This week saw the 20th anniversary of the Columbine High School massacre. The massacre shocked a Western World used to adult serial killers, because we didn’t believe that high schoolers could also be capable of such evil. In the aftermath of the massacre, the consensus was that the motivation for the deed came from nihilism. This essay asks: are we still nihilists?
History can be thought of as a series of attempts to solve the basic existential question of what we’re supposed to be doing here on this planet.
For many centuries, we had religion, and the struggle between good and evil, chaos and order. But then we killed God, and (as Nietzsche predicted) this threw us back into Nature, and the world of eternal struggle. This played itself out in the titanic clash of empires that was World War One, and the following clash of nations that was World War Two. After three decades of trauma, we decided that we’d had enough bloodshed, and so we tried a new narrative.
The postwar consensus was based around pure hedonism. After three decades of deprivation, something as simple as being able to buy a milkshake or a cheeseburger on demand was seen as a great pleasure that demanded appreciation. Later, the number of television channels to which one was subscribed was the sign of material fortune. The problem was, of course, that hedonism is not an answer to spiritual problems.
The Columbine High School massacre was perhaps the first major sign that the postwar consensus had failed. The prosperity the Boomers enjoyed was based on the idea that material consumption was the reason for human existence. This was great fun, but it was only ever a distraction. It never solved the basic existential dilemma.
Klebold and Harris’s actions were an example of something that this column has previously called anarcho-nihilism. This is where one proposes to destroy the pre-existing system without offering any alternative system that might replace it. One simply destroys for the sake of destroying.
Anders Breivik and Brenton Tarrant were later examples of this phenomenon. Both men wrote entire manifestos that detailed at length their grievances with the world and the way it was being run. Enemy crimes were listed exhaustively, but neither man suggested much in the way of an alternative. Both will go down in history, but neither as a builder of nations.
Anarcho-nihilism could be said to be the challenge of our time. This isn’t the same as simple nihilism, which was the problem of previous times, because nihilism didn’t always lead to a violent assault on the old order. It usually led to simple suicide, which meant that the ruling class were not particularly bothered by it. Since March 14th this year, there have been more deaths to suicide in New Zealand than to terrorism, but the latter has taken up a hundred thousand times more emotional energy.
If we are to avoid going down the path of Breiviks and Tarrants destroying the whole world in a hail of bullets, we need to assert some kind of anti-nihilism that meets the emotional needs of the masses, while not repeating the mistakes of previous attempts at this.
An idea of what form this anti-nihilism might take can be seen in the various corners of cyberspace. In 1999, The Shroomery was only just getting started. Now it is one of the most popular counter-culture websites in the world, with an Alexa ranking in the top 30,000. Here it’s possible to find all kinds of discussions about aspects of spirituality that ordinary people would have trouble being able to comprehend – at least for now.
Any anti-nihilistic movement powerful enough to truly appeal to a great number of people will have to achieve a number of things. At a minimum, it must convince people that their actions in this world, and specifically whether or not those actions increase or decrease the suffering of their fellow sentient beings, are meaningful.
Achieving this may require the promulgation of the kind of sentiment that arises as a result of the psychedelic experience, the kind that is often derided as “hippie” or “new age” but which, if examined closely, answers with awesome clarity the questions of how we got here and what we’re supposed to be doing. This might require the reinstatement of something like the Eleusinian Mysteries, so that we can collectively revel in something beyond the material.
At time of writing, in 2019, it seems like not only are we nihilists, but we are destructive ones, and not only that, but the destructive and nihilistic sentiments are getting worse. That is certainly cause for alarm, but it’s also cause to take action, and to help promote an alternative. With enthusiastic promotion of psychedelic medicines for curing spiritual illness, it may be possible for us to finally overcome the threat of nihilism, and to allow a new spirituality to rise.
No, we did this. Look into your own eyes in the mirror. Do you have a reason to live?
Ryder Jenkins
The mom Sue of one of those boys makes really good videos. But she low key injects anti gun stuff even though her kid got some guns illegally. Also they made shitty unworkable bombs. They originally wanted to blow everything up. They were Neo Nazis either or anything, some people claim they had a lot of diverse friends. Also the story "do you believe in god" question is fake. The dead girl who "said it" never said it, the girl who said it is still alive. And fuck those kids. Losers.
FYI all these happening nostalgia threads are fear mongering
Anthony Martinez
Sue (Dylan's mom) ended up keeping Dylan's clothes and gear he wore for the shooting, and mentioned in her book how she kept his blood soaked hat because of memories, and how she had sewn the B on the back.
>20 years >Are we still We literally haven't gone anywhere. All the music is the same, just with different niggers. All the films are the same, just with different vapid whores. All the political issues are the same, just global warming -> climate change, ethnic minorities -> people of colour, etc. All the school shootings are the same, just virgins -> incels. This is the "change" they keep going on about. This is the "change" that the white man is "afraid of". Everything has been stagnant for decades, and apparently only the white man finds the games we play to hide it disturbing.
The term "Nihilism" is used in such a nebulous and manipulative way.
Somehow people act like epistemological nihilism, existential nihilism, moral nihilism, a want for destruction in the world, and a sense of helplessness in their own lives are all really one thing. And, as far as I can tell, all of those are true for very very few people. Most people have only one or two on that list. Kind of like how a lot of moral nihilists might have cars.
Although I think most moral nihilists would also be existential nihilists.
Epistemological nihilism is the final redpill. When you see that epistemic justification is purely social in nature, and thus that "to know" is literally "to conform," you become incorruptible.
Connor Howard
I like that when Dylan shot some dork crying for help he said "Here, I'll help you" and then shot him right in the eye. Sounds like a villain from a movie.
I say that in the knowledge any children I have will ultimately live to experience the horrific future that ultimately awaits mankind. I could never subject anyone I love to that.
Jayden Ross
That epistemological nihilism is the final redpill. I think there is a very limited number of things we can truly know, and then working in the uncertain word of empirical observation we can try and kluge together things that seam to work.
I don't believe it makes sense to say "to know" really means "to conform" because the notion of a social situation exists within uncertain empiricism, and what I know is an analysis that comes prior to any belief about the existence of others or conforming to others.
Brandon Robinson
>tldr weed lmao (((we)))
Brandon Moore
take your meds
Leo Green
>what I know is an analysis that comes prior to any belief about the existence of others or conforming to others Knowledge is traditionally considered to be Justified True Belief. Any/all analysis you perform upon a belief can only lead you to a conclusion about its truth. Justification does not even come into play until you attempt to convince another that your belief is true. For Robinson Crusoe, alone on a desert island, there can be no difference between a justified true belief and any other true belief he might hold.
Angel Parker
>Knowledge is traditionally considered to be Justified True Belief. Can you define what you mean by justified true belief and tell me why something that is true and you know it to be true isn't knowledge?
Point is, I see no reason to believe that Robinson Crusoe does not have knowledge. And it seems silly to me for knowledge to require justification if: > Justification does not even come into play until you attempt to convince another that your belief is true. Because the existence of "another" person is not knowledge. It is an uncertain belief that people have for practical reasons and stems from an uncertain empirical analysis of the word, and not logic, where knowledge actually stems.
Luis Ortiz
Boikott isreal
Luke Gutierrez
empirical analysis of the world*
David Moore
>I'm not seeing this like you are... I see no reason to believe that Robinson Crusoe does not have knowledge. And I see no reason to believe that "knowledge" is even a valid concept. You're claiming it is, and that Robby has it. The burden of proving that claim is on you. If you don't like the JTB account of knowledge, feel free to provide another. >logic, where knowledge actually stems Logic is limited to the domain of truth. Knowledge is generally considered to be a more complex concept than mere truth.
Its like we could put them on an Island and re-write their pasts, shape their future their so blissfully unaware. Just kidding though, whites actually have morals.
I remember a survivor of the attack being interviewed on TV. His sister had been killed. Her name was Megan and he broke down saying her name. I remember this vividly because it was the first time I'd seen anything like it an I'd had a friend named Megan in high school. The interview chilled me in a way other reporting on the killings had not. Only there's no one named Megan on the victim list. I'm not trying to get all Berenstein about this, but by chance does anyone here remember this interview?
They were losers that got guns banned and made life in public schools a living hell for the next two decades.
Aaron Kelly
Did they ever release all the tapes they recorded? I have a suspicion one or more contained something racist and that is why they won't release them. Pretty sure one of them can be heard saying nigger while a student was on the phone with authorities.
Asher Butler
maybe YouTube. youd be surprised with some of the old footage you can stumble onto
