nstead of the coercion of work — and how much of the present could continue without precisely that coercion? — an existence without constraints is an immediate, central objective.
[Op. Cit.] How that is compatible with the arguing that industry would be maintained for a time is left unasked, never mind unanswered. And if “work” continues, how is this compatible with the typical primitivist dismissal of “traditional” anarchism, namely that self-management is managing your own alienation and that no one will want to work in a factory or in a mine and, therefore, coercion will have to be used to make them do so? Does working in a factory somehow become less alienating and authoritarian during a primitivist transition? And how will this work be done in a libertarian manner unless under self-management? It is an obvious fact that the human population size cannot be reduced significantly by voluntary means in a short period of time. For primitivism to be viable, world population levels need to drop by something like 90% as it is impossible for 6 billion people to live the lives of hunter-gatherers (as Zerzan stresses, “Agriculture itself must be overcome” [Op. Cit.]).
Related Questions
- nstead of the coercion of work -- and how much of the present could continue without precisely that coercion? -- an existence without constraints is an immediate, central objective.
- If I’m a miles collector, can I continue to collect ANA miles and present my card at ANA hotels? What about at other InterContinental hotels?
- Should India continue with present system of governance or switch over to Presidential system akin to USA.?
