tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2476448220554805209.post5103380768099525302..comments2023-09-29T05:29:17.627-05:00Comments on HumAnarchist: Why I hate progressives (part 1)Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2476448220554805209.post-25573222409954985942014-04-08T09:41:45.625-05:002014-04-08T09:41:45.625-05:00Definitely a valid question.
I can’t see how it ...Definitely a valid question.<br /> <br />I can’t see how it would be possible to have a technological commons in the way that that term is normally used without massive coercion and exploitation.<br /> <br />I guess I was probably hedging a bit when I wrote that. Ruling out industrial technology still leaves simple tools and crafts such as pottery, weaving, glass making, and basic metallurgy, where the raw materials and techniques could theoretically be available and open to anyone.<br /><br />50,000 years ago, an obsidian outcropping was part of a technological commons in this respect.<br />OldDoghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07506661121480882266noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2476448220554805209.post-42576468849887381482014-04-08T09:15:37.760-05:002014-04-08T09:15:37.760-05:00>We can have a technological commons, perhaps, ...>We can have a technological commons, perhaps, but not while the leviathan still breathes. <br /><br />So how would you have this without the (forced) labor needed to support such an infrastructure, assuming the premises presented by anarcho-primitivists are correct?<br /><br />(This is not a hostile question, I'm literally curious.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com