Prince Pyotr Alexeyevich Kropotkin was born in 1842 and breathed his last in 1921. Kropotkin was a Russian noble. He was educated for army and at the age of twenty he became a military officer in Siberia.

Kropotkin’s great interest in science developed from his military training which he received to get a job. This moulded his life in future. He had a scientific mind and devoted his time and energy to the study of books on science.

As a military officer in Siberia Kropotkin got ample opportunity for geographical survey and expedition. Thus his shift from military service to geo­graphical survey and expeditions enriched the subject profoundly. He contributed many articles to different journals.

Peter Kropotkin was a man of different mentality and attitude. His stay in military service could not satisfy his academic and intellectual requirements and desires and after serving several years he relinquished the job, and entered the University of St. Petersburg in 1867. His vast knowledge in geography brought for him the post of secretary of Geographical Society.

Even this vital administrative post could not detain him for long time. He moved to radical political movements. In 1872, Peter Kropotkin joined the International Workingmen’s Association. Later on he was deeply involved in subversive and anarchical activities. This led him to imprisonment in 1874.

He escaped from prison in 1876 and went to England. The England of the second half of eighteenth century was the centre of revolutionary activities, although she never experienced any revolution.

He also travelled to Switzerland and Paris. While in Paris he was again arrested by the French government in 1883. Released from prison in 1886 he went to England and settled there. While in exile, Kropotkin gave lectures and published widely on anarchism and geography. He returned to Russia after the Russian Revolution in 1917 but was disappointed by the Bolshevik state. The rest of his life was spent without political activity.

Peter Kropotkin was an evolutionist anarchist. But his evolutionism was more scien­tific than that of his predecessors. He wrote several books on anarchism such as ‘The Place of Anarchy in Socialist Evolution (1886), The Conquest of Bread (1888), Its Philosophy and Ideal (1896)’, ‘The State – Its Part in History (1898)’ and ‘Modern Science and Anarchism (1903)’. His deep interest in science, particularly biology and anthro­pology, opened before him new and enchanting vistas of knowledge and all these inspired him to study biological science with added interest.

Megathreads and spaces to hang out:

reminders:

  • 💚 You nerds can join specific comms to see posts about all sorts of topics
  • 💙 Hexbear’s algorithm prioritizes comments over upbears
  • 💜 Sorting by new you nerd
  • 🌈 If you ever want to make your own megathread, you can reserve a spot here nerd
  • 🐶 Join the unofficial Hexbear-adjacent Mastodon instance toots.matapacos.dog

Links To Resources (Aid and Theory):

Aid:

Theory:

  • GalaxyBrain [they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 days ago

    It would be cool if we tried not to apply race science and social darwinism bullshit to animals as a default. The way most nature documentaries go you’d think the entirety of every non-human thought process I’d based solely around fucking or eating. This is of course totally untrue based on easy observations that anyone can make. Animals be doing absolutely unproductive shit ALL THE TIME. Yes, the animals that are better at eating and reproducing have an evolutionary advantage but the animals themselves don’t fucking know that and we should stop acting like everything they do boils down to.those functions. It was bad when we applied it to humans and it doesn’t work for animals either. Genetic taxonomy being THE OFFICIAL method of classifying animals and their relations to one another is also some eugenicist bs. Behavioral patterns in common between similar niches in different biomes is just as useful when doing not archeology. It’s a form of anthropomorphization in how we think of animals and it’s no good as the sole and default way of thinking of natural biology. We’re basing everything off ourselves too much still.