[tuxxy]

But don't take Anarcho-primitivism seriously. A lot of the "thought leaders" on that side of the Anarchist spectrum just use it as a means to espouse what would normally just be considered Fascism except with an Anarchist twist.

It's the same stupid arguments that people use to justify population control due to "overpopulation". There's a school of thought called anti-civilization that's a tad similar with some divergences that offers far more interesting critiques of industry. Once you get through that, post-civilization thought is also rather interesting.

But really, Anarcho-primitivism is essentially fascist dribble disguised as environmentalism and social justice.

[zozbot234]

> But don't take Anarcho-primitivism seriously.

Why shouldn't it be taken seriously when it's the only variety of anarchism that's actually self-consistent? You can't run a large, mass society on anarchist principles, because social organization on a large scale will always require some way of formally resolving disputes, and that pretty much implies that conventional politics and "rule" by some over others will be a thing.

[michaelt]

A self-consistent philosophy based on a world with a 99.5% lower population seems like a step backwards for that 99.5%, regardless of how good it is for the freedom and equality of the remaining 0.5% of the population?

I mean, in my mind that's right up there with negative utilitarianism's benevolent world-exploder in terms of clever ideas that aren't good ideas.

[partomniscient]

Unfortunately sometimes the only way to find out that a clever idea is not a good idea is to test it via implementation.