Full Version: The Plausibility of Anti-Civilization Without Anarcho-Primitivism: A Critique of Murr
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Initially fooled by the title, ‘The Emergence and Dissolution of Hierarchy’, I now step into a one-way argument with Murray on his wished-for a-hierarchal societal utopia (his word). That’s right, yet another proposed form of society, this one scientifically adept at living in sync with nature. Ah, I sense I am walking straight toward the ‘plausibility of anti-civ without anprim’ dilemma, on which I’ve never fleshed out my thinking. But soon Murray begins attacking back, launching hysterical shots at anarcho-primitivism. A two-way argument with a dead author? After grinding through his 1991 ‘Twenty Years Later, Seeking a Balanced Viewpoint’ add-on introduction, positioned just before the original introduction, I stop pulling out my hair and redirect my fingers to the keyboard.

I really can't muster the bother to read this in its entirety. Are there any titbits worth sharing in a TL;DR?