Hey nihilist communists

[727Goon]

If everything is meaningless why should we oppose exploitation or racism or any of that bad shit. Same goes for really hardline materialists who reject anything that has to do with ethics or morals and anything that's not economics. If self interest is the sole basis for Marxism its pretty much as philosophically bankrupt as libertarianism.

[EdgyandOriginal]

I'm a utilitarian, not a nihilist. On the whole, Capitalism does not maximize utility (Which makes it even more annoying when the RW-libertarians tell me that the transactions between a worker and capitalist are positive sum because each individual is maximising his utility when making a trade I.E. selling his labour. This obviously does not justify the travesties of the system as a whole E.G. the conditions of class divide that cause the huge inequalities in wealth between the market participants).

/Rant

[Os Cangaceiros]

Have you actually read the "Nihilist Communism" text?

[Viet Minh]

If everything is meaningless why should we oppose exploitation or racism or any of that bad shit.

Precisely because everything is meaningless we make our own reality, and anyone with any sense doesn't want racism to be any part of that reality. I'm not a nihilist btw, and I don't know shit about it, just my 2 cents..

[The Douche]

You apparently don't know what nihilist communism is, or what materialism is.

If you want answers you shouldn't load your questions with assumptions...just saying...

[727Goon]

Have you actually read the "Nihilist Communism" text?

Do I look like a graduate student?

Say what you want about the tenets of Marxism Leninism Maoism but at least its an ethos.

[Rafiq]

I haven't read Nihilst text, but I can bet that they view Morals and Ethics as non existent, though, if existent, just social constructs, which is what hey are. If our morals and ethics are consequences of the material and social conditions around us, why should we care about changing the morals, or focusing on them as a whole, when the problem is systematic, and not ethical? Morals aren't going anywhere, but they will change drastically as the mode of production does.

[black magick hustla]

Do I look like a graduate student?

Say what you want about the tenets of Marxism Leninism Maoism but at least its an ethos.
dawggg, nihilcom was written by two disgruntled post office workers its not an academic treatsie lol


the "nihilist" part basically means that ideologies and dissemination of such beliefs are inconsequential to whether we will see a communist revolution or not. i.e. it is not up to the sheer will power and activity of activists, but communism will happen because of sheer material determinism. (if it ever happens)

[RGacky3]

Say what you want about the tenets of Marxism Leninism Maoism but at least its an ethos.

Big Lebowski .... hey hey.

Ultimately NO BODY is a-moral, every arugment about society is ultimately moralistic, so the hardcore materialists or nihilists that want to regect all morality are just fooling themselves.

[Thirsty Crow]

the "nihilist" part basically means that ideologies and dissemination of such beliefs are inconsequential to whether we will see a communist revolution or not. i.e. it is not up to the sheer will power and activity of activists, but communism will happen because of sheer material determinism. (if it ever happens)
What does "sheer material determinism" mean? That a workers' revolution will occur as a result of the inability of capital to maintain wages at a level conducive to workers' bare survival? Or something else?



Ultimately NO BODY is a-moral, every arugment about society is ultimately moralistic, so the hardcore materialists or nihilists that want to regect all morality are just fooling themselves.
It's not that nihilist communists reject morality (how would one reject morality? in abstract? in practice?), bmh explained it (not so clearly, at least in my opinion).
But I'm curious, how do you define what constitutes "morality"? I'm asking since it seems that you're using the term in a very broad sense.

[RGacky3]

Morality in the sense that you believe in principles that apply to everyone (such as everyone should have a right to not be discriminated on based on race), or that there are principles that you apply universally to yourself.

Like for example don't cheat on your wife is a morality, even if you just apply it to yourself, don't cheat on your wife (unless you can get away with it and she's hot) is not a morality.

[#FF0000]

Ultimately NO BODY is a-moral, every arugment about society is ultimately moralistic, so the hardcore materialists or nihilists that want to regect all morality are just fooling themselves.

I disagree. Everyone is a-moral. Everyone is a nihilist. No one has principles no matter how much they insist they do.

[cogar66]

Big Lebowski .... hey hey.

Ultimately NO BODY is a-moral, every arugment about society is ultimately moralistic, so the hardcore materialists or nihilists that want to regect all morality are just fooling themselves.

Moral Nihilism simply says that there is no objective morality.

Makes sense to me.

This says nothing about subjective morality, which is really just a preference.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Do I look like a graduate student?

I dunno man, I'm not a grad student but I've read it.

It's not particularly difficult, actually it's quite straight-foward, especially when compared to, say, TIQQUN.

[Decolonize The Left]

Morality in the sense that you believe in principles that apply to everyone (such as everyone should have a right to not be discriminated on based on race), or that there are principles that you apply universally to yourself.

Morality =/= you believe in principles

Morality is a set code of conduct which is agreed upon by a given constituency and generally enforced by some authority.

Also, you can't "apply [principles] universally to yourself." The fact that you believe a principle to be universal in itself dictates that it applies to you (as it's universal).


Like for example don't cheat on your wife is a morality, even if you just apply it to yourself, don't cheat on your wife (unless you can get away with it and she's hot) is not a morality.

Don't cheat on your wife isn't "a morality," it's not even a moral, it's a command. It becomes a moral when it's legislated into existence through some sort of authority.

I have no idea where you come up with much of what you say.

- August

[Decolonize The Left]

What does "sheer material determinism" mean? That a workers' revolution will occur as a result of the inability of capital to maintain wages at a level conducive to workers' bare survival? Or something else?

"Sheer material determinism" means that capitalism contains an inherent contradiction which will result in the collapse of the capitalist system regardless of the political/ideological actions of any given set of people.

Basically, that shit's gonna hit the fan no matter what we do (or don't do).

- August

[Os Cangaceiros]

I think that I appreciate Nih-Com so much because it tends to elicite two primary reactions:

1) "Herp derp nihilism!? Isn't that the opposite of, like, communism?"

2) "What do you mean demonstrating in front of my college administration building with half a dozen other people isn't helping anything?!"

It probably is excessively mechanistic/deterministic, though. Although it's hardly unique in that respect...you can read bits and pieces of Marx or Bordiga and get roughly the same impression.

[RGacky3]

Morality is a set code of conduct which is agreed upon by a given constituency and generally enforced by some authority.

Also, you can't "apply [principles] universally to yourself." The fact that you believe a principle to be universal in itself dictates that it applies to you (as it's universal).


most people would'nt define morality that way. You can apply them universally to yourself, for example you decide its wrong for you to have sex with people that are not your wife, you apply that to yourself universally (not matter what the situation), but not to other people. Universally may not be the right word, but you get my point.


Don't cheat on your wife isn't "a morality," it's not even a moral, it's a command. It becomes a moral when it's legislated into existence through some sort of authority.

I have no idea where you come up with much of what you say.

- August

What if its your own personal morality?

If we are talking about semantics here, then how about if I say ethics?

[9]

Originally Posted by black magick hustla http://www.revleft.org/vb/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.revleft.org/vb/showthread.php?p=2173024#post2173024)
the "nihilist" part basically means that ideologies and dissemination of such beliefs are inconsequential to whether we will see a communist revolution or not. i.e. it is not up to the sheer will power and activity of activists, but communism will happen because of sheer material determinism. (if it ever happens) What does "sheer material determinism" mean? That a workers' revolution will occur as a result of the inability of capital to maintain wages at a level conducive to workers' bare survival? Or something else?

I would be interested to see bmh's response to this question.

[RichardAWilson]

Maybe I can answer this question. I happen to subscribe to Nihilism. I believe ethics are relative social constructs used to maintain order and co-existence. Right and wrong are whatever we define them.

Nonetheless, from a philosophical angle, we don't have predefined rights and wrongs and nothing has objective meaning. We each have our own subjective meaning in life. An individual that subscribes to Nihilism can still struggle for subjective progress. Historical Materialism reaffirms that progress by showing us that it's inevitable.

There's a common misunderstanding that Nihilism is the Philosophy of Meaninglessness. There's more to Nihilism than meaninglessness. Nihilism is the philosophical version of theological Agnosticism. -

It's a Humanitarian Ideology that's centered on human freedom, expression and the rejection of authority and questioning so-called "predefined" values and beliefs. - Such as Religion and Ethics.

[black magick hustla]

I would be interested to see bmh's response to this question.

i think bcbm is better acquainted. but i don't think the duponts offer a specific situation (i.e. whether ifit is falling rate of profit or something specific). what the duponts affirm, more so than the possibility of communism (i don't think they say is inevitable), its inconsequencial to the amount of effort put forward by activist or militant groups. they simply state that communism will only be a possibility when objective forces throw workers to fight against capital and then there will be a sort of breach where communism might be a possibility. its an old council communist argument really

[Thirsty Crow]

I disagree. Everyone is a-moral. Everyone is a nihilist. No one has principles no matter how much they insist they do.
C'mon, don't you think that this is an oversimplification of a whole host of human behaviour patterns?
Also, it might be more accurate to say that most people are utilitarian in that they adapt their moral principles to their interests and desires, in the short and long run.

[ComradeMan]

C'mon, don't you think that this is an oversimplification of a whole host of human behaviour patterns?
Also, it might be more accurate to say that most people are utilitarian in that they adapt their moral principles to their interests and desires, in the short and long run.

He's just been in a strange mood lately..... :lol:

I like to believe that most people are fundamentally good and try to look for the good in them.... it's not always easy!:(

[Thirsty Crow]

He's just been in a strange mood lately..... :lol:

I like to believe that most people are fundamentally good and try to look for the good in them.... it's not always easy!:(
I don't think that people are either fundamentally good or fundamentally bad. We're all natural creatures with needs that have to be fulfilled, and human behaviour emanating from this simple fact tends to get very complex since it depends on the social conditions in which these needs are realized and even shaped.

[ComradeMan]

I don't think that people are either fundamentally good or fundamentally bad. We're all natural creatures with needs that have to be fulfilled, and human behaviour emanating from this simple fact tends to get very complex since it depends on the social conditions in which these needs are realized and even shaped.

Well, without getting in too deeply- I said I like to believe... ;)

Seeing as humans as a species are fundamentally social animals then what is positive and good for society, i.e. the "troop", does tend to be what we usually think of as being good. Things go wrong when people act against this.

Now, this is a very simplistic way of putting it, but it's rudimentarily my outlook.

[Red And Black Sabot]

Do I look like a graduate student?

Say what you want about the tenets of Marxism Leninism Maoism but at least its an ethos.

I know your joking but I'm tired of folks who dismiss insurrectionary and nihilist texts as being something only grad students can comprehend.
I'm an uneducated drop out prole and I go through kicks where I read nothing but that sort of thing.
The working class is not as unintelligent as you think.

PS: Big Lebowski FTW!