Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

lettuceLeafer wrote

wait so let me get this right the author is willing to sacrifice themself and potentially (probably) having an overall pleasant life to attack constructs to change society. Idk how collectivist u can be when u are making yourself a sacrificial lamb for building a better world with an endless world. This seems like the same conclusion a an ancom and many tankies would come to just with different words. Though tbh, tankies are prob more individualistic bc most of them wouldn't risk their hide for other people. So maybe the real collectivists were post left nihilist anarchists all along. lol

6

lettuceLeafer wrote

idrc to much but these essays always seem weird to me. Like they claim they are an individualists and then talk about their obsession with attacking the state and capital or whatever so they can build a different world to live in. Like idk, is attacking the government and capital choosing to not serve it anymore really? Take 9/11 did it even really attack the US? I would say it was extremely beneficial as it allowed politicians to consolidate power, start a war so they get more money and can ramp up millitary industrial complex and surveil citizens harder and millitarize the police more.

So when people talk about attack I wonder if it even really could be considered an attack. Like if I attack someone and my enemy goes "oh thank u very much how helpful of you" did I attack them?

Just like when u compare this method of thinking to just living your life and if its illegal you just do it in the way the gov won't catch u and just living in a way where things u find constricting don't bug u then this essay looks way closer to leftism than if an individual only did stuff for themself and not for attack. Idk, it just seems like anarcho nihilism often is "I'm only doing this bc I want to" but its something someone would only want to do in they had a ton of underlying leftists ideals causing their desires and they just aren't open are or cognizant of it.

6

SnowCode wrote (edited )

Yes, I found the criticism of collectivism and stuff interesting, but the conclusion seemed kinda like "you SHOULD do this" which kinda defeat the whole point. I am not into pipe bombs and stuff like that because I just don't want to do it, so I don't see why I would do it.

If the author likes to do this, then that's fair. But that's a personal decision at the end of the day.

5

lettuceLeafer wrote

I'm pretty sure the pipe bomb was metephorical. I presume the author is okay with them tho based on their desire for sabotage and destruction and arson.

This is a good point but I was more talking about how the essay seems to be talking about spending your life doing leftist goals rather than living a life for yourself doesn't seem individualist. Sure you can both enjoy something and not be doing it for yourself. Soldiers in the military often gladly die fighting for their country and I think flower bomb is doing the same, fighting a war not for themself but for chaos or whatever. Sure they might enjoy it but it still isn't being individualists since u have devoted yourself to an abstraction or larger cultural norm. Just like a solider or a cop or any other politician does.

And if we are at the point where you are dong stuff not for yourself, not for other people and potentially at the abject harm of people even the weakest for an abstractions it starts looking a lot like any other oppressive system where u hurt others to attack the enemy and defend your abstraction.

5

Terror_Incognita wrote

You both are missing a couple points that I can probably fill in.

Individualist anarchy can mean any type of life related to anarchy that an individual decides on. Some individualists go fuck off in the woods, ride trains and keep things gentle and peaceful. Other individuals find pleasure destroying things, watching things burn, assassination attempts and so on. The enjoyment of sabotage and attack are not leftist concepts. They belong to no one. On their own they mean absolutely nothing. They only become meaningful when the individual engaging in such activity finds pleasure in doing so. It is not a devotion to an abstraction. It is a devotion to an excitement that can only be produced through acts of illegality. Otherwise, at least for these particular individual(s), a lawful life of peace and serenity is dull and therefore undesireable.

This is a central reason for the hostility between leftists and nihilists. Some nihilists don't want to wait for permission to act. The desire may be too strong. Even when "winning" is an impossibility, it is not the point. The point is as simple as this; it is fun to fuck shit up!

4

lettuceLeafer wrote

That's silly tho. Bc the reason one enjoys attacking the state is due to a larger social goal. There is a reason individualist anarchists attack capital or the state and not random people. The enjoyment is due to a larger social belief that goes beyond the individual.

1

Terror_Incognita wrote

"Bc the reason one enjoys attacking the state is due to a larger social goal."

So did you go around and ask everyone, and get a general consensus on this? Or are you just assuming a representative role and making a universal assumption as to everyones (uniform) motive for why they attack? And surely there are individualist anarchists who attack people (and maybe even random) as well.

Why do you just assume everyone acts in accordance to your singular perception of individualist anarchy? It is silly for you to assume you know the basis for everyones personal enjoyment. Some god-complex shit goin' on lol.

3

lettuceLeafer wrote

No bc it's illogical to think otherwise if the individual enjoyment is also not derived from attacking no leftists targets like workers or random people ect.

1

Terror_Incognita wrote

So you are the expert on logical thinking when it comes to other individuals and their ideas on enjoyment eh?

Individuals are capable of enjoying activities without requiring or even being aware of the politicized nature of such activities. Lettuce, have you ever set something on fire and watched it crumble? Or stolen food and gotten away with it? These individual acts stir up emotions that relate to the individual engaging with them. They don't need to have an end in of themselves or be a "goal" in order to be pleasurable.

It is strange that despite seeming to defend individualist anarchy, you dismiss the individual agency in determining what is enjoyment and what is not...Perhaps you don't enjoy these activities due to your assumption that they are exclusively leftist or collectivist objectives lol. And in a desperate attempt to distance yourself from leftism you deprive yourself of engaging with any activity you have ideologically surrendered to the concept of leftism.

3