I understand some people may actually choose to live in civilization after an in depth comparison of the two ways of living. After all, we wouldn't be in civilization today if there weren't many people who found living outside wilderness satisfactory, especially the elites who have always found anti-wilderness systems to their benefit. But i feel many people are not aware of/understand alternative philosophies like anarcho-primitivism and because they get no exposure to wilderness for most of or their entire lives, the issue of what many people actually want or find satisfactory is complicated. My anarchy example just pushes this point further in showing that people are heavy influenced by society and don't necessarily know what they want because their choices are based on severly limited knowledge/experience.
I too suspect the discussion is in its waning moments, so I will leave you with this. If there is only one more book you ever read in your life, check out Paul Shepard's Nature and Madness. It's less then 200 pages but is in my opinion one of the most important books ever written that most people are unaware of.
