|
Nihilism
Defined
A
common, but misleading, description of nihilism is the 'belief
in nothing'. Instead, a far more useful one would substitute
'faith' for 'belief' where faith is defined as the "firm belief
in something for which there is no proof." A universal
definition of nihilism could then well be the rejection of that
which requires faith for salvation or actualization and would
span to include anything from theology to secular ideology.
Within nihilism faith and similar values are discarded because
they've no verifiable objective substance, they are invalid
serving only as yet another exploitable lie never producing any
strategically beneficial outcome. Faith is an imperative hazard
to group and individual because it compels suspension of reason,
critical analysis and common sense. Nietzsche once said that
faith means not wanting to know. Faith
is 'don't let those pesky facts get in the way of our political
plan or our mystically ordained path to heaven'; faith is 'do
what I tell you because I said so'. All things that can't be
disproved need faith, utopia needs faith, idealism needs faith,
and spiritual salvation needs faith. Abolish faith!
|
NIHILISM IS
SANITY IN AN INSANE SOCIETY |
The second element
nihilism rejects is the belief in final purpose,
that the universe is built upon non-random events
and that everything is structured towards an
eventual conclusive revelation. This is called
teleology and it's the fatal flaw plaguing the
whole rainbow of false solutions from Marxism to
Buddhism and everything in between. Teleology
compels obedience towards the fulfillment of
"destiny" or "progress" or
similar such grandiose goals. Teleology is used
by despots and utopian dreamers alike as a
coercive motivation leading only to yet another
apocryphal apocalypse; the real way to lead
humanity by the nose
– tell them it's all part of
the big plan so play along, or else! It may even
seem reasonable but there is not now and never
has been any evidence the universe operates teleologically
– there is no final purpose.
This is the simple beauty nihilism has that no
other idea-set does. By breaking free from the
tethers of teleology one is empowered in outlook
and outcome because for the first time it's
possible to find answers without proceeding from
pre-existing perceptions. We're finally free to
find out what's really out there and not just the
partial evidence to support original pretext and
faulty notions only making a hell on earth in the
process. So abolish teleology too!
Nihilism is
primarily skepticism coupled with reduction, but
in practical reality it takes on more than one
facet which often leads to a confusion of
definitions. In the most general sense nihilism
has two major classifications, the first is
passive and usually goes by the term existential
or 'social' nihilism and the second is active and
is termed 'political' nihilism.
Existential nihilism is a
passive world view which revolves around such topics as
suffering and futility, and even has connections to Eastern
mysticism like Buddhism. In a more direct sense existential
'social' nihilism is manifest within the sense of isolation,
futility, angst, and the hopelessness of existence increasingly
prevalent within the modern digital world, an effect referred to
as the 'downward spiral'. A direct way to describe it might be
'detachment from everything'.
Words used to describe
political nihilism include active, revolutionary, destructive,
and even creative. Political nihilism is dictionary defined as
the realization "that conditions in the social organization are
so bad as to make destruction desirable for its own sake
independent of any constructive program or possibility." It
deals with authority and social structures rather than simply
the introspective, personal emotions of existential nihilism.
Political nihilism is
especially a world-view that's rational, logical, empirical,
scientific and devoid of pointless, extraneous emotion. It's the
logical psyche that distills everything down into what is known,
what can be known and what can't be known. It's the realization
that all values are ultimately relativistic and in some ways the
simplicity of nihilism is its own complexity.
|
Nihilism |
When
conditions in the social organization are
so unhealthy as to make destruction desirable
for its own sake independent of any
constructive program or possibility. |
An estimable and
succinct definition of a (political) nihilist
comes from Ivan Turgenev's 1861 novel Fathers
And Sons, "A nihilist is a person who
does not bow down to any authority, who does not accept any
principle on faith, however much that principle may be revered."
So the two classes
of nihilism overlap but the CounterOrder is
mostly about this second stage of 'political'
nihilism for reasons of brevity, because the
existential angle when not stillborn generally
leads to political nihilism anyway, because
nihilism isn't something to just talk
about it's something you live, and finally because
political nihilism has real world history and experience as you will read
in a moment concerning
the Russian revolutionaries in Historical
Nihilism below. Ultimately however, the
nihilistic direction one travels depends on what
the individual wishes to make out of life.
To negate and circumvent the
paradoxes and internal contradictions inherent within
existential nihilism is the course of the 'political' nihilism
you're reading.
Nihilism is
the destruction of idle philosophy, the negation of idealism,
the negation of mythology, and the destruction of perplexity
along with the disingenuous despots that profit from it as the
monopolist interpreters of artificial confusion. Therefore, Nihilism's definitions are:
1) When conditions in the
social organization are so unhealthy as to make destruction
desirable for its own sake independent of any constructive
program or possibility.
2) A doctrine of skepticism
coupled with reduction that refutes faith, teleology, arbitrary
morality, sacred values and principles, heresy, blasphemy, and
similar beliefs while maintaining that existing political,
social, and economic institutions based on these beliefs must be
destroyed.
3) A methodology for a
biologically-based existence that rejects arbitrary morality in
favor of cause and effect and inviolate forces, predicated upon
that which is objectively self-evident and without need of
belief, within a sustainable mental and physical environment
that promotes independent thinking and critical expression.
Historical
Nihilism
The first
nihilists were likely the Greek Sophists who lived about 2,500
years ago. They used oratorical skills and argumentative
discourse to challenge the values upon which everyday beliefs
rested. The Greek sophists, such as
Gorgias,
represented the beginning of philosophy and the first conflict
between the traditional mystical belief system and a rational,
skeptical view of the natural world. It was as basic as the
difference between a worldview based on emotion and one on
thought. Because the sophists challenged established beliefs
they were often condemned by public authorities and critics as
moral corrupters or worse.
One of the earliest
nihilistic writers of the modern era was the Dane
Soren Aabye Kierkegaard who lived from 1813 to
1855. Kierkegaard was a truly unique but also
enigmatic philosopher who established the foundation of the
philosophy later termed existentialism. Kierkegaard's
existentialism was in many ways a negation
of the ruling Hegelian philosophy, views deeply rooted in Kierkegaard's Lutheran
Protestantism that reflected the ideals of the subjectivity of
truth and the nature of life as a uniquely individual pursuit.
To be brutally succinct existentialism posits that existence is
based on experience and this experience is a uniquely
individualized sensation, in other words ‘my reality is not your
reality’. Modern quantum physical 'philosophy' returned to this
theme of solipsism during the late 20th century using
empirical mathematics.
The Russian
Nihilists
Political nihilism goes back at least to Russia
during the last half of the 1800s as a
revolutionary movement with the stated goal of
overthrowing the despotic authority of the Czar.
In Russia, nihilism
became identified with a loosely organized
revolutionary movement (C.1860-1917) that
rejected the authority of the state, church, and
family. ... The movement advocated a social
arrangement based on rationalism and materialism
as the sole source of knowledge and individual
freedom as the highest goal. By rejecting man's
spiritual essence in favor of a solely
materialistic one, nihilists denounced God and
religious authority as antithetical to freedom.
From: The Internet
Encyclopedia of Philosophy
By modern standards the
Nihilists attempts at revolution were inconsistent and mostly
ineffective
– lobbing low quality munitions at the Czar and his
family and even getting themselves blown up in the process. But
what they lacked in equipment and tactics they made up for with
vision, ideas, and an unparalleled intensity.
The nihilists
enjoyed shocking their parents by calling for an
end to the old moral system, advocating, for
instance, the extermination of everybody in
Russia over the age of 25. In the 1860's many of
these young intellectuals went to Switzerland,
where the proper Swiss bourgeoisie were
scandalized at the men with their hair cut long
and the girls with their hair cut short, at their
loud voices and insolent behaviour.
[1]
The mark left by the Russian
Nihilists was not in ephemeral political change but rather a
revolution of ideas and attitudes, one that still resonates
today. "The earnest
young men and women [Nihilists] of the 1860's wanted to cut
through every polite veneer, to get rid of all conventional
sham, to get to the bottom of things."
[4]
Anarchism
Both modern Nihilists and anarchists can trace
roots to the intense personality of Mikhael Bakunin in the
19th century who succinctly reflected the nihilist sentiment
with his famous statement: "Let
us put our trust in the eternal spirit which
destroys and annihilates only because it is the
unsearchable and eternally creative source of all."
Anarchism and nihilism are often confused, but looking deeper we
can see that they view events from a different perspective. For example the anarchist says
that 'no one
has the authority to tell another what to do'. But the nihilist
replies that if the one giving orders has a gun and the other
not, then what do rights or authority matter? Indeed, what
benefit
is constitution at the moment of any criminal event?
The abuse and exploitation of power
by illegitimate authority is as old as history because human
behavior is primarily selfish and will usually take advantage of
the situation as much as allowed. Right or wrong, authority and
power remain. Nevertheless it's also true that the demand for
fair treatment and equal opportunity are just as timeless. Human
social development is a story of the constant struggle between
the two forces. In this struggle the only healthy and functional
structure remains one of robust checks and balances.
Anarchists are
idealists that believe in subjective concepts such as
peace, legal justice, and especially the universal noble nature
of all individuals (at least under the proper social conditions).
These myths can serve a constructive function, but all too often
dogmatic attachment only serves to lead us astray. It's critical
that we criticize and reconsider even what we value most.
The Nihilist realizes that history is abused and misconstrued through the formation of
artificial lines and erroneous connections
between disparate events, only to substantiate
preconceived interpretations of reality, the
classic teleological myth.
We draw an
imaginary thread through the ages to chart the course we judge
to be the 'correct' one. All wrong views are ignored. This
approach was dubbed the 'Whig' theory of history by Herbert
Butterfield. The name derived from those past historians who
treated history as a record of events that culminated in the
political system dear to their own hearts: the liberal
democracy.
[2]
It's an understandable product of human
evolution to not only detect patterns but also get
carried away and concoct them as well.
Human nature sees
things that aren't really there, just think of
optical illusions or Rorschach ink-blot tests.
Much of life is nothing interpreted as something.
This is because dealing with the yawning absence
necessitates the concoction of a something to
grasp the nothing, thereby ignoring the perilous
obvious by manufacturing a more malleable
artificial myth. Yet the attitude of a Nihilist
is contradictory to this because they aim to view human
character as it actually is and understand purpose within
context.
Objective
Reality & Freewill
It's remarkable how
even a modicum of logic and scientific philosophy
demonstrates the difficulty of defining what is
real and the rules to describe it. Like a sandpit
the more one struggles the tougher it gets. So an
important value to question is objective
reality. The closest match might be scientific laws which
are merely consistent principles and the most powerful ones are
just statistical constructs.
This struggle to define objective reality
implies a lack of objective truth, but really this philosophical
assumption leads to neither clarity nor accurate
interpretations. Even a state of total
chaos has statistical uniformities. Consensus can
be found and in fact it's remarkably prevalent.
Commonality can be found and built upon at many
levels but absolutes are less meaningful here
than consistency; ultimate reality is fuzzy
because it's a product of probabilities. The key
is to utilize the solid and avoid the ambiguous,
bet on the likely and not the unlikely.
Existence
is largely defined by perception because reality is contextual. If you perceive yourself to be weak
and without willpower then you will find life is such.
Conversely, if you perceive that you have the power to change
things in your life, so it will be. In the same way we tend to
find what we expect just as physicists contemplate how a photon
can be both a wave and a particle. This essence doesn’t mean
that practical reality is an illusion, rather it is
multi-dimensional.
The random and statistical
qualities of nature are critical forces because they negate the
credibility of teleology, that purposeful
predestination that undermines freewill. So one
actually has the option to passively accept the
socio-historically established concoction of
absolutes, truth and moral laws, the objective
reality which can be nothing but myth. Or you
can accept real for what it is and assume the
healthier role of active participant
constantly defining existence through perception
and intelligence. In this way defining existence
is predicated upon life, conscious awareness of
sensory input combined with critical
interpretation of what that input means. And the
more highly developed the consciousness or the
greater the intelligence the more effective and
meaningful is existence.
Passivity
is a myth. We are all intricately
enmeshed within a dynamic system that
doesn't just demand but compels active
decision-making.
|
Hence the difference
between passive 'social' and active 'political'
nihilism is that one accepts whatever happens
within futility and pointlessness while the other
destroys/creates meaning and value. Which path a
person takes is a personal decision within the
limits of ability, and that means one does have
choice; existence is not predetermined or fatally
ordained. However, default answers and the
compulsion of conformity shouldn't be overlooked.
Reality is contextual.
Beyond
Good and Evil
Religious believers and philosophers alike frequently ask the question,
‘does evil exist?’, as if they need to be continually reassured
that it does and we agree with them. Many are completely
convinced that evil is everywhere, yet the same people are
equally sure of luck, fate, and mysterious malevolent powers
out to defeat all their noble efforts. But all these
imaginary influences are simply projections of a selfish ego. In
fact, there is no natural evil, and no malicious intent
exists within any forces of the universe.
An old Russian proverb states,
"There is no
evil, but that it brings some good,”
revealing that even in standard Manichean theology every god has
a devil and every good requires an evil to shadow it.
Even to define evil as wholly immoral acts we still have to
specify which set of moral of standards we’re using as rule book.
Is it the Bible? The
Talmud? The I Ching?! Obviously,
evil is a variable, yet
nonetheless consistent elements of healthy and
unhealthy can still be discerned within the boundaries of a
species due to the
shared genetic material. Actions and
events that benefit the growth and well-being of the species,
and the individuals within it, are colloquially, but
consistently, termed good and the opposite as evil. For instance
the chicken, as well as the human owner, considers the fox evil
because he sneaks in to commit murder, yet the fox doesn’t
consider his species' carnivorous actions to be evil but rather
entirely good because they mean food and survival. This analogy
also reminds us that we can go much farther with symbiosis and
cooperation than with warfare.
For intelligent creatures good and evil are unnecessary
categories, they’re loaded terms that intentionally obscure
actual forces and events while impeding our ability to
accurately comprehend both. We shouldn’t view life and existence
as a conflict between good and evil; to
do so is both foolish and self-defeating because it requires us
to declare war on ourselves, our instincts, and even unavoidable
natural laws!
Nihilism is a
consequence of the personal realization that values previously
assumed inviolate are wholly false and
unworkable, and the ultimate esteem with which these
morals have been uplifted leads to a catastrophic
withdrawal to the opposite extreme when the deception is
recognized. And while an acceptance of nihilism
immediately returns a perspective of utter futility for life and
universal existence, this perspective is not the final
resolution. As Nietzsche once wrote in
The Will to Power, "Nihilism represents
a pathological transition phase..." Existence is not futile simply
because the edifice of modern morality is
inherently dysfunctional. Actually existence has
even more purpose now because a proper
perspective has been attained and a reason is finally
clear – the complete destruction of the debasing,
theologically derived moral order. Thus the
nihilist is at base a creator of the highest
magnitude and a survivor of the most intense
metaphysical struggle of all time. The nihilist
undergoes a personal evolution and has proven
themselves the mental superiors to the herd and
mob, they have proven their will and 'license'
for continued existence and have successfully
escaped from the circus of values. Once the transvaluation of values is complete an entirely
new and sane perspective can be achieved.
A
Little Perspective
Everybody has an
answer, but not just any answer, the
answer. If you think about it it's truly amazing
the sheer number of people that have the
officially authorized monopoly on truth. This
fact alone highlights the dissonance of absolute
values and the misguided nature of idealism. What
quantitative value would you place on your life?
A life insurance corporation could concoct an
exact dollar amount. But even that figure may be
inflated, the chemical compounds that make up
your body are only worth a few cents. But isn't
life more valuable than gold, oil or other
commodities? Think again.
Human arrogance
conveniently assumes itself the apex of evolution
yet in reality the corporeal being is merely a
disposable vehicle for the reproduction of
genetic material, not the other way around!
Perhaps the most profound realization of the 20th century
remains mostly unknown for it is the genes that are the master
and not the individual human created by them. This helps explain
why many human cravings are harmful to the self
but profitable to the genes, and the prevalence of certain
self-destructive behaviors. And
remarkably this is the true solution to the
classic existential dilemma, why life is
just death or as John Lennon once put
it, "Why in the world are
we here? Surely not to live in pain and fear," yet
apparently we are! The human body isn't
programmed for pain-free longevity, just long
enough to reproduce physically and to perpetuate learned skills, which is why doctors will
never run out of business. The biological boss
may be too small to see but it's far too powerful
to ignore.
If human value could
be measured outside the skewed perspective of the
collective ego it might look something like this;
if only one individual existed on planet Earth
they would be the most important human. If two
people existed their individual significance
would be divided in half (1/2). If six thousand
million people existed on Earth what would the
individual significance of each one be? A simple
equation shows the value as the fractional
percentage of the whole population plus any
incidental, conjectural additives from education,
training, intelligence etc. Presupposing this
Marxian values system of universal equality the
formula for individual human value is:
|
1/p
+ (E/p) = individual human value |
p =
current world population
E = years of education, training,
work experience. |
|
|
So
in a world of six billion people your
uneducated mass is 1/6000000000 or 1.67 x
10^-10 of that whole. Your significance
is 0.0000000167%. With a 12 year
education your significance rockets
upward to a factor of 2.167 x 10^-9 or 0.0000002167%. |
It's clear that overpopulation
dramatically diminishes the value of human life. So, is it any wonder
religion is so popular and why human nature so
desperately seeks meaning and purpose even in the
most ridiculous places? Why do so many people
hide behind money fooling only themselves into
thinking that wealth gives them significance?
Isn't it painfully obvious why society invents
artificial concepts of justice, morality,
and ethics? The brutality and utter irrationality
of the animal world is just outside the rusty
gates of our crumbling civilization. But isn't it
comforting to know that as long as we're inside
we have the warming sensation of fairness,
equality and justice for all (that can afford it
anyway)?
Self-delusion seems to be a
defining quality of human behavior. Lies maintain our flimsy
order, we find consolation in myths like 'what we do has
significance' and 'God punishes the wicked'. The constant
avalanche of empirical evidence to the contrary simply gets
relegated to the third class bureau of irrational philosophers.
Hypocrisy can flourish when
goodness is defined not only as kind and altruistic behavior,
but as sticking to the rules and obligations of the faith. [3]
Our 'leaders' wage war in the name
of peace and establish democracy with an iron fist. Our
traditional values are warped; they reflect fantasy not reality.
Our values are so removed from actual substance that fantasy
becomes reality and truth becomes error. This is the primary
difficulty in conveying the meaning of nihilism because all
morally loaded concepts are biased against a lucid description
of the nihilistic viewpoint. Nietzsche was addressing this issue
when he wrote the title and the book Beyond Good and Evil.
But it's not just a series of lies it's a debasing and wholly
aberrant structure. The problem is so deep that even the words
to define it must be replaced with a new lexicon.
|
Nuclear power remains a beautiful analogy for the era we
live in, a struggling existence bounded between torment
and ecstasy, every day living all shades in between. We
can ultimately accomplish whatever we can imagine while
moving forward with curiosity and courage, yet we still
battle the drag of fear and cowardice.
We walk the edge of a sword in this process of human
development, aware that we can cure the illnesses of
millions, or vaporize them with a bomb, and nothing
outside of our planet (until we leave it) is going to care
whether we do one or the other. |
 |
Nihilism challenges the assumptions
supporting common values such as 'equality'; 'pity', 'justice',
but also terms of conclusion about human existence. Existential
values, terms such as 'meaningless', 'pointless' and 'futile',
are flawed because their definitions stem from the moral values
that have hitherto been rejected. We have to criticize justice
when events demonstrate that in court it's not whether one is
guilty or not, but how persuasive their lawyer is, or how
thoroughly the judge and jury have been rhetorically
manipulated! 'Justice' is the confusing legalese that your
high-priced barrister can spew in the courtroom like an oil
slick in front of a pursuing vehicle. The rich go free while the
poor go to prison.
Justice has been perverted beyond recognition, ironically
through a dogmatic belief in its sanctity and immutability. It's
clearly time to question the root assumptions.
The Pitfalls of
Artificial Law
It may seem peculiar
how terms like 'moral', 'liberal' and
'conservative' are used in conversation. People
will tell you they're moral individuals but they
don't say moral according to who or what even
though every culture and religious order has
different standards. They'll tell you they're
liberal and one is supposed to assume they mean
it politically instead of liberal users of peyote
or stamps on heavy envelopes. 'Progress' is
another favorite; progress is good but as in the
spread of cancer? Or maybe they mean the spread
of Wal-Mart's to every town in the world with at
least 5,000 people?
But the consistent
message people are trying to convey in
conversation is their own subtle deviation from
the political and social norm and from the
ambient morality which is to say from the
definitions and standards processed, packaged and
pumped into them by media, government and church
authorities. Since all these concepts are unable to
be empirically codified they assume elastic
values that are easily warped to serve despots
and unhealthy outcome, which is why Nietzsche
wisely stated:
"Morality is
the best of all devices for leading mankind by
the nose."
But moral laws
aren't the only kind that can be warped to serve
disingenuous ends. The greater the personal
wealth and property one controls or possesses the
more laws are needed to protect that wealth.
Conversely, the less one owns the fewer laws are
needed for protecting it. At a point of total
poverty, where one has nothing but the self, they
would only feel the need for laws against killing
i.e. 'thou shalt not murder'. In other words the
degree of law desired is directly proportional to
the wealth in possession. Laws protect that
vested power and the people owning it by
providing consistent codified support for the
control and distribution of that wealth. But even
though the stated desire for legality is
universal the interpretation of that legality is
not, clearly varying between haves and have-nots,
a schism fervently exploited by Marxists. Enter
the lawyers who are mercenaries paid to
reinterpret the law to favor the client. Since
the rich have the money to buy the most powerful
lawyers and since the establishment of precedent
is defined through epic court battles, common law
is gradually skewed in favor of those rich
patrons. Hence the emergence of a class-bifurcated,
sanctimonious justice system and the erosion of
legal fairness. Scientific research shows that in a
police lineup witnesses' who choose an incorrect
person are just as confident as ones that choose
the correct one because human memory fills in the
blanks with assumptions. Furthermore juries are
just as credulous of false or inaccurate
testimony as legitimate because all that
really matters is strength of conviction.
The criminal justice system warps science and the
witness to its own ends because the only thing
that matters in this setting is which side you are on
– prosecution
or defense.
Laws
are employed to shield the incompetent and mitigate the
influence of the capable. For example, a cop with a gun can be a
greater danger than a 'criminal' because they have an official
sanction to kill; their murder is backed by the concept of law.
The government and legal institutions have no higher morality
than the 'criminal' does; they are prone to heinous conduct just
as, if not worse than the criminal is, without impartial
oversight. One party can act with impunity; the other will be
executed. So what of "rights"?
Nihilism views rights as irrelevant because it's
the underlying structures of morality and the
roots of truth, myth and collective delusions
that dictate significance. Morality and ethics
are artificial byproducts of culture and through
hypocrisy and abuse are warped into becoming
illusory forces.
Some argue that
money is a proxy for achievement,
but
this is false. Money is aggregated amongst the already wealthy.
Nor does our capitalist society promote achievement through the
educational establishment, the mythical system of western mandarinism
perpetuated by certain members of the intelligentsia . The true nature
of the system is based more on connections and wealth than
merit. The true nature of the system is based more on
connections and wealth than merit. The number of slots to get on
this escalator to social achievement is limited, and those
already powerful get to choose who gets those slots. It has
never been truer than today, the rich get richer while the poor
get poorer.
Systemic Self-Destruction
Nihilism is an
awareness that destruction is at least as
important as construction, even more so
when institutions have outlived their usefulness
to become corrupt and unhealthy. Idealist
crusades fail because they never remove the
vestiges of the past order. Think of it
biologically, would Homo sapiens have evolved out
of the Mesozoic era, or would they have just been
dino-snacks? We're here because of a previous mass
extinction! The old order didn't mutate, it
was catastrophically destroyed because that's the
only way radical, meaningful change can occur.
Revolutions fail because the willpower to enact
the necessary severity of change is lacking.
Actually it's not just willpower it's the total
vision that's usually lacking. Some call Karl
Marx a revolutionary but Marxism isn't genuine
revolution it's just rearranging the artificial
order. Every ideology on the books is merely a
convenient way to re-order the present situation;
they just shuffle the same old cards and the
people end up worse off than before! Nihilism
plays a completely new game, but the old game of
lies and myths always self-destructs eventually.
These are the cycles of history, the recycling of
flawed ideologies and our era is a prime example.
Nihilism is the
organic logical response to artificial chaos, the
intentional chaos manufactured by government,
religion, and mass-media.
Every
political ideology has been discredited as an affront to freedom
and well-being. From capitalism to communism the blindly
faithful never test and verify theory before implementation, so
the fatal flaw is always the same – actualization; it’s the
predictable literalization of faith and myth.
Besides producing voluminous hypocrisy and tyranny the byproduct
of sham ideologies and fractional logic includes extensive
pollution of both the human mind and the Earth's ecosystem. Think of the billions of
dollars spent to produce nuclear, biological and
chemical weapons all to have them rust and leak
in storage bunkers from Tooele to Tomsk-7.
Millions toiling to produce ultra-deadly nerve
gas and radioactive waste with a four and a half
billion year half-life. Nihilists know who to
'thank'- and who to stop from doing it again.
Religion
Independent theologies and
decentralized organizations have replaced the Church/State
monopoly. With the loss of government support (money) the Church
has revealed its true nature as the giant predatory profit-motivated scam
that it is. The theological monopoly has been broken and now any
faith is just as valid as any other is. History will rate the
separation of Church and State as one of the most critical
pivots of the modern era. The secondary effect of this is that
the national population doesn't know which faith to choose, and
although religion can't be eliminated it can be easily replaced.
Now all the addicts to God will have to make do with a
pluralistic methadone.
Education
Every election season has its
battle over education in some form or another. These conflicts
only become more heated as relative values polarize amidst
social disintegration and the concomitant increase of media
attention on school violence. But this incessant emphasis on
'education' has little to do with training skills in
socialization or adaptability and everything to do with myth
indoctrination! This is why religious groups fight like hell for
separate private or home schooling. Instead of learning critical
reasoning skills useful for all applications education has been
turned into a process for molding and warping young when they're
most impressionable in order to serve corporate demands, and not
the needs of society and the intellectual development of the
individual. Given the stunning
uselessness of most school material within practical life, it seems difficult to explain the education
scam otherwise, except perhaps as hollow tradition or keeping the
kids off the streets for a few hours each day. Employers and
authority powers all look for those stamped and notarized pieces
of paper to effortlessly determine the gullibility and
exploitability of a person, how quickly they'll latch on to
authorized opinions and follow orders without questions, or at
least that's how a cynic would posit degrees and diplomas are
really being used.
Monarchy
Those inveterate despots and
prostitutes for the Church, one of mankind's long lasting
afflictions, the monarchy has finally been eliminated and
relegated to a proper place in the dusty archives of history.
Unfortunately the new master, the mass media, has simply
replaced much of monarchic authority.
Nationalism
The nation no longer has any
real
meaning except as a vestigial tool to
drag the public into fratricidal
conflicts or generate enthusiastic
rivalry for sporting events. The
citizenry get the pain without the
benefits of nationalism anymore because
leaders fail to protect their citizens
from external threats. Money, immigrants,
religion, drugs and disease all cross
political boundaries with impunity,
ironically usually unmolested by
nationalist politicians. The facile irony
only masks the hypocrisy of the domestic
leadership that parrots nationalist
rhetoric yet acts in favor of
international moneyed interests; they
talk local but act global.
The super-rich aren’t restricted by nationalism, they
and their money can move anywhere they want – and play
one country against another for greater profits.
Nationalism is just like religion, it's a means of
exploiting the poor and ignorant with faith and blind
obedience.
|
 |
Never
let government shrink-wrap your
mind with their flag. |
Patriotism follows
the same pattern of obsolescence because anymore
it has been hijacked to mean obedience to the
suicidal dictates of corrupt authority. As long
as the domestic death-toll can be kept to a
minimum war is good and noble because it
generates employment and corporate profits.
Traditional
faith in the military establishment has become equally foolish.
The creation of the professional military composed of volunteers
drastically alters the equation, elevating imperialism and
executive authority over the needs of the greater public. The
worlds of the military and the civilian used to
be intricately related. Now the two are rapidly
spinning in opposite directions. Mistrust,
ignorance, and incompetence have created a re-evaluation
of the mission of the military and even its very
necessity.
Mass Media
The character of the mass media is
finally being viewed as the imperative threat to collective
health that it really is. Democracy is a sham when the primary
media filters and manipulates the vast majority of information
voters need to accurately judge candidates and issues, while
making a fortune broadcasting specious and vitriolic campaign
advertisements. Not only do the same companies own the networks,
but they're owned by the same people, and the trend towards
consolidation and mergers continues unabated.
This highlights a
few elements of the decaying superstructure but
to stop at that would be a fatal flaw – Marx's
mistake. It's an unfortunate fault of simplistic human nature to
first target the visible elements. But to merely attack the
visible superstructure of capitalism, church and politicians is
doomed without reaching the "demons" in the public
consciousness. Don't make the mistake of anarchism, reach and
dissolve the myths and the lies, the foolish ideas and the
self-destructive notions, as well as the people that preach it.
The relativistic moral codes of "good" is this and "bad" is
that, they're cynically reinvented by self-righteous leaderships
to achieve misguided, mystical goals. And the intangible,
non-verifiable goals make the sweetest bait because no one can
claim otherwise! If you want to change a belief you must first
change an environment because what the masses believe is formed
by what they hear and see around them.
"The great
revolutions are those of manners and thought. Changing the name
of a government does not transform the mentality of a people."
– Gustave Le Bon
The strategic success of revolution
is predicated upon reaching these roots. How? Use the acidic
dissolution of delusion. Ridicule the ridiculous; highlight
absurdity, contradiction and irony. Make fun of the foolish and
faithful alike but more importantly the notions they use and
discredit delusion by every means available. Propagate the
replacement and fill the vacuum left by the discredited myths.
Fill it with facts built from the boundaries of the known and
the unknown in order to deal with the present and not some
fictional afterlife. Counteract religious modes
– convince the public that natural
behavior and instinct are normal again. Work to build havens
from mass-media and pop-cultural influences allowing anyone the
freedom of independent thought and introspection unfettered by
the corporate sponsored, brand positioned homogenized opinions
doled out like drug-laced candy.
|
We tend to think
of revolution to mean violent armed conflict such as in a
civil war but a revolution can be entirely peaceful and
non-violent, for a revolution is really just a radical,
fundamental shift in individual and collective viewpoint. |
So when does the revolution start?
It already has! Act accordingly in what you do and what you say.
There's no half measure and
no fence to sit on, everyone is a participant in this
omnipresent psychological war because it has no front-line or
boundaries. Every mind is a battlefield and every person with
above room temperature body warmth and IQ is a combatant. Now's
the time to decide which side to be on.
A Brief History of Power
Within crude authority structures power is transmitted via
violence, or at least the threat of violence. In less primitive
authority systems power is primarily transmitted through
mechanisms of money: bribes, kickbacks, and the various forms of
financial corruption. Within more advanced authority structures
power is mostly wielded through mechanisms of belief: faith,
popular assumptions, and myths. This is why within the modern
system of coercion through belief media control is so critical
to authority because that's the means of manipulating the range
of acceptable thoughts within the public mind.
So, just as power through violence and fear has become obsolete
and strategically ineffective, coercion through belief is now
becoming an obsolescent method of control. This development is
largely due to advanced communications technology spreading
practical ideas and information, along with the universal
application of standardized and scientifically-based education. Eventually, with struggle, we will supplant the use of force and
coercion with structures of social organization that are not
based on whim or belief but built from impartial testing and
verification, in other words, methods and ideas that actually
function as intended in practice. When statement, intent and
effect are matched then political and social hypocrisy are
eliminated.
Despite the remarkable progression of human development we can
still find examples of the various structures of power in
different locations throughout our contemporary world. And when
establishment authority loses legitimacy, through ineptitude and
corruption or other reasons, they frequently resort to more
crude forms of coercion in order to cement their hold on power.
In this regard it's wise to remember that even
within a political system based purely on power and force, the
subjugated have every natural and inalienable right to resist
and overthrow those in power over them. Of course whether
they’re able to or not is another matter, but the point is that
an authority system based on power, whether stated as such or
covered behind layers of hypocrisy and rhetoric, is one that’s
inherently unstable and where violence begets greater violence
in cyclical fashion. At best this can be described as
asymmetrical development.
Power, Sex, Revolution
Every monolithic establishment seems impossible to change when
we’re trapped within it, yet the revolution always seems
inevitable in retrospect. Contrary to the view of the irrational
pessimists human society does grow and develop, and even
human nature evolves too. We're not doomed to repeat the past
unless we fail to learn from it.
Vertical authority structures have been frequent features of the
past 6,000 years of male-dominated human history. However, to
believe that power and force are the only ways to structure a
society is both profoundly foolish and historically myopic, even
as such beliefs serve as convenient justification for
contemporary abuses. The Paleolithic to the Neolithic era,
around 6,000 to 60,000 years-ago and beyond, was the reverse –
featuring successful civilizations structured around women. And
now in the 21st century, with the development of increasingly
advanced reproductive technology like bio-engineered sperm, the
human species has moved into a completely unprecedented and
astonishing realm: a third sexual age that has effectively
rendered the male sex biologically redundant.
|
The symbols and images of early human civilizations were
almost exclusively of women, sometimes abstract and
highly stylized. More recently these symbols were
replaced by men while at the same time slavery and
violence suddenly became commonplace. |
 |
 |
It is thought that the Cucuteni would sacrifice whole
cities every 60-80 years by intentionally burning
thousands of their houses. They would then move and
create another new settlement. [5] |
|
Structured authority predicated upon force leaves much to be
desired, most notably the stifling of human potential amid the
upheaval of violence and brutality, both physical and
psychological. Over millennia of accumulated experience, through
wars and revolutions, and stepping-stone criticism by
enlightened thinkers, the human species has devised means of
structuring social authority, resources and power that strives
towards more equitable formations that are therefore more stable
and flexible, empowering greater numbers. This system in modern
form revolves around concepts of equally distributed freedoms,
rights of varying definition, and widespread expectations of
fair treatment and open opportunity; symmetrical development.
The concept of rules being equally applied to everyone, the
ruler and ruled, and the realization that neither is inherently
superior to the other, is a development as remarkable as it is
revolutionary in human history.
The
Russian Nihilists were a part of this process of human
development, fighting to overthrow abusive and despotic
authority and to build a society based on scientifically
rational treatment for everyone. This kind of struggle doesn’t
come easy, it requires persistence and stamina, and especially a
sober awareness of potential and pitfall, separating myth from
facts. We don’t have to exist under fear, torture and abuse.
Freedom, peace, and cooperation are just as valid physical
dimension within the virtually limitless realm of our universe,
even superior because they confer unambiguous benefits to the
vast majority involved within society; but we’ll never arrive
there using faith and hope, guided by belief and fictional
saviors. Together we have the potential to achieve anything
with a vision and persistence. The question is: will we try?
280
Million Years of Nihilism
It's a
characteristic of the human mind to turn
simplicity into subjective complexity and to
construe difficulty from life where none exists.
Today the archetypal question for philosophers is
"why are we here?" Ask a human and
a serious response will probably involve complex
reasoning involving mystical deities or
introspective analysis. But before we leave the
final answer with humanity I think we need a
second opinion.
Some 280 million
years ago the
first amphibians began life outside water. These
Labryinthodonts named for their infolded tooth
enamel typically had large triangular heads and
wide, flat bodies that looked like giant road-kill
without the tread marks. Tetrapods like these
crawled around on land eating worms, maybe a few
bugs but basically whatever they could catch and
digest. Not much to look at or admire yet they
gave rise to all other land vertebrates,
reptiles, birds, and yes eventually even literate
humans.
If we could ask the
same of a Permian tetrapod what mysterious, and
enlightening answers would they provide? Perhaps
something like "I don't understand the
question, I just want to avoid death."
Odd isn't it that
they never had any goal or god, no soul or hope
of an afterlife indeed they lacked any
purpose beyond the brief struggle for life and
yet millions of years later here we are reading
this because of it, because they existed and
evolved? We as humans exist in the same physical
universe, subject to the same rules of physics
and biology, the same need for sea-water salinity
body fluid, the same protein and amino acids ... Decades
of scientific inquiry and careful research all to
reach the inescapable conclusion that the point
is there is no point. The joke is on us because we turned
the absurdly simple into the dangerously complex.
The answer to "why
are we here?" is no different for human, Labryinthodont or jellyfish, because we live in
the same world subject to the same physical
limitations and end up in the same place after
death. Well, some leave better fossils than others.
Now we see why fear of death is such a natural
instinct and why religion exerts so much
concerted effort to contradict that instinct.
The human mind
creates ethics, moral codes, rules to die by,
excuses and justifications for the deepest
epiphany and the most trivial event alike. Some
even go so far as to hijack random events and
misinterpret them as self-created, the
psychological principle known as 'illusion of
control'. Unfortunately the complexities of the
human mind merely make it easier to believe in
fantasy and entertain delusion. Such an effort to
find greater significance where there really is
none and this only leads to wayward guidance and
specious justifications. Those concocted reasons
are then used to justify what need not be
justified like our continued existence except
based upon lies, setting up everyone for the fall
when the myth erodes. Everything would move
onward quite smoothly without any human minds
around to believe in God, Satan or any other
fictions, it did before us and it will after.
Instead the Nihilist is concerned with the things
that matter whether anyone believes in them or
not, and all the forces and factors that influence
even the things that don't think.
Although evolution
has no goal and our purpose may be just as
elusive that doesn't void significance, it
doesn't make action and consequence irrelevant,
an important distinction too often confused
within nihilism. Nihilism doesn't preclude
significance or a naive refusal to extract
lessons from history just as a lack of the
traditional mystical goal does not necessitate
futility. Extinction events, for example, are
significant
– after all, we wouldn't be here
without them. The only cosmic justification
supported by any tangible evidence is the impetus
for continued existence, the self-justifying
purpose of tautology. And truthfully demanding
any further justification from most simply
foments confusion and foolish behavior.
Furthermore it's likely that anything beyond that
basal maxim is just an artificial construction.
So, nihilism is not an issue of existence so
much as a series of questions regarding the value,
if any, that those artificially constructed
meanings have. Where do they take us and do
we really want to end up there? And can we really
outsmart natural selection, for instance?
What's
Left?
Nihilism can appear
very complicated because in the present moral
milieu it's necessary to describe it in the terms
of negatives and being against this or that. It's about
accepting what is, and working within that
framework to generate a lifestyle of efficacy and
natural perspective. Too often our modern hi-tech
planet makes us think that if it looks confusing
and it takes a Germanic scholar to analyze it
then it must be complicated. What I'm saying is
that you don't need any of that shit. You don't
need to believe in God or Beelzebub or anything
else that can't be verified or tested in any way. You don't need to believe that human nature is
intrinsically evil or in original sin. It takes
so much vain effort to struggle with good and bad.
Normal people literally torture themselves with
ethical and moral quandaries in self-created
dungeons that ultimately never matter. For this
reason the nihilistic philosophy takes a beating
in the arena of ideas because it's about nothing. That's why I like to call it an anti-ideology.
It simply doesn't play by those rules because
those rules are arbitrary; they exist only in the
social-mindset. And if other people want to live
within that self-torturing, intellect numbing
fantasy world then I'm not going to stop them;
have fun ... hating life.
It's important to realize too that Nihilism isn’t like every
other ideology that places a vague future goal in primacy and
forces everything in the present to fit that fantasy. Nihilism is a
counter-order, it is the opposite of every other ideology and
theology that seeks to impose an absolute conception of the way
everything should be because that’s simply not how things really
work. Life can’t be controlled by an artificially concocted
single universal answer or by building a perfect order that will
last forever. Nihilism operates with the expectation that the
future and its needs are always unknown and all we can really do
is prepare ourselves to fit the present and try to meet whatever
challenges arise in the ongoing process of existence; thus
Nihilism isn’t concerned so much with the aftermath as it is
with the here and now, hence its very definition.
|
Many
people spend great effort trying to determine what
nihilism is, and it often seems perplexing because it is
such a radically different viewpoint and mindset. Belief
systems and ideologies are defined by what they are and
what they value but nihilism is more defined by what
isn’t, it’s about an absence rather than a presence.
Nihilism is absence of faith, absence of teleology, lack
of God, and so on. That’s why I’ve always said Nihilism is
where you go when you can’t find anything to believe in.
All that’s left are the inescapable natural forces and that
which is self-evident or verifiable.
It often seems more complex than it really is and indeed
the more philosophers struggle to force it into the
traditional ideological mold the less it’s really
nihilism. Is it hedonism? Is it immorality? Does it
support capitalism, or socialism? Anything beyond the
primary aspects are derivative and potentially arbitrary
considerations, perhaps simply personal interpretations. |
Even if you reject nihilism your relationship
has not been severed. The entire social and political
structure that we have to live within is programmed for
self-destruction because it’s all based on disingenuous ideas
and promulgated through hollow rhetoric and plastic faces for
near-term goals. And what do lies breed except vengeance and
anger? So you may blame the violence, blame the anger, blame the
nihilism, blame the effect not the cause, but nevertheless that
dangerous dénouement will remain not far off and no one alive
will avoid it.
When we conclude
that we each only get one life, the goal becomes
painfully obvious, as unpleasant as the sight of
the predator messily devouring the prey on Wild
Kingdom. I think humans are the gods, but the
corporal package is a powerful dichotomy.
Worm
and god side by side. We need no higher power for
justification or success, only the desire and
willpower. Each human life has the potential, but
unless one strives to be something higher they are only a
worm. We can do anything the question is
will we? Will we struggle in vain
with the futile labels of olde, senselessly
slaughtering each other over self-imposed
polarities while disingenuous despots reap the
profits from our collective bloodletting? Or will
we choose the exit, and in this very dark room
known as life not too many exit signs are visible.
The one I used is called nihilism.
In a way that's all it is. That's
all that's needed to revolutionize the planet because once a
person finally realizes the totality of the lies that comprise
everyday modern life they will become the greatest nihilist and
radical imaginable.
Comments?
|
Now that you
are
sufficiently enthused or riled up depending on
your reaction to the provocation why not direct
the sentiment to: |
|
 |
|
And
yes, I do respond to e-mail so if you
have a link, question, found an intriguing
opinion or debate on the topic for or against, send
that too. |
| |
|
Important Note! To make sure your e-mail
letter is received please make sure the word 'nihilism'
is in the title/subject line. Also note that
given the volume of responses from
readers I'm not able to respond to every
letter but I do write something for most. Short
and concise letters are much appreciated and they get
answered first! |
1. A History of
Civilization, Brinton, p. 300-301,
Prentice Hall 1960.
2. The World Within The World by John D.
Barrow, pages 334 & 332, Oxford University
Press 1988.
3. The Meme Machine by Susan Blackmore,
page 189, Oxford University Press 1999.
4.
A History of Russia,
sixth edition, by Nicholas V. Riasanovsky, Oxford University
Press 2000, page
381.
5.
7,000 years
ago, Neolithic optical art flourished, by Rossella Lorenzi,
MSNBC, September 22, 2008.
|