Thursday, 2 October 2014

Pseudo-Nihilists: or Still seeing 'videogame' fascists and self-destroying reactionaries

Pseudo-Nihilists: or Still seeing 'videogame' fascists 
and self-destroying reactionaries

by Kat Ulrike

"Future. This topic has always excited people. Scenario of impending catastrophe, designed to destroy the human race, presented to people of different ages in different ways. The prophets have appeared in antiquity religions believed that this car will be a higher power. With the development of scientific and technological progress began to appear, and other versions of the end of human civilization. Some predicted the fall of a giant meteorite, other - other natural disasters, but with the advent of weapons of mass destruction the most popular version of the end of the world has become the self-destruction of the human race."

These are the words this person had read weeks ago. Crudely translated from Russian, this writer had sought how man and its technological progress also concedes with destruction of its own self; especially with the advanced weaponries that had been predicted centuries ago by those whom had foretell the future such as a coming deluge.

However, in spite of people seeing physical damage as depicted by bombs if not hunger, what this writer sees is that the today's culture that is lucrative has become a weapon of mass destruction. That Man's failure to harness control comes an effect that is far from its productive expectations. As today's culture, left unharnessed and tempered had turned man into waste, it is likely to say that that those whom are deeply rooted are facing with really hard decisions that has to be made in pursuit of averting total disaster and yet those whom chose to be idle while swimming in the current unknowing where will it end.
Right is the statement taken that with the development of scientific and technological progress began to appear so is the idea of destruction, if left unharnessed, if left guided, so it hastens self-destruction, to barbarism as what Rosa Luxembourg stated years ago.

However, what is really destructive is the rise of those who pose for a certain idea, yet fail to analyze the realities surrounding them other than mere observation. Influenced mostly by their vices with a smattering of thought from online pages, these people speak their so-called aspirations and yet likely to conceive as Reaction, or Counterreaction to an issue.
They tried to act nihilistic, counter-cultural, counter-current, or anything that counters the prevailing norm and more of the society through their statements. But on the other hand, they have less aspirations nor alternatives to offer other than the word "self"; much more that they are supporting a rotting state in degenerating a once healthy society, and its self-destruction just to keep their interests in the expense of many.

One likely example was the statement of Ria Bautista of the band Paramita. It may sound near-nihilistic by negating the protests happened during the State of the Nation Address, calling them "apathetic whiners" without "offering any solution" while tackling nothing about the system; that somehow likely to consider it as Counterreeactionary for she offers no solution other than the individual, the lonesome self whom actually limits "change" to its own self than for the benefit of its own fellow and the community.
However, in an article made in, Bautista stated that her statement posted on her Facebook page is not intended to vilify the leftist groups and supporters of the rallies against the government. It is also not her intention to attract “anti-rally” sentiments but a call to action for everyone to do his/her part in nation building. She goes on by saying she is not against rallies, but she is not in favor either, which is two different things.
Yet still, it had attracted criticism in spite of thinly-veiled denial such as "not being against activists/rallyists nor against street protests but doesn't share the same enthusiasm when it comes to taking my fight to the streets" and end up be described as bullying. Her fans did afford counter those who criticized her statement if not telling to calm down or venting clauses like "freedom of speech," but in this writer's view still despite her fencesitting approach of neither support or oppose ends described as Counterreaction as she, her fans, or any other apologetics had afford to react in an existing reaction; much more in indirectly defending the status quo by countering those who protest by saying stupid questions like "how much did you pay for rallying?" "Why always making trouble instead of cooperation?" alongside raising the "red scare" card and a series of hecklings that really invokes their Counterreactionary idea (of being against the system yet trying to keep 'order').

But in spite of these, still what are they actually doing other than their so-called productive work that benefits themselves and less of their communities (contrary to statements such as taking part in nation building) is living in comfort and escaping the reality, much more in justifying apathy by trying to deny reality (nihil) in favor of a tangible illusion such as a better, luxiourious life.
And yes, it is destructive as it progresses, destructive yet without significance other than an intentional abscence of concsiousness. viewing an inconvenient truth, struggling life as being utterly meaningless, and eventually deciding to give up, escape, if not destroy the bonds of existence largely for this reason.  

Admittingly speaking, this person used to be playing Red Alert, Medal of Honor, Tactics Ogre, Dark Omen, or any other game but at the same time reading works from both left and right. The works of Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin, Mao Zedong, as well as Oswald Sprengler, Jose Streel, or Guilliame Faye, did influence him in his writeups concerning politics, society, and culture while satisfied in an accomplished missions in front of the screen playing a game for a respite; but those whom parroting statements and even ideas without a just, concrete understanding are likely to be influenced by what they just observe without immersing, or even posing, imitating their 'idols', yet still having a smattering of an idea they're parroting of that some of which are through their statements.
Some had cried for another Hitler, Marcos, Martial Law, Palparan, or any other dictator or tyrant people abhorred due to their actions, and offering no solution (as they gave up their consciousness) other than submitting to the rotting order of things, and treats 'change' as an individual matter that undergoes close scrutinization if not a hollow rhetoric frequently said for chrissakes.

Again, it is destructive than creating an idealised future. Destructive in a sense that despite desperately trying to keep interests lies a community in ruins, a people wiped out of their existence. Nihil except fearing death and submission out of mere survival.

Well, in spite of concerns coming, the market for these people, such as computer games, social networking sites, and others continue to increase as these youths makes the computer rental "full house." Some of these youths whom afford to play those games, watching shows, end self-proclaiming as "rebels" with all their near-nihilistic fantasies. Whether they are trying to act left or right, those games provide respite and vent their passions the way they afford to march and confront their adversaries like the system or their own rivals.
There were those whom became activists, political soldiers so to speak that by their passions, no matter how less taught in their supposed guiding line, they want to take political power through the barrel of the gun.

That obviously they know it ain't easy to attain that with just few shots "if they do so." The actions made by these trying hard trigger happy wannabes cannot be like those of Ulrike Meinhof, Gudrun Essenlin or Andreas Baader citing the fact that the latter three did their actions to justify people's struggle against the system, calling their bank robberies as expropriations as its example. They may speak terms like "rebellion" or "revolution", yet mostly driven by their personal interests really far from destroying a repressive system and steer social change. They have sought the figures of people clad in keffiyehs, reading the Qur'an, and brandishing AKs, yet they failed to understand why they fight the system that is repressive, or why they self-destruct in a populated place like Tel Aviv.

And if they afford to do so, they can't as they are likely to act like stooges of the order while parroting pseudo-nihilist sentiment such as what Hitler or Mussolini did decades ago. Both wanted nothing but change, only to turn out that they want nothing but order to the disgust of those whom once supporting the two. Will they insist that is nihil that also means keeping firm to the status quo sand limiting change to the so-called self? They are plain, simple Counterreaction to an existing reaction rather than partaking to a Revolution if that's the case, regardless of what they are babbling of.

Anyways, they are just posing if not parroting a thought that is contrary to their ideas, much more that they are steering anything down below towards destruction leaving without a meaning other than nihil. Let them destroy the world as they want while those who revolt against the same order they whine with will make something anew from its ruins as Shiva invokes destruction and recreation. 

Right was Bakunin, as he said:

“Let us therefore trust the eternal Spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternal source of all life. The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!”