John Zerzan's means to an end.

Chances are, if you've had a meaningful conversation with me in the last year or so, then the subject of Anarchism most likely came up at some point or another. It's a belief system that I've clinged strongly to over the last year and a half and it's managed to change my perception on nearly everything from family and work, to society in general.

To be more specific, I prefer to align my beliefs in the Anarcho-syndicalist side of the spectrum; meaning I prefer to envision a future in which all matters are decided upon by well-organized committees and panels that are made up of the very same people who break their backs all day long, as opposed to overly privileged old white men in suits as it's currently done in present day society.

Essentially Anarchism has become a general over-head term that's used to describe the common threads that each of it's sub-sects embody. These sub-sects range from the exclusionary Anarcho-feminists, to the oxymoronical Anarcho-capitalists (seriously how can two things that are diametrically opposed ever function side by side in a fair society).

Out of these sub-sects the one that i find the most interesting and important, yet confusing and idealistic, is Anarcho-primitivism.

Interesting because unlike most other forms of Anarchism that attacks and picks apart the system itself, Anarcho-primitvism not only attacks the system, but also picks apart the very environment that surrounds us. From the buildings and skyscrapers that tower over us, to the medicine and food that we're fed, to the ease of communication through cell towers and the internet that we're so accustomed to; even going as far as in John Zerzan's case as to criticize language itself.

Important because this sub-sect is the fastest growing within the realm of Anarchism. No surprise there since the so called "green-revolution" has been the fastest growing amidst the mainstream political sphere as well.

Idealistic (almost overly so) because of the means to an end that Anarcho-primitivists seek. Where as the revolution amongst Anarcho-syndicalists would end at the destruction of the central state, the revolution for primitivists seems to end at the destruction of the metropolis and all major cities.

Confusing, to me at least, because I've yet to read an answer to the question of how exactly they plan on achieving this means to an end. While it may be the largest growing sect of Anarchism, once the central state is eliminated we are then faced with the overwhelming majority of the country that know next to nothing about Anarchism. This majority is accustomed to the ease of communication and the grandeur and glamour of the metropolis that they inhabit. So the idea of destroying the cities and communication airwaves on the heels of the destruction of the central state, to me, wouldn't seem very appealing. So the only logical way that I can see the primitivists achieving their goal is through force over the innocent and uncooperative masses, which itself is an affront to the name of Anarchism itself.

blah blah blah blah

I don't know what the point of this post was, except to

1) get back into the blog-0-sphere

idk, we're reading John Zerzan's book for our Anarchist Book Club, and i wanted to start blogging again....so thats what this post is... also im incredibly stoned, so that explains everything that's wrong with this post.

on a side note, we're looking for a backyard/house to throw a benefit show for the Zapatistas of Chiapas, Mexico. We plan on charging at the door and selling food, and all proceeds will go to them. So if anyone knows anything message me.