Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments


ziq wrote (edited )

I'm not taking it personally.. The point of this thread is to ask why people take memes personally and feel the need to silence them. Idk why anyone downvotes OC.

Also, the only logical anticiv endgame is elimination of the human race. Without civilization you can’t enforce your anticiv ideology.

that doesn't make much sense. Humans don't = civilization. Read the piece I posted to f/anticiv today about the origins of civilization. And while you're at it, the piece in f/anarchism about the failures of moralism.

Giving a shit about the environment (i.e. our habitat) isn't moralism.

However, the moment the critique of morality is raised, even in Anarchy magazine, there are always those who pop up with the aim to confuse things (in order to defend their own moralistic commitments) by claiming in one form or another that there is no such thing as a non-moral human value! Most people, in common with dictionary definitions, would never say that a person expressing her or his own desires with no claim to transcendental status for them is being moral by valuing a particular goal. But the defenders of morality will come out of the woodwork to claim that even the most finite, ephemeral and contingent human desire indicates the existence of a moral system every bit as real as those taught by the various branches of the Catholic Church!

To avoid this intentional confusionism wrought by those afraid of any criticism directed at their own sacred cows, people pursuing critiques of morality usually attempt to make a clear distinction between ethics and morality. In this case, ethics is considered to be concerned with finite, non-fetishized values, while morality is concerned with fetishized, transcendental values: right and wrong or good and bad. Unfortunately, since there is almost no radical and substantial criticism of morality in our popular culture (as opposed to the mountains of superficial and insubstantial, partial criticisms of morality), appeals by moralists to dictionary definitions of “ethics” often derail such attempts. (Most dictionary definitions in an alienated, moralistic society will be unlikely reflect the possibility that a dichotomy between fetishized and nonfetishized values could even exist. For most people consistently nonfetishized values simply aren’t considered possible).