"But what do we owe future generations that have done nothing for us?"

Boy, conservatives are just going to increasingly make their moral nihilism more and more absurdly explicit, aren't they?

The freedom of people ten billion years from now is continuous with my freedom.
I keep re-emphasizing that limited time preference is connected to a limited circle of care. To blur our present identity with the agent operating in our body in the future is basically the same as blurring identity with agents operating in different bodies.
Fascism is based in the intensification of limited identity and horizons. It shrinks the circle of care to the nation -- or in the case of some fash, just the "individual."

This is likewise the mistake of liberal statism (which doesn't care to plan coherently for the future).
Liberalism defers consideration of future consequences.

What is the inevitable result of having the state own all the guns? Who cares!

Will normalizing getting healthcare from your employer have horrible effects on worker power? Shut up, we want healthcare now!
What anarcho-primitivism gets right is expanding one's circle of care to future generations and thus opposing catastrophically shortsighted/selfish damage to the ecological pathways humans depend upon.

(What it gets wrong is not caring about the further far future.)
(It's always been particularly hard for me to understand why primitivists could care about helping people flourish ten thousand years from now, but not helping consciousness flourish ten billion years from now in all directions in our lightcone. Why cut the circle of care off?)

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with William Gillis 🏴

William Gillis 🏴 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @rechelon

19 Feb
Core to my analysis of power has been -- since about 1998 -- that power is rooted in a cognitive strategy of disengagement (walls, borders, static systems, tradition, etc), whereas freedom is about engagement (networking, vigilance, reflection, empathy, etc).
I discuss this briefly in my piece Two Definitions Of Power (which got reposted in 2009 during a website change, but was first posted in the early 00s) while addressing and rejecting attempts to use "power" with positive valences or other definitions.

humaniterations.net/2009/11/13/two…
This core analytic dichotomy between engagement and disengagement cuts through all my work. It was initially a troubling tension with my involvement in the counter-globalization movement. Eventually it won out in the consent v agency framework debate and became positive freedom.
Read 12 tweets
14 Feb
Ideologies primarily evolve as a consequence their social base and recruitment channels. Who you recruit and why shapes the direction of your ideology because some people have stronger affinities to some aspects than others.

Thus STOPPING certain recruitment can be critical.
There are infinite examples but the most resonant for me was the anti-globallization movement. We recruited a wide base ("teamsters and turtles") and you could get a lot of people quickly by playing to "sovereignty" arguments. Which meant a ton of folks trended fascist.
Instead of a more complicated and less accessible (but correct) critique of neoliberal globalization in terms of power accumulation and global apartheid, the standard narrative became 'outsiders influencing local stuff is bad, nations must be independent.'
Read 12 tweets
14 Feb
I've urged people to read various Scott Siskind pieces for almost a decade. But you'd have to be a complete fool to have followed him closely and think he's not on Murray's "racial intelligence" train. His entire tribe knows damn well and is openly lying to give him cover.
There is *zero* doubt in my mind that every single person going "Scott never said he agreed with Murray on race" is fully aware he's a racist (friendly liberal technocrat version who "just wants to help the blacks"). The dishonesty is so fucking blatant and intense.
Never mind the direct fucking comments, the endless dancing around racial intelligence, the copious whining about how "I have some beliefs I just can't say openly"...

He cited having *ONLY* 17% self-reported fascists in his commenters/readership as proof he's fair and balanced.
Read 4 tweets
22 Jan
Sure he pals with paleos and cryptofash like Rockwell and the LvMI "blood and soil" shits, sure the Libertarian Institute has taken to platforming "national anarchists," sure he's taken to defaulting on far-right narratives, but Scott's a principled anti-war voice that--
If your whole shtick is that tolerating reactionaries is necessary because everything must be put to the side besides opposing war, you don't get to casually retweet a snide complaint about how Dems are softies who negotiate with the enemy rather than bombing them.
Christ, it's almost impossible to emphasize how much of the libertarian old guard who made mildly encouraging left moves in the 00s have fallen to tolerating or embracing nationalism and foxnews level dribble.
Read 5 tweets
21 Jan
At the end of 2015 I stopped in Portland to hook up with an ex before planning to head to Greece to help in a refugee camp and then swinging back for a grad school opportunity.

But there was a hole I could help fill in local organizing & an "ancap-fascist alliance" to counter...
My life plans got completely obliterated by resurgent fascist movements. I think it'll still be several years before I've recovered from the sheer fucking adrenaline and terror of 2017, as fascists proliferated like never before and the few antifascists were widely slandered.
Antifascism has always been an essential and vital part of broader work in the anarchist movement, it's not anything or everything, nor a particular personal preoccupation, and I never thought I'd spend years focusing my writing on defenses of it, but jesus these last five years.
Read 4 tweets
20 Jan
Punching Richard Spencer helped set off a phase shift in discourse and perceptions around fascism. Yes it made him look weak, but it also, for a brief moment, gave some liberals enough spine to say shit in public they'd never said before. That had huge results.
Liberals are selfish and timid, their behavior over the George Floyd uprising is a great example of why radical action with some popular pull can suddenly unleash liberal proclamations they'd *never* voice or risk thinking unless they thought they had wind at their back.
When Richard Spencer got punched it basically ended the endless fawning liberal pieces about dapper nazis that had proliferated in 2016, it changed their instinctive perceptions of the overton window. One punch shifted the entire liberal baseline.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!