💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › riflebird-meeting-at-the-dead-end.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 13:41:21. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Meeting At The Dead End
Author: Riflebird
Date: March 23 2015
Language: en
Topics: nihilism, anti-civ, Green Anarchy, affinity, insurrectionary anarchy
Source: Retrieved on May 31 2015 from https://fiercedreams.wordpress.com/2015/03/23/meeting-at-the-dead-end-nihilism-green-anarchy-and-the-desire-for-immediate-revolt/

Riflebird

Meeting At The Dead End

We are not autonomous, we are everywhere and everyone. We are looking to

set an invisible trend that is already here, that abandons the shackles

of subculture, identity and ideology, and finds comfort in the

revolutionary discomfort we all feel. The suicidal are in control,

destroying the land that feeds us, mediating our relationships with each

other and all life on this planet, and establishing a global reality

that efficiently forces all life to survival as opposed to living. There

is unity in our cynicism, skepticism, and common contempt. There is

unity in our neglected passions, malnourishment, and feared temptations.

While there is also a division set in their very existence, there is a

unity in these feelings. There are those who share these feelings, and

those who look to silence them, deceive them, or murder and imprison

those feeling them. ‘Fire to the Prisons’

The conversation regarding nihilism in anarchist circles has been almost

impossible to tune out in recent years. This article has come about from

my own recent reading, personal experiences, and talking to those that

read nihilist-influenced literature. Not many of these folks would

identify as a nihilist of course, because they usually have a strong

aversion to labelling themselves and are working toward ‘a negation of

political identities’. There are innumerable articles, books, and

lengthy theses on nihilism, published around the world. I don’t profess

to know about even a fraction of them, I am simply trying to scratch the

surface.

The nihilistic literature I have come across can be deep and convoluted,

often deliberately contradicting itself. The level of theory makes some

articles dense and nearly impenetrable at times, alienating those that

don’t appreciate the philosophical tone and the now-generic writing

style. Some of the articles I attempted to read just did not hold my

attention, even if they were designed as a preliminary reading. Some

were overly poetic, contrived or just simply resigned and pessimistic.

In other cases, however, I was totally on board and felt like I could

relate to the sentiment.

Throughout this piece I will mostly refer to green anarchy and green

anarchist theory but also will touch on (anarcho)primitivism which I see

as closely related and a necessary inclusion in the topic. As it did

with basic anarchist theory and green anarchist ideas, it would take a

few years of contemplation to really familiarise myself with the vast

array of nihilist-influenced material that’s out there. Oftentimes too,

I think it is unclear where nihilist influences end and insurrectionary

anarchist ideas begin, or vice versa. I am merely dealing with the

material I have read and found relevant to my own exploration. A

preoccupation with internalising theory and regurgitating ideas, at the

expense of dialogue and experimentation, is not something worth striving

for anyway.

Much green anarchist writing resonates with me, and nihilist tracts and

journals may speak deeply to somebody else- it’s all personal and

subjective. I have felt from my interactions with nihilists a definite

sense of kinship and trust, and I wanted to uncover why this is so. Part

of my curiosity is that within nihilism there is often an expectation of

a much sharper and deeper critique, which I have felt challenged and

confronted by. I see this as a positive. Another pattern I have noticed

is the willingness to go further in both theory and action.

FROM ENSLAVEMENT TO OBLITERATION

“The current nihilism amongst the youth is not arising from nothing. It

is a reflection of the total failure of both resistance and capitalism.

Many see no alternative and want nothing else other than the complete

destruction of the beast that feeds them: the city.”

Uncontrollable : Contributions to a Conscious Nihilism.

As aforementioned, I have tried to find commonalities with nihilist

thought and green anarchist viewpoints because I do sympathise with

both. I came to green anarchist beliefs the long way around, starting

from a destructive and nihilistic streak that showed up earlier in my

life. I was originally guided almost solely by boredom, depression, and

frustration, then inspired by crappy punk and hardcore music,

situationist ideas, art, and existential philosophy via Crimethinc, I’m

not ashamed to admit. This led to a rejection and abandonment of the

values of mass society, far before I had any serious interest in the

natural world, environmentalism, or anthropology.

By this point I believed I should question everything, and attempted to

start this process, finding many smokescreens and lies that had clouded

my vision. During this process I developed a deep distrust of society

and authority in general terms, way before extrapolating this out to the

entire phenomenon of civilisation. This is contrary to many other green

anarchists I have since met; many had a direct experience with some form

of remote, wild place early on, which shapes their anti-civ perspective.

I realised that I was against civilisation, but at the time was living

in an urban environment with almost no connection to my bioregion, no

comprehension of the annihilation of the ecosphere, and no understanding

of life outside the industrialised bio-dome.

Like many friends I saw little meaning in anything and wanted revenge on

society. This manifested in varying small-scale, non-threatening ways,

such as petty larceny and vandalism. At the time there was a generalised

refusal of what was ‘on offer'; work, careers, shopping, morality and

the spectacle. It was not until the literature of Derrick Jensen,

Chellis Glendinning, Ward Churchill and Jerry Mander came my way that I

specifically critiqued civilisation. These are lesser discussed nowadays

by myself not because they say nothing of worth but are not anarchist,

and they don’t delve quite as deep as I would like to go.

COMMON THREADS

By interrupting the apparent consensus and social peace, confrontations

make injustice visible and legitimize the rage others feel as well. When

the fog of apparently universal submission is dispelled, those who wish

to fight can finally find each other—and readiness to fight is a better

basis for allegiance than merely ideological agreement.

‘Say you want an Insurrection’

The similarities of green anarchist thought and nihilism start where

they discuss ‘civilisation’ as a specific enemy and target of attack.

This belief is non-existent in workerist and leftist thinking. I also

have noticed that domestication is named as an enemy in several (what I

would describe as) nihilist influenced publications and communiqués, and

the term is discussed extensively within the pages of magazines such as

325 and Baedan. Domestication is not usually referred to or recognised

as a part of the problem (these days). It has been ‘off the table’ in

most discussions and accepted as inevitable. Alongside green anarchists,

nihilists appear to have it in their sights, along with all the other

techniques of control and domination that mass society imposes.

A conscious level of self-reflection appears to be key and common to

both green anarchy and nihilism, at least in theory if not always in

reality. By remaining critical of all social institutions both seek to

tear down internalised structures of morality, repression and leaving

behind the guilt-driven ineffectual activist mentality that accompanies

and characterises so much of broader anarchism. This extends to vehement

criticism of politics in general, embracing and referring to a stance of

antipolitics, sustaining a critique of the left and traditional ideas of

revolution. This is a step in the right direction in my eyes. It should

be obvious, but by encouraging critique I am not referring to ripping

other peoples’ efforts to shreds, meanwhile contributing nothing useful

to the conversation. Nonetheless, this phenomenon seems as widespread as

it is infuriating in anarchist ‘communities’ and literature.

The schism seems to begin where green anarchists will outline what they

are fighting for and oftentimes nihilists will not. Nihilism deeply

opposes any blueprint and seem to favour attack, sabotage, and rupture

for its own sake without a specific outcome in mind. This is probably

stemming from the failure of leftist ‘programs’; and therefore an

understandable reluctance to carry on in this tradition. Instead,

nihilists emphasise the sensation of liberation which comes from a

direct confrontation with a target. In this way it is similar to the way

green anarchists express a desire for immediacy and, in my opinion,

possibly comes from a similar place.

Both green anarchists and nihilist reject activism and

organisationalism. There is a focus on the subjective experience in

both, and a desire expressed for direct sensory experiences, whether in

a forest, ocean or cityscape. An overarching premise common to both

nihilism and green anarchy is that one should never wait around or ask

permission to be liberated or feel free.

KNOW-IT-ALLS AND NO-HOPERS

“Some contemporary insurrectionism affects a nihilist posture, proposing

in an offhand manner that everything that exists must be destroyed. To

indigenous or environmentalist ears, this project of universal

destruction can sound suspiciously like the program industrial

capitalism is already carrying out.”

Say you want an Insurrection

“Does nihilism mean that pretty much everything must go for a decent

life to be possible? If so then I’m a nihilist. It’s safe to say that

nihil-ism isn’t literally nothing-ism or one couldn’t be both a nihilist

and an anarchist. If it means the politics of desperation or

hopelessness, no thanks.”

John Zerzan

As John Zerzan, prominent anarchoprimitivist writer, has pointed out,

his problem with nihilists is not what they stand for but what they rule

out. I have noticed this too, but would say it is generally relegated to

the soul-sucking vortex of the internet where ‘know-it-alls’ and

contrarians find their miserable home. However, I have come across

plenty of articles and personal examples where nihilists have not ruled

out everything, and find joy and celebration within destruction. Indeed

some nihilist-influenced writing and themes I find genuinely intriguing

and seductive, inciting the desire to act like few others. The concept

of ‘passionate friendship’ (as mentioned by the nihilist/egoist writer

Wolfi Landstreicher), and a steadfast commitment to solidarity are

concepts that are embraced by many nihilists. These are principles that

are certainly more meaningful than whether or not you are in political

agreeance all the time. On the other hand, some pieces on nihilism and

individualist anarchism emphasise the pitfalls of being attached to

anything, so commitment or long term alignment with people or groups can

be more difficult, or ephemeral.

My own interpretation is that there is an elitist streak present in some

nihilist circles that is irritating. Of course, that claim has been

levelled at green anarchists and primitivists plenty of times too. It

would be wise to remember and focus on the fact that intellectualism,

leftism, and the academy are the enemy and have always drained energy

away from any struggle or threat to mass society. That said, in terms of

practical, tangible direct action and regular attacks on the

infrastructure of civilisation, I am inclined to argue that an awful lot

is motivated by a purely nihilistic influence, rather than a belief that

such a tactic will ‘bring it all down’. It has to be said that if the

nihilists are an observable phenomenon (which they would probably argue

against) they have been more inclined than most groups to engage in

risky and sustained direct action, predominantly fuelled by anger,

hatred, and revenge.

By all means, explode with rage. Refuse to reduce your raw anger to

demands or suspend your emotional responses to the tragedies around you.

Turn your years of pent-up anguish into a fearsome instrument of

revenge. Don’t translate your grievances into the language of your

oppressors—let them remain burning embers to be hurled from catapults.

Attack, negate, destroy.

But if it’s rage you’re feeling, why quote philosophy professors?

Say you want an Insurrection

THE FAILURES OF PRIMITIVISM

Coming from a green anarchist, anti-civilisation background, and heavily

primitivist-leaning myself, I can say there is a significant section of

primitivists that are essentially eco-activists that enjoy being

outdoors. There is therefore significant crossover with the realms of

green activism, student organising, drum circles, and pacifism, and as a

result, often, more militant anarchist folks get frustrated. I have

witnessed instances whereby folks advocate to ‘drop out’ of civilisation

and not give it any ‘energy’, as a primary mode of resistance.

Obviously, this does not go deep enough or address the crisis seriously.

It is important to recognise how dire the situation is and what level of

resistance would be necessary to disrupt the onslaught of

techno-industrialism. An acceptance of practical resistance has usually

been a major facet of primitivism but I would say this has been

dwindling of late, in its place a deluded idea that knowing traditional

skills will miraculously heal the entrenched pathology of civilisation.

I disagree. A level of philosophical support and solidarity for attacks

on civilisation, at the least, should go with the territory.

This is not the case, perhaps due to the co-option/dilution of terms

like rewilding and the ongoing campaign of greenwashing by environmental

groups, have had the effect of making primitivist concepts palatable to

moderate and fluffy hippy activists. I wish it wasn’t so, but I have to

concede that it has been an observable phenomenon at gatherings and

primitivist encampments I have attended. Conversations around

primitivism seem more common but fighting back against the ever-growing

tendrils of civilisation is less frequently discussed. Much of this

could be self-censorship, attributable to the green scare and the rise

of the surveillance state, so the conversations may take place

elsewhere. But in many cases it appears some folks just don’t see the

point to fighting back and have given up any hope for personal or

collective liberation and action. Others pursue change via the mundane,

reformist and futile channels of activism and politics.

It is a fine thing to tell stories, foster community, pursue

spirituality or magic, and enjoy the fire and stars, and ‘drop out’ of

civilisation so that it does not poison one’s psyche. I would argue that

all of this can be helpful. Without the flipside of a generalised

antipathy towards mass society and decisive strategic self-defence

component though, this can be a frustrating waste of time for those

genuinely fed up with civilisation. An over-reliance on positivity, hope

and magic is absurd. A degree of anger, resentment, bitterness, and a

desire for destructive change is a healthy sign and should be encouraged

and supported. Without this balance, a paralysing sense of morality

tends to take over, and a regression to milder ‘green/eco’ politics.

This soon becomes the default setting; and broader, unauthorised actions

are condemned as ‘jeopardising all we have worked for’, and careerist

eco-activist politicians hijack any struggle for their own purposes.

MEETING AT THE DEAD END

The nihilism I am advocating would pit itself against all those who wish

to manage the potential of the present, not against the people who are

managed. Our enemy is not society, our enemies are the people who

maintain and create society.

Uncontrollable: Contributions Toward a Conscious Nihilism

‘The dumb or elite try to pass us off as hoodlums. In some ways they’re

right. As we mention we are “for nothing” and in this we look to create

a trend that desires to destroy “everything”. We are not a political

party, but we are a party; one that celebrates tension, conflict, and

attack. Not against each other, but to everything that is everything as

we know it.’ Fire to the Prisons

The uncompromisingly militant perspective of many nihilist-influenced

articles offers a counterpoint to this current failure of primitivism –

it primarily advocates and supports property destruction, direct action,

attack and sabotage against the mechanisms of society. On the far end of

the spectrum are groups like ITS and Wild Reaction, from their

communiqués it is clear they have no qualms about killing folks. Other

nihilist- influenced texts seem more measured, and offer messages of

friendship, community, and favour attack against the machine to

facilitate a move toward something better. This aligns well with green

anarchist ideas, which encourage the dismantling of the infrastructure

of civilisation to slow the assault on our planet, bodies, and psyches

and allow us to heal.

In my personal dealings with those who have a more nihilistic outlook

they have shown themselves to be quite reliable, solid friends and have

shown consideration of my thoughts regarding green anarchy and

primitivism. Much more so than other ‘radical’ friends who jump to the

defence of civilisation, and lecture me about activist causes I should

be supporting more. In general I have found them to have a stronger and

deeper critique of mass society, and a willingness to form bonds rather

than fight all day about our differences, particularly as many of them

are sick and tired of urban existence and what is on offer. This has

been a welcome antidote to the waves of anarcholeftist social justice

‘experts’ who revel in the banality of iphones, popular culture, modern

‘life’ and act as apologists for the techno-nightmare engulfing the

planet.

‘While many of us feel the specific analysis of institutions, dynamics

and origins of civilisation is a necessary project, as well as the

investigation of our true desires and their separation from manufactured

ones, nihilism may also be an important element to integrate into our

deconstructive process. It is actually a liberatory process to be freed

from the restrictions of thinking within the confines of conceiving of

another world. That responsibility should be left to individuals and

their communities of affinity. It cannot be fully dreamed, let alone

realised, until all power is destroyed!’

A Morefus – Nihilism as a healthy influence

If, in the fine words of Klee Benally, it is preferable to be

‘accomplices not allies’, I see a possible and potential relationship

with some nihilist-leaning individuals. These folks support the

sabotage, destruction, and permanent dismantling of civilisation, which

would force civilisation to retreat and wildness to flourish. There may

still be a rift between nihilists and green anarchists, and sometimes

are goals will not be the same, but oftentimes I think the targets and

the enemies will be closely related.

Riflebird