Thanks

I've been trying to explain this to marxist friend. And yes, the primitive part of the linear evolution of "production". Oh my god. Most modern anarchists I see (on Substack) seemed to have just quietly moved on from all that - regen ag, Villaging, spreading changing permaculture, and listening to indigenous. The arguments seem to impass - massively - around worldviews. Indigenous vs the machine. It's a divide that seems unable to be crossed. I understand their world and, like you said, it's just rationality, enlightenment, dissection, disconnection. But they don't seem to be able to step out of it to consider anything else. Even saying the indigenous perspective is "just an ideality, a fantasy in someone's head" and that "you're talking about primitive communism, where they only had enough production because they needed to survive. They didn't have any surplus to suppress other classes." And therefore evolve, they mean. And then I hear that "perfect communism" is when people share everything and workloads are shared and no one is over anyone else." Gobsmacking. That's the theory? You need this capital history evolution to get to what was already there so you can call it something else? But now there's factories. Perfect. The response, " So you want to go back to primitism and work yourself to death and live in squalor?'

Oh. Dear. I keep trying to find a bridge, but, so far, I get scorn and a repetition of the Marxist jargon real. Burgoiis. Means of production. You know. Sorry for the rant, it's both frustrating and shocking. But I'm open to learning from it. I respect both babies and bathwater.