Junghalli wrote:I can't even bring myself to read the whole article. The concentration of weapons-grade stupid just burns too much.
Article? There's
a whole page of this stuff! It's amazing, it's like a window into madness! Just go anywhere, look at anything, you won't go far wrong.
EDIT: It's not just agriculture that's evil! Oh no! It's the English language! Read
Rewilding the English Language for a good description of how you can talk in order to make the nice men in white coats come around. Seriously.
...
Some 2 millennia later, the “is” of identity has dominated the English language. So much so, that it seems nearly impossible to speak without it. Go ahead. Try speaking for five minutes without saying is, was, are, am, were, be, been.
Many problems occur when adapting to the Aristotelian Orientation of English. “To be” supposes that the world never changes, but remains in a fixed state. It casts the world into separate parts: black and white, good and evil. This “is” that. A man can only love a woman. A woman can only love a man.
The development and enhancement of the verb to be reflects civilizations quest for absolute control of the cosmos. To label things as fixed in time, you attempt to undermine the very essence of this universe: change. In a world where nothing can remain fixed, it seems a bit psychotic to perceive it as such, though I think you can probably imagine how a verb like this would have had an easy time developing in a sedentary, civilized culture. Civilization itself a product of agriculture, and agriculture an attempt to resist the changing world, to control the food supply. The unpredictable nature of change seems like the biggest threat to an agricultural based culture. They cannot move with the land, so they feel they must control it.
Without the verb to be, civilization’s prized philosopher Descartes could not have made his famous addition to civilized thought, “I think, therefore I am.” Nor could civilization’s prized playwright Shakespeare have written his famous line, “To be or not to be? That is the question.” Nor could civilization’s prized pacifist Gandhi have said the famous line, “Be the change you want to see in the world.” None of these statements make any sense in a real, constantly fluctuating world.
...
5. Tear Down the Prison of Identity
“Is that” a woman? “Is that” a man? “Am” I gay? “Am” I straight? “Am” I good? “Am” I evil? “Am” I Christian? “Am” I Jewish? “Am” I rewilded? “Am” I a Taker? “Am” I a Leaver? “Am” I an anarchist? Who “am” I?
You can”t even construct these pointless, meaningless questions in a language that sees the world as an active, creating, destroying, celebrating process. Even to call it a “process” creates a noun-state—more accurately, you could call it “process-ing”. Do you notice how that brings it alive, makes it vibrate, to acknowledge that it hasn’t stopped doing, and may do something else at any time? Fuck the verb to be.
Saying “I hunt and gather” rather than “I am a hunter-gatherer” pretty much encapsulates the whole idea, with a little bit of an E-primitive bias. You see, E-prime enthusiasts would mostly agree with the use of -er professional labels, as in “I make a living as a hunter-gatherer”. Hence my support of the E-primitive focus.
...
6. Break the Shackles of Factuality
Civilized peoples worship facts, reliable unchange-ables. A common defense of the concept of “fact” goes, “Well, it’s a fact that the sun will rise tomorrow. That we know.” Since I know of many Native American cultures that feel that in order for the sun to rise, they must call it up, and welcome it, and if they don”t, it may not rise that day, I know that it won’t surprise them when the Sun’s furnace goes cold, or if the earth itself gets pushed out of orbit by very real cosmic phenomena (asteroids, nomadic black holes, etc.). A civilized reaction to that would involve saying, “well, yes, our science predicts that, but you know it’s a fact that…”
Yes that's right you are imprisoned by the word "to be", by the idea that you
are something rather than doing something, by factuality, by...
Believe it or not but there's more on this website, and it's all so totally and utterly bonkers that... Look I know there are a lot of groups we laugh at, lots of sub-cultures, lots of really bizarre stuff, but compared to the Anarcho-Primitivists there's scarcely a single sub-culture that doesn't look sane and well adjusted. This is just so utterly and totally insane that I have trouble understanding how these people can even try to function in the real world!
Sweet mercy... I think they are saying that Aristotelan rules of logic are bad.
It's like
this parody suddenly made real! I mean ... this totally over the top parody, but these guys actually believe in this.
EDIT 2: I keep adding stuff but the further down the rabbits nest I go the more insanity I find, like this article stating that
no you don't need pills to control your fertility. By means of lambskin condoms, abortions, and the rhythm method, since we all know how well that works.
The 'average reader' has definately changed in taste and expectations.
Yes, Khan specifically states he's Yoshitsune, not a son of Yoshitsune who was raised by the Mongols (still ridiculous, but more plausible, as this would get around the fucking obvious cultural and language barriers). What, Japan's tragic hero was the God Emperor of Mankind in disguise? 
