Mar-Jana Philips | Revolvy
As well, John Zerzan's reading glasses would have to be cast aside in a . probably continue to criticize the irrationality of those who believed in the supernatural. Radically reducing living standards to meet a primitivist notion of “affluence”. The film's main actors and supporting players included Greg Evigan, Taurean . refers to a historic meeting that took place in Kimberley, South Africa, in .. The Award for Innovation in Theatre was presented to the Zabalaza Theatre Festival. of alleged witchcraft were psychological rather than supernatural in origin. ZABALAZA: David's behaviour hurts a fragile Neli. FEARLESS HEART: Fernanda tells Bernardo that she would like to meet Verdugo. . at which "key players" Gillian and David are able to reprise their roles in the supernatural drama. . Naturally, the cast, while still comprising some long-time actors, boasts fresh faces.
Anarchists did not consider the living standards of the Neanderthal worthy of modern humans. The only ones who felt that people should live like primitives were those capitalists whose desire to keep business costs down resulted in primitive living conditions for their wage slaves. It is in the future.
They are attracted to projects and ideas precisely because they are absurd; and so anarchism comes to be known precisely for the illogical character and ridiculousness which ignorance and bourgeois calumny have attributed to anarchist doctrines. Whereas in the past primitive thinkers were consigned to the margins of the movement by virtue of the absurdity of their ideas, a recent absence of lively, mass class struggle activism has allowed primitive thinkers to exert greater influence.
The onus is on traditional anarchists to take the movement back, and force primitive thinkers to their previous place on the sidelines. Not to be discounted, either, is the influence of the corporate media, which has taken primitivism and situated it front and centre, presenting it to the public as the lifeblood of a 21st-century anarchist resurgence.
Time magazine, for example, ran two articles in on John Zerzan and the cult-like following he has attracted in his hometown of Eugene, Oregon among other places.
The December 13,issue of Newsweek featured a picture of anarcho-syndicalist Noam Chomsky with images of Zerzan and convicted murderer Kaczynski beside him; the publication associated all three as leading lights of modern anarchist thought. NPR, 60 Minutes, and other news outlets have given airtime to the absurd proclamations of John Zerzan even as the unofficial media ban of Noam Chomsky and other more capable analysts continues.
Again, as Fabbri, noted: This follows a historical pattern in which anarchist activists are ignored by the establishment until one does something so anti-social or outlandish that elites can score cheap points by reporting it. If the public sees only the primitivist wing of anarchism, it will be unlikely to support anything associated with anarchism. Understandably, few people want to support something that is hostile to the life-saving medical care, information technology, and electronic entertainment they enjoy.
This includes interviews where Kaczynski reports on attempts to have a dialogue with terrorist Timothy McVeigh, dragging again the shadiest figures of modern politics into anarchist history. It also threatens to divert eager new activists into its theoretical cul-de-sac where nothing revolutionary can ever be accomplished.
Worst of all, the primitivist agenda would result in mass scale atrocity if its objectives were ever met: That primitivists play casually with such globally catastrophic notions speaks volumes about their real concern for human well-being. An Ignoble Savage I am as free as Nature first made man, Ere the base laws of servitude began, When wild in woods the noble savage ran.
Primitivists emphasize how good ancient humans had it. The more we reflect on it, the more we shall find that this state was the least subject to revolutions, and altogether the very best that man could experience.
Hunger and other appetites made him at various times experience various modes of existence; and among these was one which urged him to propagate his species — a blind propensity that, having nothing to do with the heart, produced a merely animal act. What evidence we do have should caution us from projecting our own fantasies onto them, however, or asserting them as desirable alternatives for the future. That is, the natural world is still here and ensconces us, even if aspects of it are modified.
Its tool kit is elegant and lightweight, its outlook linguistically complex and conceptually profound yet simple and accessible to all. Its culture is expansive and ecstatic. It is propertyless and communal, egalitarian and co-operative… It is anarchic… free of work… It is a dancing society, a singing society, a celebrating society, a dreaming society. How true is this, really? Conservatives often fixate upon an idealised — and unrealistic — notion of the past, lamenting that society has grown far away from it.
The Nazi Party presented a story of a once-great Teutonic civilization in decline, the victim of Jewish parasites and communist forces; contemporary U. The problem with such ideas is that they posit a romanticised vision of an earlier era, inconsistent with the often unpleasant realities that existed.
Again, this notion gained much currency among the European far right in the early 20th century, which conceived of, for example, the Anglo-Saxon race as a hardy, earthy volkish people softened by liberal, effeminate notions of welfare statism and progress. Germans, in fact, enacted racial hygiene laws to preserve the most robust strains of the species. Murray Bookchin has noted this ideological tendency in the reactionary romanticism of Nazi sympathizer Martin Heidegger.
As well, Janet Biehl and Peter Staudenmaier have explored the problem in-depth in the excellent Ecofascism: Lessons from the German Experience.
Good medical care, subsidies to help with home heating costs — these amount to mollycoddling, business owners assert. Real Americans, they maintain, realize that hardship builds moral fibre and physical stamina — an idea that conveniently justifies business in behave as irresponsibly as it wants.
However, primitivists, unlike the corporate elite, claim to oppose environmental ruin. Like Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, primitive humans had all their needs provided for, but they also stayed fit.
So, who were the peoples that primitivists seek to emulate? What were their lives really like? This is, in fact, where the fraud of primitivist thought reveals itself most clearly. For example, primitivists conveniently fail to mention the religious notions, patriarchal structures, or strict traditions like clitoridectomy, painful coming-of-age rituals, etc.
Perhaps they are aware that most would find these undesirable. What is the primitivist ideal? According to the Green Anarchy collective, language is out. That is, people primitivists wildly conjecture were psychologically healthier when they stood in mute awe — or fear — of everything, unable to communicate with one another.
Of course, it is unlikely that anatomically modern homo sapiens — that is, humanity as it has anatomically existed since aboutyears ago — has ever gone without speaking. According to anthropologist Kenneth Feder, it is likely that approximately 1. Because the muscles involved in the production of speech are connected to the basicranium, this may indicate that the physical capability for human or human like speech production was present in homo erectus.
Sinai School of Medicine anatomist Jeffrey] Laitman has concluded that homo erectus could produce speech at the level of a modern six-year-old. There are no audio recordings from 1. In fact, much primitivist theory relies on wild speculation about how humans organised social life in eras from which we have no written records. Because the least is known about such eras, primitivists can project their wildest fantasies onto them and never worry about being proven wrong. It is the conversation of one human individual with many other individuals.
Only through this conversation and in it can animalistic man transform himself into a human being, that is, a thinking being. His individuality as a man, his freedom, is thus the product of the collectivity. Many of us enjoy the work of poets, who use language as their paintbrush to enrich — not impoverish — our cultural experience. Singing and storytelling are cultural forms valued by most humans, as well. Other examples abound, too numerous to mention. No Technology No technology above simple tools is to be allowed in the primitivist utopia, either: Primitivists define technology in a manner that suits their ends, however: Technology, however, which existed long before capitalism, is defined by most scientists as the practical application of knowledge towards problem solving; alternately, most anthropologists agree, it is a manner of accomplishing a task using technical methods.
Despite the protestations of primitivists, most anthropologists also classify stone tools as a type of technology. Other technology includes the construction of crude wells for securing water as well as the most advanced equipment used to save human life.
Deprived of such things, countless humans would immediately die. Primitivists say they fear that, like the Skynet computer in the movie Terminator, technology will develop its own sentience and work to eradicate humanity. It may be a body without any life of its own.
It may be a dead thing, a huge cadaver. It may move its slow thighs only when living beings inhabit it. Nevertheless, its body is what does the wrecking. Anecdotally, this author can vouch for having met many primitivists who enjoy their Play stations in their heated apartments, rent DVDs Fight Club, Instinct, Matrix, Terminatorand otherwise gladly partake in privileges unavailable to real-world tribes people.
Presumably, primitivists are waiting for everyone else to go primitive first. In the capitalist system, it is true that capitalists direct much technology towards misanthropic ends — demonstrating that it is class rule that determines how technology is applied, and not vice versa. Due to the poverty of their analysis and intellectual sloppiness, however, primitivists cannot make even such obvious distinctions, and condemn technology wholesale.
Of course, harmful technology is just that — harmful. It is hard to imagine a positive use for nuclear weaponry, for example, or for biological and chemical weapons.
They also have a long way to go to convince us that people like physicist Stephen Hawking should be left to die in Social Darwinian fashion simply because they require technology to live. Let us not play around with these concepts idly. When primitivists advocate eliminating technology, they advocate the wholesale slaughter or starvation of billions, of humans worldwide.Supernatural Cast Plays WHO SAID IT?
No Agriculture Zerzanite and Green Anarchy primitivists would prevent the domestication of food and animals as well. Domestication of crops began around 12, years ago in the Near East, marking the shift from nomadic hunter-gatherer lifestyles — which most primitivists like — to more sedentary, settled social formations, which most primitivists dislike.
Postscript to Future Primitive. In order to preserve primitivist society, primitivist police would have to root out this kind of dissidence immediately. Cultivation of crops would have to be banned.
Bourgeois Influence on Anarchism: Redux
Again, let us reflect soberly on the consequences of the belief that agriculture ought to be eliminated: Given these three criteria alone, it is clear that no existing society could be called primitivist. In fact, it is not clear that any culture we have knowledge of accords to such strict ideals. Societies lacking language, agriculture, and technology are few and far between.
Even the living, non-industrial tribes that primitivists regularly cite in their analyses — such as the! And even if the! Kung do not employ technology as primitivists define it an important distinction, since primitivists define it to suit their agendaor domesticate animals, there are other respects in which aspects of theirs and other tribal lifestyles are not anarchistic or desirable for others.
Furthermore, anthropologist Edwin Wilemsen notes that living! Kung cultural practices observed by anthropologists such as Marshall Sahlins or Lorna Marshall are themselves the product of millennia of adaptation: Kung used to hunt elephants, practiced horticulture and other types of farming, and had skirmishes with chiefdoms in eastern Africa that drove them into their current habitat the Kalahari Desertwhere they are observed by contemporary researchers.
Kung people miraculously survived into our own exterminating age. Kung have survived, as have Native Americans and Aborigines, but Perlman implies the! Keeley notes that the!
Kaylee meets the cast of Supernatural - Children's Wish Foundation International
Accomplished academics like Noam Chomsky and Ian Hacking have made strong points on this exact topic. Our assessments of arguments should have less to do with who is making them and more with what is being argued and what thought is behind it. Some of the key features we feel the trio of proper conspiracists, obscurantists, and mystics share are: Intelligent Design Conspiracy theories seek to offer all-encompassing explanations of specific world events and the general social order.
Refusing the existence of coincidence or even dynamic historical conditions, every event or significant development has its origin in an intentional strategy of those in power.
The conspiracy theory is both all-encompassing and endlessly flexible. By definition, it can grow larger and more complex to explain virtually any natural, economic, or cultural event the conspiracist puts their mind to. Conspiracy theories flourish in a world in which working class people are confronted with rampant exploitation, war, sexual violence, brutality within the legal system, environmental destruction, displacement, and corruption.
The vast scope of the supposed conspiracy taps in to the equally broad fear and hatred much of the working class feels toward the order they live under. However, even those conspiracy theories that seem to oppose the State and capitalism do so in ways that we should see to be fundamentally different from, and even opposed to, anarchism.
Conspiracy theorists tend to focus on individuals as actors, rather than on broader social structures. So, for example, rather than all bosses benefiting from capitalism and all workers losing out, the nefarious secret agreements between specific family lineages are the culprit and of primary importance. The totality of conspiracy theories, and their tendency toward personification, is not a trivial matter.
Conspiracy theories, at their very beginnings can corrupt any further action regarding those very conspiracies. Converts to the conspiracist flock tend to believe this newly acquired secret knowledge is of primary importance.
Thereafter, the spreading of it is the most important action they can take. This fixation on conspiracy is not only often factually incorrect, but destroys potential for real organizing and leaves only proselytizing. The conspiracy theorists may start off with questioning real conditions, but rather than setting off a trajectory of struggle, they become trapped, endlessly promoting the increasingly complex conspiracy theory.
The True Believers The focus on alternative health choices as a form of activism has gained much popularity among the anti-authoritarian Left. Our healthcare system is far from perfect. The pressure and control exerted on the healthcare system by its economic and political structuring is frequently the crucial component of that harm. The poisoning and disfiguring of newborn children caused by the prescribing of Thalidomide for the treatment of morning sickness that began in the s and the infection of blood transfusion recipients by Blood Services Canada are just two of many examples.
But like conspiracy theories, the conclusions health mysticism draws are dangerous. The methods they use to reach their conclusions are deeply flawed, and the ways in which they propagate them can be incredibly damaging. Health and care mysticism involves three distinct, though often overlapping, modes of thought. The first is a sort of a pure mysticism, that these crystals, stones or stars work in ways that are unrelated to science.
Often, this is sort of a fringe religious belief. The second is pseudo-scientific: The last is anti-scientific, which rejects science totally on philosophical, religious or political grounds. As individual choices, these may be unsound, but when they are pushed on people in a mass way, they can be dangerous.
Health and care mystics follow much of the same rhetoric, but their focus on personal and socially-pressured choices makes it all the worse.
Their orientation towards motherhood and children is fraught with examples of this, as many of the choices mothers make are viewed as inherently imbued with positive or negative politics. This puts incredible and unnecessary pressure on working class mothers, who while exploited in their reproductive labour and socially marginalized in their role, now have their very worth as caregivers called into question.
Guilt and shame become coercions employed by mystics to expand their influence, and choices become laden with moral meanings mothers have no need to carry. Anti-vaccination campaigns provide a strong example of the devastating effect that this can have on working class communities. According to a UK study, radical anti-vaccination groups tend to be composed of and led by people already involved or interested in activism around issues such as genetically modified organisms GMOsbig pharma, and alternative health.
This is in contrast to more reform-focused groups, which tend to be composed of parents who believe their children have been adversely affected by vaccinations. The effect of this has, of course, been holistically unhealthy. Vaccination rates have dropped in many parts of Europe and North America, leading to outbreaks of deadly diseases such as whooping cough and measles.
Even more terrifying, the fact that these diseases are now once again active poses a risk that vaccine-resistant strands will mutate, putting the entire population at risk.
The damage that anti-vaccination movements do is very real and very material, while their cause is entirely immaterial and entirely moral.
Poverty and class are the most significant determinants of health. It would stand to reason, then, that anti-authoritarian Left activists would focus our efforts there. Instead, we see anarchists interested in health taking a starkly different, and somewhat frightening turn, into practising acupuncture and midwifery in small collectives that avoid regulation. Into replicating the judgmental and paternalistic attitudes that pass judgement on those whose personal healthcare is not natural, not alternative, and as it has somehow come to indicate, not revolutionary.
The Loquacious Types Obscurantism refers to deliberately preventing the facts of a matter from becoming known, either by restricting knowledge or presenting things in a way that is deliberately vague.
This conduct is common in Left academia, and it is against this that we are arguing. To be clear, when we critique academia, we do not mean to argue against the pursuit of higher knowledge. We do not mean intellectually rigorous attempts to understand the conditions of the working class. To paraphrase Chomsky, we are not against theory, but against posturing. Our opposition is to theories that present themselves as having revolutionary content, but which often have very little content at all.
Many aspects of academic obscurantism have been debated in different academic fields themselves. Postmodernism, in its promotion of the relativism of all ideas, has a strong role in this.
Academic obscurantism essentially promotes the idea that the discourse, the expression of ideas, is of such greater importance than the material reality these ideas relate to that the ideas need not relate to anything at all.
In his book The Social Construction of What, Ian Hacking explores how the idea of a social construct, which has potential value in helping oppressed people realize that their conditions of oppression are not natural, has been applied so broadly in both humanities and sciences that it has lost much of its use and meaning.
Advancement and notoriety in particular academic streams through the use of bizarre or inflammatory arguments has become a tried and true method of satisfying the competitive impulse encultured within academia.
Often this is presented as rigour, but that claim is shaky. Academics claim to have high standards in their work, and approach things from a more intellectual framework in their writing and presentations, but tend to quickly resort to emotional manipulation when their ideas are challenged outside formal institutional spaces.
Put simply, the scaffolding their ideas are built on is unsound. When their ideas are challenged, they have nothing to fall back on. And their ideas are challenged often. A good example is when Left academics enter organizing spaces.
So, quickly, they call others racist or sexist, try to manipulate them into thinking they are incapable of understanding, or retreat back to purely academic spaces. The First Step… Is admitting we have a problem. Not just that there is a problem but that we have a problem. Neither coincidence or conspiracy can explain this concerning phenomena.
Our conduct and orientations need to be brought into question if they are apparently engendering familiarity in those that repulse us. This concern can even become primary. Not many people know that about me. I get inspiration from cooking shows.
I love experimenting with different cuisine. How to use the knife properly, not just cutting food as I please. The Rivers Foundation because of the amazing work they do.
Fashion photographer Merwelene van der Merwe Q: A lot of excitement. What is your favourite dish to prepare and where do you draw inspiration from? I do three things — sheep, stew and salad. I get inspiration from whatever is around me at the time. The Orange Baby initiative begun by the fashion industry in The Netherlands. TV presenter Sade Giliberti Q: I like cooking pasta as I come from an Italian background. Survivor opened me up to different ways of cooking fish.
Chicken is also my favourite.
One is a simple thing like chopping because you watch Nigella Lawson and Jamie Oliver and how they chop. Its whole angle speaks out to me.
- American musical groups
- Navigation menu
- South African films
They go out to underprivileged areas and emphasise every child deserves a meal. Not only children, but everyone, elderly included. They do a lot.