So, to do a broad stereotype of anarcho-primitivists, the ideal world that they envision would by necessity kill a vast majority of the population. And going back to entirely "natural" medicine and tech would in particular murder disabled people. They like to couch it in the whole "disabled people had a special place in society and were totally cared for" rhetoric but let's be honest about how that would work out.
Similarly, the models they envision would exclude a lot of trans people who have medical needs such as hormones and surgery. But it gets more overt with that, with two of the leaders of Deep Green Resistance, Derrick Jensen and Lierre Keith, who expressed their transphobia in a lot more overt ways. Here is one of the other founders, Aric McBay, who left the organization after a trans-inclusive policy was cancelled in 2012.
No problem. I have strong opinions about this because 1) I'm disabled and have a lot of trans friends, and 2) I had an infestation of anarcho-primitivists crash at my apartment back when I was a baby anarchist and as a result, my loathing of them is a permanent part of my personality now.
Ah! Further questions, if you don't mind. In the pastebin receipts, the DGR transphobes denigrate "anarchists" pretty fiercely. Are DGR anarcho-primitivists or are anarcho-primitivists mortal enemies of anarchists or...? I'm trying to get oriented to the teams in play.
Also, if I wind up writing about this (on sylloge_of_soughs) do you want credit/a call out?
I'm not an expert in leftist trainspotting like I used to be, but I think DGR used to identify as anarcho-primitivists/anti-civ (which are slightly different but both annoying) and maybe rejected that? Or they're talking about anarcho-communists and anarcho-syndicalists, who form the vast majority of people who identify as anarchists. Jensen definitely used to identify as an anarchist and spoke at bookfairs (my ex met him and said he was nice, actually). I'm not sure how Keith identified back in the day but I don't think she identifies as an anarchist anymore.
I also don't identify as an anarchist anymore (though I support a lot of anarchist ideas!), largely because bullshit like this led me to conclude that working with ideologically oriented, sectarian groups is a lot of frustration for very little payoff. So I do not speak for all anarchists. In general most anarchist tendencies are kind of broad tent and were accepting of these people who think that 90% of the human population needs to die, at least until they went explicitly TERF.
Also, if I wind up writing about this (on [community profile] sylloge_of_soughs) do you want credit/a call out?
Oh, sure! I am no expert, though, just a political dilettante.
About thirty years ago I came to the conclusion that anarchists were a mix of heartbreakingly naive starry-eyed idealists who swallowed a spiel hook, line, and sinker, and a bunch of covert social darwinists who were attracted to the vision of a society in which laws would no longer constrain them and to the victors went the spoils. Which is to say: prey and predators, sheep and wolves.
Whenever anyone starts going on about freedom, it's important to ask "freedom to what?"
I think you've got anarchists and anarcho-capitalists in the sheep and wolves analogy. The former don't recognize the latter as anarchists.
I'm generally of the opinion that there are better ways to organize society than the one we have, and a lot of anarchist principles go a fair way in doing improving matters. But I also lived in collective houses and worked in collectives and found that weirdly, the burden of the less glamorous work, be it dishes and toilets or tabling at the 'zine fair, mysteriously always ended up being done by women while the men did the important work of talking and thinking. So I am a little skeptical that we can all function in the complete absence of a state.
That said, I am in favour of abolishing a lot of the things that states currently do that are not useful, and focusing on things like healthcare, education, transportation, and environmental regulation, which are actually socially valuable.
Thank you for the recipts re. Derrick esp. who is/was a prominent local which has complicated some things / relationships - although circles haven't really overlapped for a number of years now. Anyway, that there link is veryvery clear and I appreciate it. His most recent (Oct 21) DGR radio show featured TERF fearmongering, so he's still very much on that shit.
You know, I'm not too distressed that he's still an ass. I always fundamentally objected to his philosophy and had to deal with people defending him, so this has all been very vindicating.
(no subject)
(no subject)
Similarly, the models they envision would exclude a lot of trans people who have medical needs such as hormones and surgery. But it gets more overt with that, with two of the leaders of Deep Green Resistance, Derrick Jensen and Lierre Keith, who expressed their transphobia in a lot more overt ways. Here is one of the other founders, Aric McBay, who left the organization after a trans-inclusive policy was cancelled in 2012.
Here are the receipts. TW TW TW
Here's Vancouver's Media Coop talking about it.
(no subject)
Thank you so much!
(no subject)
(no subject)
Also, if I wind up writing about this (on
(no subject)
I also don't identify as an anarchist anymore (though I support a lot of anarchist ideas!), largely because bullshit like this led me to conclude that working with ideologically oriented, sectarian groups is a lot of frustration for very little payoff. So I do not speak for all anarchists. In general most anarchist tendencies are kind of broad tent and were accepting of these people who think that 90% of the human population needs to die, at least until they went explicitly TERF.
Also, if I wind up writing about this (on [community profile] sylloge_of_soughs) do you want credit/a call out?
Oh, sure! I am no expert, though, just a political dilettante.
(no subject)
Whenever anyone starts going on about freedom, it's important to ask "freedom to what?"
(no subject)
I'm generally of the opinion that there are better ways to organize society than the one we have, and a lot of anarchist principles go a fair way in doing improving matters. But I also lived in collective houses and worked in collectives and found that weirdly, the burden of the less glamorous work, be it dishes and toilets or tabling at the 'zine fair, mysteriously always ended up being done by women while the men did the important work of talking and thinking. So I am a little skeptical that we can all function in the complete absence of a state.
That said, I am in favour of abolishing a lot of the things that states currently do that are not useful, and focusing on things like healthcare, education, transportation, and environmental regulation, which are actually socially valuable.
(no subject)
(no subject)