Anarcho-primitivism argues that civilization is at the root of societal and environmental problems.
Primitivists also consider domestication, technology and language to
cause social alienation from "authentic reality". As a result, they
propose the abolition of civilization and a return to a hunter-gatherer
lifestyle.
The modern school of anarcho-primitivism was primarily developed by John Zerzan, whose work was released at a time when green anarchist theories of social and deep ecology
were beginning to attract interest. Primitivism, as outlined in
Zerzan's work, first gained popularity as enthusiasm in deep ecology
began to wane.
Zerzan claimed that pre-civilization societies were inherently
superior to modern civilization and that the move towards agriculture
and the increasing use of technology had resulted in the alienation and
oppression of humankind. Zerzan argued that under civilization, humans and other species have undergone domestication, which stripped them of their agency and subjected them to control by capitalism. He also claimed that language, mathematics and art had caused alienation, as they replaced "authentic reality" with an abstracted representation of reality. In order to counteract such issues, Zerzan proposed that humanity return to a state of nature, which he believed would increase social equality and individual autonomy by abolishing private property, organized violence and the division of labour.
Primitivist thinker Paul Shepard
also criticized domestication, which he believed had devalued non-human
life and reduced human life to their labor and property. Other
primitivist authors have drawn different conclusions to Zerzan on the
origins of alienation, with John Fillis blaming technology and Richard Heinberg claiming it to be a result of addiction psychology.
Adoption and practice
Primitivist ideas were taken up by the eco-terroristTed Kaczynski,
although he has been repeatedly criticised for his violent means by
more pacifistic anarcho-primitivists, who instead advocate for
non-violent forms of direct action. Primitivist concepts have also taken root within the philosophy of deep ecology, inspiring the direct actions of groups such as Earth First!. Another radical environmentalist group, the Earth Liberation Front (ELF), was directly influenced by anarcho-primitivism and its calls for rewilding.
Primitivists and green anarchists have adopted the concept of ecological rewilding
as part of their practice, i.e., using reclaimed skills and methods to
work towards a sustainable future while undoing institutions of
civilization.
Anarcho-primitivist periodicals include Green Anarchy and Species Traitor. The former, self-described as an "anti-civilization journal of theory and action" and printed in Eugene, Oregon, was first published in 2000 and expanded from a 16-page newsprint tabloid to a 76-page magazine covering monkeywrenching topics such as pipeline sabotage and animal liberation. Species Traitor,
edited by Kevin Tucker, is self-described as "an insurrectionary
anarcho-primitivist journal", with essays against literacy and for
hunter gatherer societies. Adjacent periodicals include the radical
environmental journal Earth First!
Criticisms
A common criticism is of hypocrisy,
i.e. that people rejecting civilization typically maintain a civilized
lifestyle themselves, often while still using the very industrial
technology that they oppose in order to spread their message. Activist
writer Derrick Jensen counters that this criticism merely resorts to an ad hominem argument, attacking individuals but not the actual validity of their beliefs.
He further responds that working to entirely avoid such hypocrisy is
ineffective, self-serving, and a convenient misdirection of activist
energies. Primitivist John Zerzan admits that living with this hypocrisy is a necessary evil for continuing to contribute to the larger intellectual conversation.
Wolfi Landstreicher and Jason McQuinn, post-leftists, have both criticized the romanticized exaggerations of indigenous societies and the pseudoscientific (and even mystical) appeal to nature they perceive in anarcho-primitivist ideology and deep ecology.
Ted Kaczynski also argued that anarcho-primitivists have exaggerated the short working week of primitive society,
arguing that they only examine the process of food extraction and not
the processing of food, creation of fire and childcare, which adds up to
over 40 hours a week.
One of the aims of the movement is to prevent schools from using the preferred pronouns or chosen names of transgender and non-binary youth without disclosing to, or gaining permission from parents. More broadly, it aims to prevent the teaching of LGBT issues in public schools without parents' agreement.
Additionally, the parental rights movement has sought to increase
parents' control over how children are taught about sexuality and race
relations.
The parental rights movement was brought to mainstream attention with the passage of the Parental Rights in Education Act in Florida, colloquially known as the Don't Say Gay law, by Governor Ron DeSantis. Since then, the movement has expanded across the US and Canada. Proponents of the movement have claimed that they aim to prevent the indoctrination of children by LGBT activists,while opponents of the movement argue that parental rights legislation endangers children by possibly outing them to unaccepting guardians.
Definition
Jen Gilbert, a professor at the University of Toronto's Ontario Institute for Studies in Education
defined the movement as "a conservative movement to limit the influence
of government in people's lives...more generally around the schooling,
the parental rights movement has emerged as a movement to limit
discussions of sexuality and gender in schools under the auspices of
both protecting children and protecting parents' rights to raise
children as they see fit".
Media response
The parental rights movement is viewed by some commentators as a form of pushback by conservatism against widespread acceptance of LGTBQ+ individuals and issues more broadly. It has been described as a far-right movement by Dan Lett of the Winnipeg Free Press and by progressive-leaning outlets Salon.com and Michigan Advance.
The modern parental rights movement has been characterised by
journalist Catherine Caruso as a resurgence of a similar movement in the
1990s. Caruso likened the movement to the stigmatization of HIV during the AIDS epidemic. He identified similar themes with the 1994 bill Contract with America and the Contract with the American Family.
Starting in 2020, parental rights activists in the United States have
sought to regulate how race is taught in schools. Prompted by protests after the killings of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor, schools increasingly added antiracist texts to their curricula and diversity, equity, and inclusion
measures to their policies and practices. Advocacy from the parental
rights movement led to a backlash against those trends, and a wave of
laws and regulations—often codified as anti-critical race theory
rules—were passed in 2021. Legal scholar LaToya Baldwin Clark connects
the 2020s activism to historical backlash from White parents to
"contestations over race" like desegregation.
Groups have suggested that similar ideas by parental rights advocates, which have worked to restrict education on sex or sexuality, date back to the 1990s. According to research by the Public Religion Research Institute,
the movement's failure to substantially shift norms in public education
led many conservative Christian parents to withdraw their children from
public schools and move to homeschooling or private schools.
In 2022, the US state of Florida passed the Florida Parental Rights in Education Act, regulating all public schools
in the state. The law prohibits public schools from having "classroom
discussion" or giving "classroom instruction about sexual orientation or
gender identity from kindergarten through third grade
or in any manner deemed to be against state standards in all grades;
prohibits public schools from adopting procedures or student support
forms that maintain the confidentiality of a disclosure by a student,
including of the gender identity or sexual orientation of a student,
from parents; and requires public schools to bear all the costs of all
lawsuits filed by aggrieved parents."
During the nomination of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson in 2022, Senator Marsha Blackburn accused Jackson of having a "hidden agenda" to restrict parental rights and expand government reach into schools.
As of 2023, 20 states have had their legislatures introduce derivative bills of the Parental Rights in Education Act, including Arizona, Georgia, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and South Carolina. In April 2022, Alabama became the second state to pass a similar bill, with Governor Kay Ivey
signing House Bill 322, legislation which additionally requires all
students to use either male or female bathrooms in Alabama public
schools based on their biological sex. Some states have had similar
provisions to Florida's law since the 1980s, though they were never
called Don't Say Gay bills by critics until the 2020s.
Many potential candidates for the 2024 Republican Party presidential primaries
made parental rights a major theme of their platform. Focusing on
school literature with racial or sexual content, parental control over
curriculum, and LGBT education, possible candidates like Glenn Youngkin, Ron DeSantis, and Donald Trump have endorsed the goals of the parental rights movement. Coverage in CNN has described this use of "parents' rights" as "an umbrella term for a host of cultural issues".
Canada
In 2009, Alberta
passed an act that—while enshrining the rights of sexual
minorities—also included a provision that would give parents the option
of pulling their children out of lessons when topics related to sex,
religion, or sexual orientation were taught. It was referred to as a "parental rights clause" in the media.
Prior to the start of the 2023 school year, the province of New Brunswickaltered a policy
affecting both formal and informal name changes at school, and the
ability of students to choose their preferred pronouns. The revised Policy 713
(Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Policy) denied students under
the age of sixteen the right to make changes to their personal
preferences without first receiving parental consent. The province's Minister of Education, Bill Hogan, stated that the policy review which led to the changes had been prompted by complaints from parents. The policy review was controversial, and along with concerns about Premier Blaine Higgs's leadership style, led to calls during the summer for a review of his leadership of the Progressive Conservative Party of New Brunswick. In response, the Christian conservativeactivistFaytene Grasseschi
started a campaign called "Don't Delete Parents", encouraging people to
sign a petition in support of Higgs, to pledge support for "pro-parent"
political candidates, and to promote the idea that tax dollars should
"follow the family" if parents chose to withdraw their children from the
public school system in favour of homeschooling or private schools.
In the same year, Saskatchewan
also introduced a policy requiring parental consent for children who
wished to change their names or pronouns in school and placing
restrictions on sexual health education. Following a judicial injunction against the policy, Premier Scott Moe announced that he would invoke the Constitution's Notwithstanding clause to override the decision and bring the policy into law. On October 20, 2023, the government invoked the notwithstanding clause and passed the Parents' Bill of Rights. A national Christian lobbying group called "Action4Canada" has taken credit for influencing the Saskatchewan Party government towards the policy.
In September 2023, Ontario Premier Doug Ford accused school boards in the province of "indoctrinating" students on gender identity, and stated that parents should be involved with decisions around pronoun use at schools.
Federally, Conservative Party of Canada
members adopted a resolution to prohibit "medicinal or surgical
interventions" for gender-diverse and transgender kids at the party's
2023 policy convention. Party leader—and leader of the Opposition—Pierre Poilievre has said that schools should leave LGBT issues to parents.
In 2023, the "1 Million March 4 Children" was a series of
parental rights protests carried out in various cities throughout
Canada.
The protesters included adults and students, who claimed that children
were being exposed to inappropriate topics regarding sexuality and
gender identity and that students in some Canadian schools were being
encouraged by teachers to change their pronouns and get "body-altering surgery" without parental knowledge. The protests drew significant counter-protests.
Europe
France
In 2022, following the addition of a gender-neutral pronoun to French dictionaries, French Minister of Education Jean-Michel Blanquer insisted that it was "not the future of the French language" and banned its use in schools.
Ireland
In
Ireland, groups such as the Irish Education Alliance and religious
bodies such as the Catholic Secondary School Parents Association have
opposed the government's introduction of mandatory education about
gender identity, pornography, and sexuality, which they perceive as
overriding the ethos and rights of parents and schools.
Impact on LGBT youth
Opponents of the parental rights movement argue that the policy would result in forcibly out children to parents or guardians who may not be accepting of their gender or sexual identities. In Canada, opponents such as Marci Ien, the Minister for Women and Gender Equality and Youth,
has said that requiring parental consent to use different names or
preferred pronouns places trans children in a "life or death situation." In the United States, organised opposition like the Human Rights Campaign
oppose the expansion of bills that limit LGBT freedom and expression in
schools, suggesting they "stigmatize and marginalize" the LGBT
community.
Critics of the parental rights movement include parents, teachers, students, human rights groups, and corporations.
They argue that policies which forcibly out LGBT children can be
damaging or life-threatening to those with unsupportive families.
Such policies have garnered significant concern due to the claimed
potential for adverse consequences, including emotional distress, harm
to mental well-being, and life-threatening situations for those
affected, and can exacerbate issues such as depression, anxiety, and self-esteem problems.
It has been suggested that these issues may lead to long-term emotional
scars and negatively impacting their overall quality of life.
Additionally, critics highlight that the parental rights
movement's insistence on parental control over a child's disclosure of
their LGBT identity can perpetuate discrimination and prejudice.
By prioritizing parental rights over a child's autonomy, these policies
may inadvertently discourage open and honest communication within
families, hindering the ability of LGBT youth to seek support or
understanding from their loved ones.