Well today’s episode of the podcast was about a former “anarcho-capitalist” who turned “anarcho-primitivist” and runs a bunch of fake “ancap” pages that he uses to advance his green anarchy ideology. I had a little verbal tussle with the guy and I wanted to share it as a post since Justin Stout deleted it after he didn’t want to deal with it anymore. Admittedly, I was a bit troll like, but the line of questioning I had for him still stands and highlights a lot of the inconsistencies many “anprims” fall into. Below are some pictures of the conversation before it was deleted. I didn’t even get a chance to post the final comment before he blocked me.
So much of this is laughable. He believes that all of civilization is evil and that the wood and steel needed to create skyscrapers and our modern way of life are acts of violence against the planet yet he is willing to glam camp in a bus. From my understanding, bus RVs didn’t exist in hunter-gatherer times unless you count this:
The hypocrisy of calling yourself a primitivist and camping in an RV is laughable. Not only that, but Justin rails against capitalism, markets and other such aspects of civilization from the comforts of his “primitive” bus but uses modern power tools and Amazon affiliate links to support himself.
I don’t know what he learned in regards to hunter-gatherer societies, but they didn’t have affiliate marketing and certainly didn’t have modern power tools… Unless he is again drawing inspiration from this:
What captain caveman doesn’t seem to understand is that the problem isn’t civilization. He has a romanticized view of hunter-gatherer society that makes him think it was peaceful and tranquil. That the desire to dominate others did not exist when man was barely making a living in the wilds. Not only that but it ignores the action axiom which, as we have discussed in the past, is irrefutable in many ways. This is because it is a synthetic a priori proposition. In order to refute it, an individual must engage in purposeful behavior towards the fulfillment of an end (the refutation of the action axiom). It’s kind of stupid to use that which you wish to refute in its own refutation. But the action axiom has implications that are damning to Anarcho-Primitivists beyond just this point. Humans engage in purposeful behavior towards the fulfillment of the ends they desire by economizing the scarce means in their control in order to maximize value. This means that hunter-gatherers were always looking to maximize their labor by finding efficiency which naturally brings about innovation. This means that the primitivist must arbitrarily and unnaturally set limits on technology that is allowed. This is unnatural because it means forcefully limiting innovation and problem solving; things that are a natural part of being human. But “unnatural” is a sin to the Green Anarchists which causes a problem for them. It is unnatural, they say, to drive around in cars and take part in modern society. But it is also unnatural to limit the natural tendency for humans to innovate. What does this mean? Clearly, it means that “unnatural” isn’t all that bad and shouldn’t be something we get hung up on.
In fact the “natural is good” rhetoric always bothered me. Nature is neutral, not good. It gives equal opportunity to humans as it does to the mosquito that carries malaria and other deadly diseases. What each organism does with its opportunity is up to them; humans simply became the best at maximizing the opportunities presented by nature.
So philosophically and logically, the anarcho-primitivists are illogical people. Perhaps that is why they delete your comments and block you when you challenge their ideology. Of course, they probably have a lame excuse for this. Logic and reason really took off with Aristotle who was himself a man of civilization. Clearly then, logic and reason are just unnatural creations of the violent exploitation and domination of nature so why would anarcho-primitivists care about being logical and rational?