|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|||||||
the latest anarcho-fruitloops |
|||
|
Anarcho-primitivism is a theory that has gained a small following amongst some North American and British anarchists. New Zealanders are probably familiar with the concept - opposition to technology, a return to a hunter-gatherer society, ending the division of labour - all the sorts of things the McGillicuddy Serious Party promoted as a joke, except that anarcho-primitivists take the same idea a lot further, and they aren't joking.
HAPPY HUNTING
Supposedly, agriculture and technology were not just undeveloped, but actively resisted. Zerzan thinks we were mostly vegetarian and had no specialised workers. The latter, division of labour, seems to be a particular hang-up of primitivists - heaven forbid that we should have to depend on others to produce something. Forget co-operation, let us all be sturdy, self-reliant individuals. Technology requires specialists, which seems to be equated with fully developed industrial capitalism. Make a case for even a basic form of technology and anarcho-primitivists accuse you of supporting wage-slavery, massive factories and the destruction of the environment.
|
CONTENTS |
||
According to Zerzan a few other evils didn't exist in his pre-historic golden age: "It also seems clear that reified time, language... number and art had no place, despite an intelligence fully capable of them." Fantastic. In case you're wondering, Zerzan thinks language reduces communication and inhibits "the flood of images and sensations to which the pre-modern individual was open". There isn't much point trying to refute this vision of history. Our real knowledge of life in the pre-Palaeolithic era is minimal. We are trying to build a picture based on a few fragments of bone and stone. Those of us who aren't blessed with Zerzan's second sight would admit that trying to build a picture of life at the time is a matter of making educated guesses and tossing in a bit of wild speculation. A fun game for archaeologists and New Scientist writers, but not of much value for people trying to construct a serious political programme.
|
|||
WACKY EXTRAPOLATIONS
This model from the past is also the shape of our future, although how we are going to get there is hard to say. Large-scale organisation, and most other forms of struggle are rejected. When asked at a meeting in London what we should do to bring about an anarcho-primitivist society, Zerzan's only suggestion was to launch physical attacks on the products of industry. In particular, digging up roads was suggested. Not necessarily a bad idea at times, but how is this going to bring about a global social revolution? A vague idea of inevitability is involved - sooner or later small groups of people will spontaneously break free of their conditioning, break up the roads and buildings and gather the vegetables spontaneously sprouting on the ruins. When they realise the delights of freedom and the natural abundance of nature there'll be no turning them back. But if everything is going to happen spontaneously what is the use of anarcho-primitivist movements or theories? I checked with Paul Rodgers, a Green Anarchist writer and was told its main purpose was to discredit other theories (that I guess might get in the way of all this spontaneity).
|
|||
DAFT OR DESTRUCTIVE?By now, some readers are probably asking: "Who gives a toss? Anarchism has always attracted the odd bunch of Whammo Deluxe Mince Pies, nobody much is going to take up such an obviously unachievable cause, so, so what?" Well, if I were to make it my business to discredit anarchism, I wouldn't launch my attack from the outside. Instead, under the guise of promoting it, I would present a ludicrous, unworkable and unattractive version of anarchism that is just credible enough to be considered seriously held views. I would reject organisation and encourage illegal actions to the exclusion of other forms of activism. And I'd be as vocal as possible, hoping to get the media to peddle my views as representative of anarchists. I certainly don't mean to suggest anarcho-primitivists have in fact set out with the intention of discrediting anarchism - I think they are daft rather than destructive. But however good their intentions they are the last thing an already marginalised group needs. The only value I can see in anarcho-primitivism is as a sort of "thought experiment". Its model of society represents a sort of anarchist fundamentalism with which we can compare other possibilities and think through the consequences of technological and social development. Otherwise, the theory is both useless and potentially damaging. - Sam Buchanan Note: All John Zerzan quotes are from his Future Primitive pamphlet, in an edition published by Dead Trees Earth First, Brighton, UK, no date given.
|
 |
||
Represented in the US by John Zerzan and zines such as Anarchy - A Journal of Desire Armed and Fifth Estate, and in the UK by Green Anarchist magazine, anarcho-primitivism sees society as having gone wrong with the invention of agriculture. Prior to this we were all happy anarchist hunter-gatherers, leading a life "of leisure, intimacy with nature, sensual wisdom, sexual equality and health," according to Zerzan.
I can't resist mentioning one of Zerzan's wackier extrapolations in his search for evidence of the existence of a co-operative, sexually equal, pre-historic society - the disappearance of large canine teeth in males. Apparently, this shows that females exercised a choice for sociable, sharing males! (Small canine teeth are a sign of being sociable and sharing, it seems.)