From: "Dave Coull" <coull2-AT-btinternet.com> Subject: RE: primitivism and anarchism Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 00:42:03 -0000 I asked >> So, tell us Chuck0, why do some dumbshit anarchists >> allege that you are a primitivist? What are their >> (presumably flimsy) grounds for doing so? Why is >> the allegation untrue? In what ways do you have >> something in common with Ug and his followers, >> and in what ways do you differ from them? and Chuck0 responds > It mostly has to do with guilt-by-association. > There seems to be a handful of anarchists > in the U.S. who think that anybody who is > associated with Anarchy magazine is a minion > of Satan. I have never actually read Anarchy magazine, so far as I can remember (it's not what it used to be, my, you know, whatchamacallit) but from what I have seen of stuff quoted or forwarded from that magazine here on the anarchy-list, and from things that folk who really were associated with it have posted here on the anarchy-list, my impression is that I haven't been missing very much. > I happen to be the unofficial webmaster for Anarchy > magazine and am good friends with Jason McQuinn > and I share certain ideas, so that makes me part > of the Evil Primitivist Conspiracy(tm). So Anarchy magazine can, apparently, be described as "primitivist", and from its title it also appears to make some sort of claim on being "anarchist", so perhaps Iain's question should be addressed to them : "Why call yourself an anarchist if you reject everything the name stands for politically?" > I do agree with many of the criticisms of "workerist" > anarchists The real main reason for your "criticism" of us workerists is because you come from a privileged middle class background and all this talk of class struggle makes you feel uncomfortable because it undermines your own sense of yourself as a revolutionary leader. There you are, the gift of enlightenment and self-knowledge, and it didn't cost you a single penny, and you didn't have to sit under a tree contemplating your fanny for umpteen years neither. > but I come to that because I see many of them > as dogmatic Just because I say you come from a privileged middle class background and all this talk of class struggle makes you feel uncomfortable because it undermines your own sense of yourself as a revolutionary leader, that means I'm dogmatic???!!! > non-critical Who, me? I criticise you, I criticise Anarchy magazine (without ever actually having read it), I criticise the great and primitive leader Ug, you can't say I'm non-critical! > ideologues who can't think outside of the box Bah! Humbug! "Can't think outside the box" indeed! Cliche! Did you get that motto from a Christmas cracker? It's just meaningless verbiage as a cover-up for sloppy thinking on your own part! Sorry about that. I mustn't be unpleasant. We are less than half-way through January so I must strive to keep my New Year resolution. Let me know if any of them real primitives show up. Dave C
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005