Fuck Antifa and fuck the ancaps (but slightly less because capitalism can exist in an an prim society)
Discuss anything about anarcho primitivism. Questions welcome!
Suggested topics:
>Global warming
>Human environmental harm
>Rewilding
>overpopulation
>egalitarianism
>Biased Science
>Mega Farms and environment
>Domestication
>Consumerism/Mass consuming
>Equal rights
>community
>implying this ideology is real
Global warming is a hoax. And the only way you can protect the environment is a natsoc state that genocides 6 billion people. If you claim to want to protect the environment, but you oppose genocide of billions, then you don't really care about the environment.
And Kaczynski btfo'd your "equal rights" feminist garbage already.
>Unga-Bunga: the ideology
Topkek
green fascism > all
Global warming is real . 99% of climate scientists agreed
"Climate scientists" aren't scientists.
>ancaps practice what they preach and don't use internet
omg, no ancaps exist
>ancaps talk about it online
omg you fucking hippocrites reeeeeeeee
Question to an prim people, what era of technology should we go back too ?
I advocate for going back to just before the industrial revolution the 1700s. This is enough to get rid of all the bad effects of modernity without sacrificing too much comfort.
I think the amish would be the most advanced we could go. But ideally I would like to go back to a hunter/gatherer society.
There definitely are benefits of a hunter/gatherer society like increased fitness due to the lifestyle. But such a society would be extremely vulnerable to fluctuations in the earth's natural changes. I think a mixed society of some hunter gatherers, some agriculturalist and some nomadic herders would be better. And prevent the future anprim society form being wiped out in an event of natural disaster.
what would be the punishment for using technology and who would enforce the rules against it?
If it were up to me. I'd ban quite a bit of technology. But certain things like bronze and iron smelting would be allowed.
You're gay. Are you gonna smash the state with bronze swords and rock slings?
What is the underlying principle being used to decide the permitted and banned technologies?
Feels.
You can institutionalize anti-technology. The Amish are a perfect example.
This. Read Archaeofuturutism.
Then go be fuckin' Amish. If you think it's great, go do it. No need to form some imaginary political bullshit rationalization around it.
Hunter-gatherer communities weren't really "anarchist". They still exhibited informal hierarchies and de facto leadership, which emerged from the relationship between members, none of whom were equal to each other with respect to ability and motivation. Given the small scale of these communities, inequalities couldn't manifest themselves as disparately as they do now. If a tribal leader showed himself to be abusive or incompetent, the members could kill him and replace him with somebody else.
Such communities also weren't diverse or "inclusive". A community would have seen a mass migration of strangers into their turf as interlopers and invaders, and they'd deal with them appropriately.
I would ban technology that might lead to industrialization. But i'm more of an authoritarian tribal traditionalist, rather then anprim. A combination of pol pot and unabomber.