Nihilism is Not Nothing

From: https://medium.com/@NoWing/nihilism-is-not-nothing-c9fd23df2706

Ask nearly anyone, and they will tell you that nihilism is a belief in nothing. Popularized by the movie, the Big Lebowski, and perpetuated by lazy academics and philosophers, this misunderstanding of nihilism has led to a sort of demonization in anarchist circles. Primitivist John Zerzan frequently laments about nihilism, saying things like “…you start having people that are so nihilistic they don’t even care about life anymore.” To Zerzan, nihilism is simply not caring about life.

Even someone opposed to primitivism, transhumanist William Gillis states “‘‘’Can a nihilist be an anarchist?” No. Absolutely not. Nihilism is the philosophy of our thoroughly sociopathic society. Everything we fight.” If primitivists and transhumanists can both hate nihilism together so actively, perhaps that shows they have more in common than one might expect. Perhaps nihilism is a convenient boogeyman for anarchists so entrenched in their own ideologies of primitivism/transhumanism/etc., that those ideologies have started to supersede anarchism?

Is nihilism merely “not caring about life?” Absolutely not! The first nihilists were called so because nothing “that then existed found favor in their eyes”. This does not mean that these people believed in nothing, or did not care about life. Quite the opposite! To those who would form the foundations of nihilism, life was important enough to reject those things which would attempt to fetter life. The first nihilists looked around, saw nothing that they approved of, and then set out to destroy those things, while creating structures and circumstance that did please them. Nihilism stems from people wanting to realize their desires through action. If nihilism was simply people not caring, as Zerzan claims, then nihilism could not make the claim of having killed a czar, and nearly toppling an empire. History does not support Mr. Zerzan’s claims.

Can one be an anarchist and a nihilist, as Mr. Gillis claims is impossible? Of course! In fact, from Renzo Novatore, to CCF, to the FAI, anarchists have been nihilists for over a century, and almost as long as the phrase “anarchism” has been used in politics. Mr. Gillis is either making grandiose claims, while being ignorant of history, or he is claiming that people and groups who have done far more in terms of creating anarchy than himself are not anarchist, and even the enemies of anarchism! Again, reality flies in the face of those who would make false claims about nihilism.

Mr. Gillis claims that nihilism “is the philosophy of our thoroughly sociopathic society”. If only that were the case! If only our society was rooted in the rejection of coercive social norms, and attack on oppressive structures! That is what nihilists do…I am not quite sure how that makes them the enemies of anarchism.

“Negation of every society, of every cult, of every rule and of every religion. But I don’t yearn for Nirvana, any more than I long for Schopenhauer’s desperate and powerless pessimism, which is a worse thing than the violent renunciation of life itself. Mine is an enthusiastic and dionysian pessimism, like a flame that sets my vital exuberance ablaze, that mocks at any theoretical, scientific or moral prison.” — Renzo Novatore

Renzo Novatore, an Italian nihilist anarchist from the early 1900s, specifically combats this idea of nihilism as some exacerbated hopelessness, and rejects nihilism as a “powerless pessimism”. Novatore understands that rulers can come in many forms, “theoretical, scientific, and moral” even. As anarchists, should we not be vigilant towards all concepts as potential rulers? Should we not attempt to tangibly oppose that which coerces us? Should we not attempt to create circumstances that better suit our desires? For Mr. Gillis, these acts would be far too nihilist, which leaves him holding an anarchism which would seem quite ineffective. I would argue that nihilism is a compliment, if not inherent, to anarchism.

Far from a belief in nothing, nihilism challenges us to act. It encourages us to create the world we want to see, and to do it right now. As the early nihilists took from Bakunin, “The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!” Nihilism is not some hopeless end, it is a bright beginning!

“(Nihilism) stands like an extreme that cannot be gotten beyond, and yet it is the only true path of going beyond; it is the principle of a new beginning.” — Maurice Blanchot

So, why is there this concerted effort against the concept of nihilism from many different corners of anarchism? Why are some people so bent on opposing what is definitionally, and historically, something that has been very much ingrained in anarchism? I would argue that it is exactly because of the way that these figures have positioned themselves among anarchism. The unwillingness of nihilism to accept dogma stands opposed to the very dogmatic stances that anarchists like Gillis and Zerzan have taken. Having painted themselves into corners as transhumanist or primitivist, people like this likely feel threatened by a nihilism that would reject transhumanism or primitivism as static ideologies. After all, nihilism calls for a fluidity of ideas that moves along with the fluidity of desires, and has no interest in “theoretical prisons” that claim a certain way to anarchy. Gillis and Zerzan have built themselves up on very specific sets of ideas, and they understand that nihilism challenges these ideas that they sit atop….Either that, or they really are just uneducated and ignorant as to the true origins of nihilism.

“Any society that you build will have its limits. And outside the limits of any society, unruly and heroic tramps will wander with their wild and virgin thought — those who cannot live without planning ever new and dreadful outbursts of rebellion! I shall be among them!” — Renzo Novatore

Nihilism stands against the prescriptivism and dogma of prefabricated ideologies. It encourages action, and moves people to both negate which oppresses them, while creating their desires. Far from being a passive rejection of life, nihilism stands tall as an active celebration of life, of our ability to create and destroy. Nihilism understands the need for a constant vigilance against the calcification which occurs in all ideologies and all societies. Without that vigilance, even the most ardent anarchist stands vulnerable to the very rulership they claim to fight.

“Defeated in the mud or victorious in the sun, I sing life and I love it! “ — Renzo Novatore

There are 51 Comments

"So, why is there this concerted effort against the concept of nihilism from many different corners of anarchism? Why are some people so bent on opposing what is definitionally, and historically, something that has been very much ingrained in anarchism? I would argue that it is exactly because of the way that these figures have positioned themselves among anarchism."

"Ask nearly anyone, and they will tell you that nihilism is a belief in nothing. Popularized by the movie, the Big Lebowski, and perpetuated by lazy academics and philosophers, this misunderstanding of nihilism has led to a sort of demonization in anarchist circles."

The issue isn't really what "nihilism" is, because nobody can answer that question for sure. It doesn't even have a single meaning, I just looked it up on dictionary.com and it has multiple ones https://www.dictionary.com/browse/nihilism?s=t. From all my studies of it, these are the ones that are most realistic and meaningful:

-an extreme form of skepticism.

-a way of thinking that supports the destruction of everything in favor of the natural emergence of something else (think novatore, the russian nihilists, a diverse selection of terrorists from all ideologies)

-a philosophical rejection of philosophy (think stirner, nietzsche, zen buddhists, taoists), which is really similar to "the lazy normie" definition, a "philosophy of nothing", the realization that no terms are mutually exclusive.

there are a lot of people who think that nihilism and anarchism are basically the same thing, and i agree that they have a lot in common but they are not. The thing i like about nihilism is that you can't really define it. To me it's really ironic that nihilism has become a label that has made its way into radical identity politics circles mostly i guess thanks to LBC and viral internet communications.

Being a nihilist really is about being nothing, and I'll be damned if anyone tries to use it to be a celebrity in anarchyville!

as a non-nihilist -- or perhaps as an extreme skeptic toward nihilism -- it seems to me that most of the stupid definitions and meanings attributed to nihilism derive from people who are hostile to the concept. it's like trying to understand anarchism by reading marxist analyses; it's far more rewarding to go to the sources. while i am extremely skeptical of nihilism, mostly due to the ironic hipster elitist disconnection from social life in general and social struggles in particular by its most visible and noisy north american adherents, what i like about nihilism as a concept is that i see it as a tendency with a continuum rather than as a discrete set of ideas. with that said, it would be great if some more articulate proponents would get their ideas out there. i know they exist. c'mon nihilists! a little more effort if you want to avoid even more damaging caricatures!

I think it's a bit unfair to say that only dogmatic people are irritated by nihilism. The anarchist playing the role of noisy skeptic to all the little aspiring cult leaders is a venerable tradition, I've done it many times myself. To me, nihilism is the tool for when I smell some snake oil and I resent the grifter because they're targeting my friends or vulnerable people instead of rich douchebags like an honourable thief should.

But no, my irritation with the nihilist tendencies I encounter these days, is mostly the same bullshit self aggrandizing, alienated individualism that takes a thousand other forms as people tell themselves little stories to make themselves feel something while they sit in their cyberpods.

If there were thousands of genuine Renzos running around today, society would be shook as fuck so clearly that isn't happening. Therefore, the question of having some sort of coherent vision other than a blank slate of extreme skepticism (which is good), looms very large.

Nihilism is an unfinished thought. Negate sure but then what? More negation? The negation is a means, not an end. Prove me wrong! *throws down glove*

*dons glove on wild dagger and flops it around*

but seriously, i will talk only bullshit now:

i think “nihilism” can be disdained more for being “a philosophy” than for being “nihilism”

systematized thinking or ideas, though systems, obsessively and compulsively coherent thought

something something

inhuman, overly-human, machinic, a.i.

something about logic and coherence incurs in dishonesty, and editing out nuance and uncertainty
or something

so in a way, it’s a pose

to affirm something so definitely and absolutely without doubt, is okay as a bold moment,

but as a system or immutable idea that should hold constant and correct and stand the test of time

is iffy

philosophy is brands of thought bullying and thought contracts to thought styles and mish mashing of thought traditions of mostly western or westernized introverted and contemplative (etc, a type) white males

i wouldn’t ban it, but i certainly wouldn’t encourage it!

convoluted thinking arrives at justifications for [blank]
hard to fathom or reach conclusions that most wouldnt achieve or arrive at. i think this is why it may occasionally provide valuable eccentric contributions, it’s mostly there to annoy and give headaches to not philosopher types

but, philosophy not as a separate thing, but as love of thought and questioning, fans of trippy dialogue walking and talking

then nihilism is there, just not a distilled and branded substance, it’s there in the mix

but! words mean different things!
here nihilism usually points more to a mood or headspace and orientation and disposition as well as affinity with (usually unfulfilled) desires towards a particular set if specific actions!

wow! words!

So a predisposed mood of oriented headspace. Got it. Crystal fukin clear, k thx

you know and i know anything i say is not clear and you can joke about it all you want
winky face send tweet

"-a philosophical rejection of philosophy (think stirner, nietzsche, zen buddhists, taoists), which is really similar to "the lazy normie" definition, a "philosophy of nothing", the realization that no terms are mutually exclusive."

While Stirner, Nietzsche, zen & tao do belong together in this context, none of them are offering a philosophy of nothing.

"The realization that no terms are mutually exclusive" is emptiness not nothingness. Emptiness & nothingness are not the same thing.

Further, in my reading of Nietzsche and Stirner neither is saying there is no meaning, believe in nothing. They are more saying reject received meanings and form one's own meaning in the world.

Sure but saying "I'm skeptical a lot" doesn't sound nearly as edgelord daddy cool so it JUST WILL NOT DO.

I'm the big man on campus.
I've got the weapons and the
drugs, my bed is never lonely.

People don't fuck with me
because they know it's not smart.
I stay hidden from those who force
my hand.

Don't make the situation awkward
for me, or else you'll regret it.

Why meet anyone on their level,
when a simple smirk will suffice?

I don't have to be honest, I will not be honest.
A simple white russian and a record will suffice.

with the exclusion nietzsche, those philosophies that defeat themselves as a philosophy. The words in the end don't matter, it's how you live your life and interact with the other life forms that is important. So in that sense, i stand by what i originally said. Nihilism to me is about negation. I wouldn't really want to spend time with anyone who took any sort of a "nihilist" label they attached to themselves seriously, because neither construction or destruction are superior to each other.

I read "beyond good and evil" by nietzsche and just assumed that a lot of what he was saying i can't really understand, he was more of a madman and a mystic than stirner. Stirner's train of thought is actually very clear, he sounds like a "psychopath dousche" at times but that was the point he was trying to make: what's so WRONG with being yourself? All of the modern motivational dog shit about "loving yourself" pales in comparison because it fails to criticize all of the spookish elements of society, and when you fail to do that you're gonna be confused.

My assumption about nietzsche is that he's gained a lot of attention from anarchists is because his version of nihilism is more purely an anti-authoritarian shape of the trend. I love that story about how he went into a basement and tried to invoke god, saying that "im not going to believe in him if he doesn't appear before me!"

"The unwillingness of nihilism to accept dogma stands opposed to the very dogmatic stances that anarchists like Gillis and Zerzan have taken. Having painted themselves into corners as transhumanist or primitivist, people like this likely feel threatened by a nihilism that would reject transhumanism or primitivism as static ideologies."

"Nihilism stands against the prescriptivism and dogma of prefabricated ideologies."

The idea that nihilism isn't an ideology, isn't dogmatic, or isn't even a 'stance' is so absurd, only a dogmatic ideological nihilist would say something like that. Nihilism, like any other body of ideas, is a stance taken to differentiate itself from other stances. It has its own set of ideas and principles which, like every other set of principles, is driven by ideology.. Pretending to be above or beyond all ideology or dogma is just a sales pitch in the marketplace of ideas. For there is no such logical space or point of view that is above or beyond ideology. It is a virtue-signaling exercise, a view from nowhere, that no one has ever inhabited. Notice how it's always "those bad people over there who are all ideological and dogmatic and whom have painted themselves into a corner". Political nihilism only exists in opposition to everyone and everything. It cannot stand on its own, since it has nothing to stand for. It is against everything. It's only purpose is to be contrarian.

what kind of nihilists you are talking about here:

"The idea that nihilism isn't an ideology, isn't dogmatic, or isn't even a 'stance' is so absurd, only a dogmatic ideological nihilist would say something like that."

Of course this is possible, but please do me a favor and tell me which nihilists you are talking about?

"Pretending to be above or beyond all ideology or dogma is just a sales pitch in the marketplace of ideas."

I would like to think i am above all ideology and dogma, to think this is not the case is to tell me that i should value abstraction above myself. To say that individuals are below dogma is the exact opposite of what max stirner argued. You can't have an authoritarian system based on un-edited stirnerism.

"It cannot stand on its own, since it has nothing to stand for. It is against everything. It's only purpose is to be contrarian."

This is pretty close to the truth, but i don't live to argue with other people. I only argue with people when i think their ideas are bogus, poorly thought out, or misleading. Sometimes I just shrug. Sometimes i argue based on idiotic delusions i myself have, which is fine. I don't need to beat myself up over the mistakes i make.

I am talking about political nihilists, from the 19th century to contemporary social media. I was also addressing the "nihilist" who wrote this article. Obviously that went over your head.

"I would like to think i am above all ideology and dogma, to think this is not the case is to tell me that i should value abstraction above myself."

WTF? If you think you are above ideology and dogma, then you are definitely living in some abstraction created by your own mind. This is exactly what authoritarians do, call OTHERS dogmatic and ideological, and pretend they are the true pure righteous ones. Like I said, virtue-signalling. The fact is we are all ideological, including you. Nobody gets to claim immunity or special pleading. Ideology is inherent in adopting any form of political stance.

adderal-induced grad student "bernie anarchist" quarterlife crisis rant vibes.

u can also be contrarian without being nihilist, just like me!

u lose coherence tho, but maybe not consistency if ur consistently contrarian

anarchism makes you less consistently contrarian since one wouldn't make a case for defending oppression if one truly were

Murray Blockchain, it's the exact same style of trolling, with the long winded politician rhetoric that sounds much enlightening than it actually is.

Yes, Howard is dogmatic, he has no comprehension of subjective enlightenment, cos that's what seperates nihilism, or individualism,, from being ideologies, which requires collective adherents. As to the Murray Blockchain, I thought he was more like a radicalized Daydream?

Political nihilism also requires collective adherents, unless you don't want to actually create any kind of nihilist society. One can of course be a moral or epistemological nihilist by oneself, since these are psychological attitudes and not social goals. Not sure what "subjective enlightenment" is supposed to mean here.

"Political nihilism also requires collective adherents, unless you don't want to actually create any kind of nihilist society."

The first part is flat out wrong, humans often operate in "collectives" but often nothing like a membership. Also, collective rituals general start as a chain reaction with an individual who invents them.

The second part is a general rule/or trend for actual nihilists, no they don't want to create a nihilist society! Remember that society is a very recent word and concept as well, people existed for thousands of years without that word.

Everything you just wrote is factually incorrect. You don't need to be an official member to be an adherent. And to the extent groups have members, it is their members that comprise collectives, by definition.

Society may be a recent word, but it's a recent word for a very old and very real fact: a human social group with a shared culture. Whether you call it a band, a tribe, a camping party, or a nation, doesn't really matter. Presumably, nihilists want to live in a group with other nihilists. Or do they wish to live like solitary orangutans?

"Everything you just wrote is factually incorrect."

what a fucking windbag. It seems very strange to me that such an academically minded person would hang out on an anarchist forum all the time. I'll take the overly emotional oogle into my house long before I'll accept your shitty habits.

ROTFLMAO!! 02:23

Calling me names is your argument?

No wonder we aren't any closer to anarchy than we were 150 years ago. Thanks precisely to people like you.

For clarity, personal enlightenment is better than the subjective enlightenment describing the individual. Oh I dunno, I suppose my style of trolling is an oscillation between extremes of soulful masochist/aloof sadistic, to be honest.

"I suppose my style of trolling is an oscillation between extremes of soulful masochist/aloof sadistic"

I'd say my style is just blabbing what my heart desires in a semi-self-conscious fashion, with a focus on speed and clarity.

Ok now you've reached your quota here, Tuxedo.

You go in the showers of a public pool. You find a guy sitting on the ground cleaning his toe nails with his teeth. And you find that cool.

Please don't come here again.

LeWay actually opposes the phillistines! Have you been paying attention to this website?! Go back to @101, DON'T MAKE ASSERTIONS WITHOUT SOME STUDY OF HISTORY.

I have always raged against the philistines of consumerism and other religious peasants!!

.

Fuck off I don't feel like explaining tonite.

Bye!

Another poster here, umm, real nihilists don't say "bye". They don't have a linear perspective of departure and time. Just sayin' ,get your theory right before blaa blaa blaaing!

True, I've known many nihilists and before they leapt into the Abyss, they didn't say goodbye, tbe bastards just jumped silently, they didn't even look back at me and wave or blow a kiss, just jumped. Selfish damn self-absorbed nihilists, avoid them if you can, give them NOTHING!!!

you alright LeWay(or equivalent troll)?
you’ve been shitposting non-stop
chatting with yourself
since early morning yesterday

Living nihilism amounts to nothing, like the Keystone cops catching Ted Bundy, or a newborn baby left on a park bench at midnight, its lazy, its boring, you'll get found out, eventually you will get drawn into a moral dilemma and you will have to recant or suffer the consequences.

That's a stereotype applied to the chumps out thee who can't rule their own lives. Nihilism at least is a process of creating a tabula rasa for all those inherited ideals and values that some hold as the only truth there is. Of course that nihilism can lead you to shit on many people who love you, where the ultimate spook to abolish, your ego, remains.

But negation remains a necessary process in forging an individual consciousness. Just don,t make a religion and identify out of it. It does what it does, but it's just a process.

a little more than morality because morality implies some sort of mortal dilemma, like the state of your should in the afterlife, not sure if the two are connected etymologically but it seems like it.

Ethics are just a set of rules normally applied to either an organization or an individual, the problem with applying them to organizations is that organizations that aren't willing to disband when they're useless become robotic.

The only ethical rule i am really excited about is the popular one in hood and trailer park, "don't fuck with me and i won't fuck with you." Or sometimes i go with the corporate celebrity one "i can reciprocate your generosity right now but my appreciation of you is never set in stone".

Yeah I admire your work, but if 14:47 is referring to a personal context in someone's consciousness, such as when morals refer to the individual’s own values regarding right and wrong, it COULD be called a personal "moral dilemma " But yes, for adhering or not to externally applied rules, YES, an ethical dilemma.

I thought nihilism is just a doctrine, you could say, of negation or mega exxxtreme skepticism™. The "first" OG nihilist is generally considered to be some Greek homie named Gorgias, not some Russians. Basically, one day, Gorgias was hanging out with his friends and said this memorable line "nothing exists. If anything did exist it could not be known as you cant bloody well imagine. If it was known, the knowledge of it would be incommunicable, bucko." One of his friends wrote that down on a rock tablet because it was a sick burn for the ages. With that nihilism was born, or was it?!?!?! dun dun dun!!!

Then later on this guy named Mr. von Gorres started using nihilism in a political sense, which made a lot of people angry, and was widely regarded as a bad move. It led to this article, for example. SoOoOo a hard definition of nihilism doesn't really exist as itself cancel outs and wouldn't say it's deeply ingrained in anarchism, and is weird to try to make it seem like an aspect of anarchism in the anarchist litmus exam.

Naaaah, the tab rasa does postulate it is only by experience gained, nuthins innate, sOoOoOoo theoretically, its the condition of disregarding all social ideology and conventions, like the feral child on a desert island, or them sexy sister and bro in Blue Lagoon who did the ol' Adam and Eve, they was innocent and no gods gonna tell them any ethics, no sireee! Forget the greek stuff, babies are the real nihilists, then they grow up from experience and become brainwashed, unless they're Stirnerians. Yep, them anarchists can't really be nihilists, unless they're braindead!

"Forget the greek stuff, babies are the real nihilists, then they grow up from experience and become brainwashed, unless they're Stirnerians. Yep, them anarchists can't really be nihilists, unless they're braindead"

my dog is also a much better nihilist than i am. I look at a lot of identity labels within the anarchist scene as being intentions rather than anything based on reality. To say that you are an anarchist is to say that you dislike the state and want it to go away, or that you are engaged in anti-state activism. All i can say about the latter is...good luck! I wear the Nihilist hat here because my politics is marked by my cynicism and desire not to be controlled by thought, abstraction, money, the law etc.

But of course, you anon trolls would look at my life and spit on it, BECAUSE I CAN'T LIVE UP TO MY IDEALS!

Yes nihilist, one has to live one's convictions first, not just say I am this or I am that. No, I am much like you and live up to my ideals and would not spit on your life!

fuckin dudes amirite

shoulda never gave these niggas writing

yes to using a nihilistic perspective at times.

Medium is a pretty big publisher of articles. I once saw a really badly written article on there about connections between white supremacists and cops, so i guess whoever runs Medium is sympathetic to anarchists.

Add new comment