Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

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!

3

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.

2

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.

1