portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary global

corporate dominance | environment | genetic engineering

Ted K's words coming true

Globalization and technology result in US imperialism and nanotech robots for the military. The FTAA, WTO, World Bank and IMF are the same process of the wealthy elites (Rockefeller, Ford, Bush, Cheney, etc.) legitimizing their power over the world's people and environment by purchasing the lawmakers/politicians and merging their powers into one conglomeration..
After the FTAA/WTO protests in Miami/Sacramento it is becoming apparent that the people have no say in the process of globalization/technologization that is accelerating at an unprecedented rate. We are subject to intrusion by video surveillence 24/7, and anyone objecting is labeled a "terrorist" who must have something to hide. The nanotech future with scanning bar codes, human genetic engineering (read eugenics), and microscopic nanobots capable of drilling under the human skin and emitting a tracer signal so nobody becomes "lost" (read separated from the sheeple herd). The potential benefits of technology are stifled by greedy power hungry tyrants that want control of resources instead of sharing. So something that could help people is instead used by the military to kill people..

Primitivism is only viewed as a step backwards by linear thinkers, since most of modern American society is composed of linear thinkers, it comes as no surprise that primitivism is feared. Nothing is ever returned to what was, it is simply adopting methods of living that got us through the past 10,000 years til recent industrialisation. The neoliberal reformists protest their oppressors gently, hoping not to anger them and get SLAPPed into silence. After all, they have careers to protect, and the thought of true primitivism is scary without air conditioning..

Native medicinal/edible plants are availaible at every doorstep, we only need to look at our surrounding and remember how people lived long ago. Knowledge of plants and ecology would help us become optimum foragers, with only footsteps left on the environment instead of nuclear waste and genetic engineered toxins killing pollinators. Overconsumption by western society is responsible for famine and environmental degradation, what makes anyone think that genetic engineered monoculture crops are going to save people from the pesticide treadmill of resistant insects/viruses?

The military is still playing god with living organisms, there is no future for life in this current system..

The united states government and its oppressive technology must end..

homepage: homepage: http://www.gyre.org/

he's a fascist, get over primitivism 24.Nov.2003 18:13

linus torvalds

Seems like we should see the real truth of the unabomber manifesto. He talks well of destroying the factories and burning technical manuals. But that isn't how technology is destroyed. Factories are easily enough rebuilt, right? Tech exists in the collective mind of those who understand it and drive its progression. Therefore, if you really want primitivism you have to kill a lot (and I mean a whole lot) of people. Engineers, research scientists, graduate students, programmers, there are a bunch of people in this world who will never be motivated to give up electrical heat in favor of a hunter-gatherer existence. So, you gotta kill them. Really, primitivism is genocidal.

let primitivists be 24.Nov.2003 21:08

john turnow

If folks want their technology, I say let them have it. But leave those of us who dont want or need it alone! What disturbs me is the insistance of the technologically-minded to hunt down and survey every square inch of the planet and all its inhabitants... and the insistance of the state to track everyone and force them to conform to a flawed economy and a fatalistic lifestyle. The technology culture is crammed down the throats of all, and any who resist it are captured, figuratively, if not literally.
WE need a way to opt out. That is the defining feature of a TRULY free state-- one that lets people escape within its borders.

it's worse than that 24.Nov.2003 21:56


Linus only scratches the surface. Massive numbers of people would have to be displaced. Massive numbers would starve. I actually agree with the presentation of the problem as originally posted, but I don't see primitivism as a viable solution. Of course, it could very well become the only option at some point in the future. It's definitely a bleak picture. Opting out, as the second respondent mentioned, is something I know I'm trying to do as well. But how can it become an actual choice at the societal level without causing a further, and possibly fatal, rift between capitalism's ruthless power elite and the rest of us?

We have to keep working to get the word out about that other humane, "non-mainstream" world. It could very well be that some sort of economic or environmental meltdown will force the issue, and at that point will the sane be organized enough at the grassroots level to offer a less dystopian alternative than all those armed and very pissed off others lurking in the shadows?

Re: Ted K's words coming true 24.Nov.2003 23:32


Hmmm, do I REALLY want to jump in on this? Oh, heck, it's fun to entertain unpopular ideas, why not.

Regarding Kaczynski's words, I'm curious just which ones "primitivist" is referring to when he (or she) says they are "coming true". Some quotes would be helpful. Or do you actually agree with ALL of what he as said and advocated (letter bombs and all)?

Regarding the "primitivism is genocidal" canard, I see no reason why this must necessarily be true.

First, who says that the genocide must be committed by the primitivists? Civilization has created plenty of genocides all on its own, thank you very much. In fact, if you look at the track record of past civilizations, its not particularly encouraging: they typically end in getting butchered and dismembered by a competing civilization, or in exceeding the ability of the environment to absorb the insults they inflict upon it (and thus collapsing). Isn't it in some sense responsible to plan for contingencies if attempts to derail the current march to oblivion fail? Anarcho-survivalism, if you will.

Second, people die. It's an incontrovertible fact of life. Drop the birth rate below the death rate, and population will go down. Keep it up long enough and you can get it as low as you want, even to zero. No need to open up the concentration camps and the killing fields.

Myself, I don't much like the term "primitivism". Because of its connotations, buying into it means buying into rolling the clock back. I don't think that's desirable, or even possible. The goal shouldn't be to move "back" it should be to move ahead (and by "ahead" I mean an alternate vision of "ahead") along a different path. That's not to say there's nothing to be learned from studying primitive cultures, just that there's no ready-made model of the ideal society just waiting around to be unearthed from the past and adopted.

I also have a problem with the term "anti-civilization." The term "civilization" has meanings and connotations beyond its anthropological definition. Result is that "anti-civilization" comes across as "anti-goodness" or "pro-evil".

That said, once one gets over this rhetorical hang-up and focuses on the anthropological definition of "civilization" (which includes things like fixed and permanent structures of authority, organized religions, and class stratification, among its key attributes -- see  http://staff.orcsd.org/tallen/ten_characteristics_of_civilizat.htm ), any attempt to create an anarchist society must perforce be anti-civilization.

[Using the Internet to advocate primitivism, what fun!]


But scientists find no ice 25.Nov.2003 03:24

Bez Nachalie

Technology will eventually discover harsh truths. Now we know there's no ice on poles of Mars and Moon. Ho-hum. First the ice goes and then the water. We might only have water because of the ice. How you going to build two ice caps after you've destroyed them?

here's a suggestion 25.Nov.2003 22:24


If you're really so interested in herbal medicine I'm sure there are a million anarchist collectives who could use a good herbalist. You don't have to destroy technology to rediscover ancient ways. (actually... it's almost impossible to distroy technology anyway)
I'm a red anarchist who feels a lot of the same things, but I see that the issue is the social interaction of which technology is an agent. Technology is only the agent of power, by redefining social interactions (one group at a time) we can change the (sometimes) oppressive nature of technology into something positive.
Technology itself will help us save the natural world, once it's in the right hands. Why should we destroy something because of the corrupt people who use it?
Anyway, that's just my take on things. I could be wrong.