People would feed themselves instead of expecting others to labor to feed them; an entitlement that arose with industrial civilization. People would be inclined to protect the forests instead of bulldozing them for the supposed convenience of industrial food production if they picked their food directly from those forests everyday.

They’d protect the forests with their very lives because they’d need the food that grows in the forests to survive without industrial farms, bakeries and factories outsourcing food production and then hiding the ecocide they cause just out of sight of the villages and their carefully manicured streets.

what a terrible solution. so individualist its almost darwinian. it is also ecocidal in itself, by creating a world in which humans compete with animals, humans will kill animals. without farming, you are now competing with deer and whatever schmuck or tribe moves faster than you. theres a reason humans would go out and kill various 'pest' animals and predators: their existence demanded it at the time, for better or worse. the only way to buck this trend is with proper technology and planning. lets also just forget how many plants you need to feed a family sustainably, and also lets forget how much modern agriculture (and breeding, which you are taking advantage of when you grow these supposedly 'natural' plants, which oftentimes cant grow without perfect soil conditions given how altered they are, fuck lets forget that many forests have a severe dearth of any native food edible to humans) multiplies the productivity of plants, this plan is inherently genocidal. there is also a mention from ziq that seems to imply that complex forest ecosystems of the past were naturally more productive than agriculture. but why, then, did humans begin to cultivate plants? for funsies?

also, people do get tied up with literal family trees and demand protections of forests, this is common in most societies that are not settler-colonial and heavily urbanized

mfw someone doesn't want to conquer the bread

No gods, no editors

No. In January 2020 I emailed an administrator asking if I could submit something, and they basically said something like ‘Maybe, sure.’ So I pitched my thesis on Fascism to them. They never replied after that.

It's the NYT rule, to be a guest editor you must suck a certain amount to be allowed in.

This is why tankies and ancoms need to unite against anti-leftists, especially lifestyle anarchists who do so much damage to the cause.

If any of you understood my positions, you very likely wouldn't be tankies. You have to be incredibly obtuse and prone to cult-like obedience to dear leader to be a tankie.

People who dedicate themselves to being subordinate to the party elite will never understand anarchy or wrap their heads around critiques of the fatalistic left/right paradigm.