i think you’re absolutely right that people aren’t just ‘bad’ by nature and i don’t think most of the folks who call themselves primitivists are even bad folks. as you say they’re alienated, pissed off, and desperate for a change. primitivism is an easy out because it promises change but doesn’t require people to go out and do the hard work of organizing. I also 100% agree with you about

“What about the fact that white people are set up to be the cultureless everyman exploiting others? It’s the same as the way men are set up to consume sex.”

You’re dead right. which is part of why I make such a big deal out of culture and history and a pro-male approach to feminism (because equality for women HELPS men dammit, women are not the enemy!) in my writing and music.

you say “Look at the culture and weave a culture, don’t just condemn.” and I agree with you. that right there is pretty much a 1-sentence description of my life’s work. but radicals can’t always just blame everything on capitalism and the state and the media and so on, the fact is we have to take ownership of our mistakes and of the flaws in our movements if we want to fix those mistakes, mend those flaws, and actually win one of these days. which is why i liked this pamphlet so much and thought it was worth posting.

cheers,
lynx

primitivism and indigenism are unrelated. indigenism posits that the languages and cultures of first-nations (and all other cultures, for that matter) have intrinsic value and should be respected. It aims to organize indigenous people and their allies to defend native sovereignty and self-determination in the face of imperialist aggression. It also seeks to self-consciously learn from the social structures and value systems of indigenous people and use that as part of (not a complete) blueprint for how future non-hierarchical and egalitarian societies will look.

primitivism claims to be inspired by the social structures of indigenous people but in actuality draws most of its inspiration from racist 18th century “noble savage” caricatures of what indigenous cultures were like. It also rejects technology, frequently rejects rational thought and occasionally even rejects language – Zerzan wrote a whole book on why language is a problem. The unintentional irony is astonishing. Incidentally primitivism completely fails to provide a coherent definition of what “technology” even is, which makes the primitivist critique of technology a bit problematic. many, if not most, primitivists also reject mass organization and collective action and instead promote self-centered amoral egotism based on the concept of reclaiming ones own ‘wildness’ – never mind the cost to others. primitivism also argues that industrial collapse (as opposed to the fundamental re-working of industry to make it environmentally and socially sustainable which is proposed by other anarchists) is a desirable thing, regardless of the fact that it would result in the death of the majority of the worlds population. it thus advocates what amounts to mass murder on a scale that makes fascism and stalinism seem benign by comparison.

in short:

indigenism (and other anti-imperialist forms of anarchism) are based on respect, solidarity, mutual aid, environmental sustainability, the defense of local and indigenous cultures, and the creation of a non-hierarchical egalitarian society.

Primitvism is nihilistic (in the worst sense of the word) anti-community, anti-organization, opposes rationality and logic, advocates mass murder on a scale that would make most psychopaths ashamed, and actively opposes movements that have the potential to make real change. It has nothing to do with anarchism and if the FBI isn’t paying people like Zerzan to promote it they should be because the fact that primitivists run around calling themselves anarchists does more to discredit the anarchist movement then any amount of government propaganda could ever hope too.

that’s the difference.

I disagree with you in one important way. I feel you are too hard on primitivism and instead of learning to respect the social forces that propel it you simply choose to bash it, which just looks to me like it creates a rigid and unuseful puritanism incapable of compelling a spirited humanity. The cultural dimensions of capitalist exploitation are legion, well studied, and the crucial lynchpin of the game. Check out Amiri Baraka’s Blues People and the later Black Arts Movement for some good background there.
Romantic Primitivism as well as addictive materialism itself are symptoms of populations who have been culturally gutted and have no other identity. It’s not a trivial matter.

re: my role in a post-revolutionary society. I’d keep on making music, of course, but I’d have a regular job too. hell, I’ve got a regular job now. giving away my music means I can’t live off it, it’s not like I’m collecting royalties off all the free downloads or something…

Anyway–

Lynx, what do you think your role would be in this theoretical classless society? Would you keep on making music, even though your goals have been achieved, or would you just do regular work? Have you thought about it much?