purge method. weak people get born, they die soon enough.
only the strong survive, fostering evolution in the good path instead of the opposite which is what we have now.

Thomas Rainsborough: I shall now be a little more free and open with you than I was before. I wish we were all true-hearted, and that we did all carry ourselves with integrity. If I did mistrust you I would not use such asseverations. I think it doth go on mistrust, and things are thought too readily matters of reflection, that were never intended. For my part, as I think, you forgot something that was in my speech, and you do not only yourselves believe that some men believe that the government is never correct, but you hate all men that believe that. And, sir, to say because a man pleads that every man hath a voice by right of nature, that therefore it destroys by the same argument all property – this is to forget the Law of God. That there's a property, the Law of God says it; else why hath God made that law, Thou shalt not steal? I am a poor man, therefore I must be oppressed: if I have no interest in the kingdom, I must suffer by all their laws be they right or wrong. Nay thus: a gentleman lives in a country and hath three or four lordships, as some men have (God knows how they got them); and when a Parliament is called he must be a Parliament-man; and it may be he sees some poor men, they live near this man, he can crush them – I have known an invasion to make sure he hath turned the poor men out of doors; and I would fain know whether the potency of rich men do not this, and so keep them under the greatest tyranny that was ever thought of in the world. And therefore I think that to that it is fully answered: God hath set down that thing as to propriety with this law of his, Thou shalt not steal. And for my part I am against any such thought, and, as for yourselves, I wish you would not make the world believe that we are for anarchy.

I own a house.
The house requires me to pay property tax.
Since there's an overpopulation, overfishing, and too much pollution, I have to follow certain regulations which restrict my ability to grow what I want, fish where I want, or hunt where I want. I would literally starve in this global economy if I was forced to live on my own; or I would be imprisoned for harvesting a single fish out of season. So I have to go all the way to the grocery store; but thankfully I live close to work and the grocery store, so I just walk (and never bothered to buy a car). And I need money to buy things, which means I have to work. And because I don't have time to myself to do what I want in the here and now, I'm easily susceptible to distractions like a child, like television, internet, games, food, etc.

The internet is a great way to spread the word, and to learn about plants and animals.

>All the evidence seems to suggest we would be happier as hunter-gatherers.

Sure, life is more fun when it is nasty, brutish and short.

So what you're just a larper

Wait, so we're going to make people happier by letting people die?

>all the evidence seems to suggest we would be happier as hunter-gatherers.
Just because you hate your job doesn't mean life would be better with primitivism.

You won't be particularly happy when you're dying of an easily treatable disease, or starving when locusts eat your crops, or having your children devoured by wolves, etc.

>I would be imprisoned for harvesting a single fish out of season.
There are millions of square miles in Canada that are untouched forest. You could live out there for decades and never see another person. No one would know if you hunted and fished whatever you wanted.

The problem with anarcho-primitivism is that its "followers" want to discard all of human history for an irrational want to live in the wilderness. Why do you think contacted tribes which are mostly left alone often adopt many parts of western technology/culture? Their society is primitive to ours, and they correctly see our way of living as more advanced and want to utilize parts of it.

Any sort of biological argument is proven illogical by the fact that the human species has a much higher fitness post-industrial revolution when compared to every period of humanity (including prehistoric times). What we have become is an extension of biology; we are still animals in our constructed world and we will keep artificially advancing due to the greatest evolutionary adaptation ever manifested in a species: biological sentience.

muh fuggin compooters muhfugga
muhfuggin DRUGS muhfugga

It's called being caught up in ideology but being able to see the way out, you turd.
That's wrong and that 'untouched forest' is fucking unlivable in the winter.
Homeless here die all the time in the winter, and I'm near the mid-center south of Canada. The North is unlivable alone, without a community, without special privileges to hunt and fish.

Fucking burgerfats think they know the climate here. You'd fucking die most likely during the first real freeze.
People trying to live off of the grid get caught all of the time, too.

happyness is not the issue. the concept we're here to "search for happyness" is not a natural one. Artificial is also the idea all you have to do to have the right to live until 100 is "be born".
it's not how nature works, and we will have to pay for it in the end: the planet is finite, and we'll just keep growing in numbers and in "needs"

>you should just go into exile lol

it's like you didn't even finish high school
nature won't just "purge" away people with allergies and genetic diseases. read up on sickle cell and malaria, suffering isn't going to magically disappear through natural selection

Hahahahaha how the fuck do people die during winter hahahaha nigga just burn something like nigga go inside haha

>muh suffering
nature is indifferent. get over it

Homeless shelters can't hold all of the homeless
There's nothing to burn besides government-owned wood. In fact, many homeless around here are known to cause shit just to get in prison for the six months of winter.

There's nothing keeping you from living in the forest? Why aren't you? Personally, I hate camping, so I wouldn't be happier.

Yes

People have to die... People will die. All animals die. All mammals live for these things: Play, kinship, food, and sex. Food and sex are the short-term pleasures that people can live without and still maintain happiness on long-term pleasures like play and kinship. In a liberal/civilized society, people sacrifice kinship (ethnicity, family, religion, etc) and play for food and sex; and they replace kinship with interest-based groups; and they replace play with sports. Wrestling, for example, is play for young boys, but a civilized society has made it into a controlled and regulated sport. Ethnocentric behaviors is likewise not tolerated as the civilized man is supposed to look past socially enforced behaviors that hinder our progression toward a more material-based world of food and sex.

Point is, by letting people die, they choose what makes them happier. Either stay civilized and be happy from the opiates of civilization (food, sex, drugs, etc) and abstain from ethnocentric or savage behavior, or regress and attain happiness from pure kinship and play - and abstain from food and sex.

Its what he wants. Anarcho-primitivism is literally just living in the woods without technology.

>All the evidence seems to suggest we would be happier as hunter-gatherers.
No, it literally doesn't.

You do not need privileges to hunt or fish. Who the fuck is going to catch you? Do you realize just how fucking gigantic these forests are?

Fun fact, a family fled Stalin in the 30's. They fled into Sibera, and did not see another human until 1988.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lykov_family

If some religious fundamentalist slavs can do it, why can't you?

>dude people would be happier if we lived in mud huts
>>lol no
>REEEEEEEE
get fucked

Because Canada has much much stricter hunting laws than Russia?
Again, THE FORESTS ARE NOT HABITABLE BY ANYBODY WITHOUT A COMMUNITY. You'll freeze or fucking starve.

cities are our habitats, we thrive in them. hence they keep getting bigger and we make more babies.

the "top" grizzly bear would hardly be able to climb to the top of a corporation. maybe grizzly bears should quit making so much out of this "catching salmon" thing.

>Computers and internet are just another form of addiction created by the modern system.
Computers aren't addiction.
But sure, you can be addicted to using them for specific purposes, like playing video games or watching pornography. Building machines that crunch numbers our brains couldn't fathom makes us successful animals. Gorillas use sticks to catch ants. It's a step removed, but through mathematics we catch quite a lot of ants.

> A lot of people are going to have to die before all is made well again.

"A lot of people dying" is not my definition of "being well". A man with allergies can treat them and still be around to save your immune butt from being hit by a train. Teamwork, nigger.

Sorry, meant to quote you. I want your answers.

They can outright ban hunting and you'll still be able to do it. No one will know. There are no CCTV cameras in the woods.

The forests are totally habitable. Check out "Alone". Its a show on the History Channel. 10 people are dropped in the woods in Canada, spaced out far enough that they can't work together. They're completely alone. The goal is to be the last one out there to call for help. Season 4 just ended, the final guy to quit made it 74 days. You could easily make it longer if you did not have the History Channel's rules to follow: I.E. only allowed to bring 10 items and they can only be chosen from a list HC provides, also have to carry ~40 pounds of camera gear everywhere.

Sometimes competition is good, but if you are any sort of God-fearing man you know that order is necessary to some degree. Chaos is Satan's game.

I've seen 'Alone'. The forests they're dropped into are not the northernly forests during the winter. They're the backyard forests that everybody and the iranians have hiked. My fucking elementary school had a scarier forest just a few meters away. The only thing difficult about them is their size and the length that they need to stay (nothing compared to living in them).

You seriously don't seem to understand, cities get to -40C for a week to a month every winter. The forests get colder, and are effectively colder because there are no real heat sources around to radiate. Not to mention they're filled with predators and other landscape terrors like fissures.

And yes, people would be looking for a missing person in those forests, and those forests are monitored. If you are caught hunting or fishing, especially by people with licenses, you'll be spending a few years in prison. This is not debatable.

>this is what statist's tell themselves
You're a tool of the Antichrist.

fuck off varg.

>respond to an OP directly from two different angles
>no replies
fourth time in a row something like this happened to me over a short span of time on this board...

I'll take it as a compliment to my reasoning capability

>wants to live in a hunter-gatherer society
>doesn't want to be cold, hungry or deal with predators
Pick only one.

Varg, are you here? Pls tell us u're here :^)

Varg doesn't believe in a Christ.
I don't want that, I'm not anprim I'm anthe

anthe?

Anarco-theocrat

anarchotheist

Anarco-thelemite

Anarcotheosophist

As a an prim, my view is that we do not have to go all the way back to hunting gathering. We should just go back in time to before the industrial revolution, maybe to like 1800. This will be sufficient, we have lived with agriculture since the neolithic so we have evolved enough to handle it.

Don't feel too great here you might as well have BTFO a flat earther

Anarco theban

The earth is flat, though. Why do you seek to rape your Oikos?

...

>google Oikos
>get yogurt
explain this bullshit

>2017
>not knowing your oecology
>not recognizing the Oikos as equally important to the Logos

Cities are not our habitats...
Depression is considered a "random occurrence" in a civilized society; but we know why animals get depressed; they're abandoned, ostracized, mourning, or lonely. A city gives you a pill for your depression, a drug to make you happy, less of a deficit to make you work harder for the system; a city is not a place for humans to thrive. Because the people don't learn abstinence from the fear of starvation, the only function of a city is to overpopulate the Earth with as many humans as possible. This makes humanity parasitic to every living being on Earth. We're not just parasitic to all the animals, but to the Earth itself.

>Gorillas use sticks to catch ants. It's a step removed, but through mathematics we catch quite a lot of ants.
Gorillas catch enough ants to live, and they eat a lot, yet they never starve; they're satiated by what nature gives them, and nature is satiated with the contribution that the gorillas make; they exist co-dependently.

There are literally millions of humans starving today

>"A lot of people dying" is not my definition of "being well". A man with allergies can treat them and still be around to save your immune butt from being hit by a train. Teamwork, nigger.
A lot of people are going to die regardless. The difference, instead of them artificially living to 80, on borrowed time (courtesy of the Earth), many would starve to death in record numbers followed by a healing period where humanity would be objectively better off and happier, because they're not part of a self-propagating system that uses them like fodder.

well two of the four were actually well thought out responses (one had many individual points, no response to any of these even though someone asked me to post my reasoning before I did); I'm just getting antsy because I don't like writing what amounts to blog posts on an imageboard

>Advocates anarcho-primitivism
>Complains you can't live outside without civilization
>Too pussy to go fishing

I believe in the theories behind anarcho-primitivism, but I also believe it's impossible to live in the hunter-gatherer style that our ancestors lived and evolved in due to how far civilization has progressed. It's both impossible to change our (you and me) nature considering how far removed we are from our natural state, as well as impossible for anyone to live a natural lifestyle with how much humans have ruined the earth. It's a nice hypothetical that I stand by 100%, but I do no believe it's possible to achieve.
That being said, I still live in a somewhat remote area most of the time, and try to get out in nature as much as possible. Is there an anarcho-primitivism without the anarcho?

>God makes us special, gives us increased intelligence as to make us different than all other life forms
>HURR fuck that lets all become literal monkeys and start flinging our shit at each other!! It's the way nature intended it to be!!!
Nature isn't supposed to be a certain way, even you view what you think nature is supposed to be through subjective glasses (haha) shaped by 21st century thought, which was itself shaped by 20th and so on..
Humans overcame nature. It happened for a reason. That's the way it was meant to be. Whether or not you believe God had a hand in that is your opinion, personally I believe that He for sure did.

You actually sound retarded.
I mean, anarchism is already a pretty stupid ideology, but primitivism? Just lol.
Go run around in the forest naked if you'd like, dying by age 18 (because let's face it, there's no way you're an adult) because you stubbed your toe and it got infected, I'll enjoy all the qualities of life provided to me by my ancestors, thank you.

t. ressentiment

Trump looks like THAT

>All the evidence seems to suggest we would be happier as hunter-gatherers.
Maybe, but to get there we'd have to reduce the population by a factor of about 1000. Maybe closer to 10000.

T H I C C

>All the evidence seems to suggest we would be happier as hunter-gatherers.
Actually, the evidence suggests the opposite
psychohistory.com/books/the-origins-of-war-in-child-abuse/chapter-7-child-abuse-homicide-and-raids-in-tribes/

Underrated post.

i should have just said this in my shitpost. my opinion is that it seems like a double edged sword. you can either suffer lesser quality of life through greater unpredictability and preventable disease, daily convenience, things of that nature, or alternatively endure the variety of ways modern society forces people into misery and exploitation, whether they realize it happening or not. they both suck.

as another user mentioned, the pandoras box of technology, ideology, society, etc has been opened, and the only real way that i could envision anprim happening would not be through social change, but apocalyptic devastation. i dont think that most people would ever be convinced to alter their belief system and lifelong conditioning that drastically without it being forced upon them. i dont think it would be a fun transition or worth the effort to just end up at a place that also has significant suffering. it also doesnt seem sustainable to me, as others have said, some agricultural society would form and gain influence. also i like the internet

Stop larping; you're a luddite at most.

>Cities are not our habitats...
They literally have been for as long as there have been enough people living on the planet for them to be congregating in large enough numbers

>Depression is considered a "random occurrence" in a civilized society
It would have been in HG times too, only without the modern medical infrastructure to diagnose and treat it. The only redeeming factor would have been that you were so desperate for your next meal that you didn't have free time to sit and dwell on your own sense of existential incompleteness.

>A city gives you a pill for your depression, a drug to make you happy,
Depression is clinically proven to be a chemical imbalance in your brain. Living in a city no more causes depression than it causes nearsightedness.

>There are literally millions of humans starving today
Not caused by a lack of food or resources, nor caused by large metropolitan areas. All famines are man-made disasters which hit poor rural areas the hardest.

>A lot of people are going to die regardless.
No, fertility rates will continue plunging and the population will shrink naturally as people in developed areas have fewer and fewer children.

>people are so tired of leading luxurious lives in the west that now they have to crave for struggle to make their life meaningful
anprim niggers in a nutshell.

>hey dude, these people outright escaped all civilization for half a century and were only discovered by a total freak accident
>b-but muh hunting laws

what the fuck is your problem?

I would sure be happier if we scorched the fucking earth bare the first year of this faggotry and every single one of you crazy fucks would starve to death.

What evidence is this? You honestly think people would be happier starving in a ditch, covered in filth a dcwatxgingvtheur children die in agony from an infected splinter?

>thinks civilisation and technology is bad
>crying because it's too cold

The absolute state of you.

Since nobody really addressed my first post itt, let's try a different method.

How the fuck will you actually bring anarcho-primitivism into practice?

Ask some african niggers if they would rather live in a normal society or their mudhuts.

Create a machine in the far future that destroys any group of people that try to organize.

>Akulina died of hunger in 1961. Three of the children died in 1981. Karp died in 1988. He is survived by his daughter Agafia Lykova who continued to live in isolation until 16 January 2016[6] when she was airlifted out to a hospital in Tashtagol, Russia, from her remote location near Kazakhstan's and Mongolia's borders. Her condition is related to cartilage deterioration in her lower extremities.

If you wanna "live" like that, sure, go on, society won't miss you.

>Since nobody really addressed my first post itt
ignorant fuck

>How the fuck will you actually bring anarcho-primitivism into practice?
kill 99% of humanity to even make it wiable
threaten to kill the rest if they attemt farming and such

>evidence seems to suggest we would be happier as hunter-gatherers
Do you have a 20,000 year old diary or something? How could you possibly know?

oh shit

When you live life in a box, you would really never be able to imagine a life outside your little box.

>GOD gives us anything
We're the only animal that can talk.. Beyond that, our skills are limited to our physical strength which is NOTHING compared to that of a gorilla. I mean, if we were meant to live in houses, then we would have been given the strength to actually build houses, rather than rely on a crane or a bunch of tools. If god created us to be self-sufficient, he would have given us the ability to digest cellulose, or the speed to run away from any and all predators.

But no; for the majority of our time on Earth, we weren't civilized. Civilization is new.

That's not what user is saying. Individuals can't live and survive alone in the wild. But besides that, it's pointless, because one person living in the wild isn't going to change the mindset of everyone on Earth, but a successful community in the wild would.

>Depression is clinically proven to be a chemical imbalance in your brain.
And yet statistically happens in crowded/civilized places moreso than everywhere else. Think about that.

>No, fertility rates will continue plunging and the population will shrink naturally as people in developed areas have fewer and fewer children.
They don't.The only reason the fertility rates are dropping, like in crowded places, is because of the disadvantages of having kids, the higher number of recluses, and the better designed birth control methods. The people that ARE breeding are the mentally retarded whores that forget to take the pill, the idiots without jobs that require welfare assistance; and those moronic babies will grow to have treated health conditions, and they will pass on their shitty genes.

>When you live life in a box, you would really never be able to imagine a life outside your little box.
Says the little fucknugget who's imagining a life outside his little box, yet has never been outside it and is in fact too scared to go out of it unless external forces would force him to.
>but a successful community in the wild would.
user, there are successful communities in the wild, they're called uncontacted tribes. Society at large tends ignore them, unless they're actively being a bother or society needs someone to pester out of boredom. Seems this includes you.
The only people they may possibly have inspired are those who now call themselves primitivists, and even that's arguable. Everyone else didn't give enough of a fuck.
>And yet statistically happens in crowded/civilized places moreso than everywhere else.
Something that occasionally happens to people will happen more if there's more people? HOLY SHIT, STOP THE PRESSES.
Someone give this man his masters degree in sociology please.

But yeah, nah. You're a larper who's feeling cramped in his little box, but doesn't dare go out even to get a little taste, so you need the box to fall apart on it's own first.
You'd be just as unhappy in a primitive society, since you'd still be the bottom bitch everyone shits on.
Provided you'd even survive your first week outside.