Nihilism vs meaningless

I have encountered the following attitude on numerous occasions: If we elect not to participate in the American electoral system when that system offers us no meaningful choice, we are engaged in “nihilism.”

Nihilism is the belief that all values are baseless and that nothing can be known or communicated. It is often associated with extreme pessimism and a radical skepticism that condemns existence. A true nihilist would believe in nothing, have no loyalties, and no purpose other than, perhaps, an impulse to destroy. (Encycopedia of Philosophy, Internet Branch)

I suggest that if we do not participate in the system as it is structured for us, that we are asking for a positive alternative to meaninglessness. We will have, in November, two men who mirror each other on virtually all policies (except perhaps abortion). Choosing “none of the above” is an informed choice. Voting for either is the opposite.

13 thoughts on “Nihilism vs meaningless

  1. “The System” from “Fire Up,” Recorded By Merl Saunders and Jerry Garcia, 1973

    Who will you murder
    For democracy
    Who’s next to be slain

    People wait to be
    Sucked up
    By your genocide campaign

    Murdered for
    Technology
    Natural resources too

    While earth faces extinction
    Guess what?
    They say prayers on the moon

    Chorus
    I’m talkin’, talkin’ about the system (system)
    Said I’m talkin’, talkin’ about the system (system)
    I said the funky, funky system (system)
    I said the funky, funky system(system)

    Who will you murder
    For democracy
    Who’s next to be slain

    People wait to be
    Sucked up
    By your genocide campaign

    No sociology
    Equality of life
    We’ll only save ourselves
    By lessening human strife

    Feel the system
    Stalk the land
    And with death goes
    Hand in hand

    [chorus]

    Who will you murder
    For democracy
    Who’s next to be slain

    People wait to be
    Sucked up
    By your genocide campaign

    No sociology
    Equality of life
    We’ll only save ourselves
    By lessening human strife

    So the system
    Stalks the land
    And with death goes
    Hand in hand

    [chorus]

    Said the system, yeah
    The funky, funky system (system)
    The funky, funky system (system)
    The funky, funky system (system)
    [etc]

    “Fire Up,” Recorded By Merl Saunders and Jerry Garcia, 1973

    Like

  2. I think not voting is a form of political nihilism. it’s conceding electoral political power to the god squad.

    Like

    1. Interesting … Is “nihilism” a word that can be limited by descriptors like “political”? Isn’t is a pregnant-type concept, all or nothing? There are a multitude of ways to influence public policy outside of voting. But when the choice offered is essentially meaningless (or, as I maintain, self-defeating in that election of Trojan Horse Democrats is more destructive than of erstwhile Republicans), the decision not to play the game, but rather to use alternative means to exert influence (OWS) makes more sense to me.

      I do vote when a candidate is in my view worthy, and I do not demand that all of my attitudes be satisfied. I am glad to accept something over nothing, but that is the great lie about D vs R, that the former actually offers something. I easily voted for Schweitzer several times even though, as mahmet reminds me, he’s an environmental disaster.

      Like

      1. maybe nihilism is better understood as an all or nothing ism. what isn’t all or nothing is how humans relate to isms. for that, their are gradations.

        but you make good points. apathy is probably a better suited word regarding not voting. nihilism actually implies there is more thought going on in abstaining from voting, when in reality I think it’s mostly not giving a shit and viewing the process as too corrupt to care about the outcomes and possible consequences.

        Like

        1. I am absolutely not apathetic about politics or wanting Americans to have a more democratic country and better lives. But when it is reduced to voting for two parties that have the same source of finance, such a choice is a charade. There are indeed good people who want to serve the public good. But the filtering process, getting more thorough as the office level gets higher, weeds these people out. Candidates can and do bypass this process, but that is the exception and not the rule. Kucinich was taken down in redistricting, Feingold by CU, Bingaman fed up? (Bingaman leaving probably clears the way for Tester’s FJRA.)

          It’s not that politics is futility, but mindless party voting is. The Republican base holds its people accountable – George HW Bush went down in part because he violated his no-new-tax pledge. All of the others are watched closely. Democrats are just happy when one of theirs is elected, and re-vote them no matter how they perform in office.

          That is dysfunctional.

          Like

          1. I’m speaking more generally; nearly half the voting public doesn’t vote. those who don’t do so for reasons similar to yours, I would imagine, are an extreme minority–which you yourself seem to imply when you repeatedly state how stupid most people are.

            Like

  3. If “not voting is a form of political nihilism,” what is voting? Wouldn’t it equate to an exaggerated belief that Party values are real?

    Voters would above all believe in something, especially loyalty to like-minded Party dogma, a belonging. And there seems to be some conviction that American elections serve some noble public purpose. Voters impulsively seem to believe in hope and change, and relish serial abuse by the officials they elect. Munchausen syndrome perhaps?

    Even the Pope doesn’t enjoy this kind of blind faith among his flock. Wierd!

    Like

    1. I had to look it up: “Münchausen syndrome is a psychiatric factitious disorder wherein those affected feign disease, illness, or psychological trauma to draw attention or sympathy …”

      Like

  4. Nicely done, a Budge-like blow.

    You know who is stupid, who is not. You know lots of people, like I do, and know that they are almost all good at some things and smart about some things. And if you don’t know it, groups of people have characteristics quite apart from the individuals within the group.

    And you know that groups exercise psychological control over members, keeping them in line, forcing conformity on them.

    So to stand apart from groups is to be anti-social, self-informed, arrogant, dismissive, conceited … But maybe not. Maybe it just looks that way on the inside looking out. Or maybe I’m an asshole who needs to join the Knights of Columbus and get his mind right. All I know is that when I became self-employed I was scared shitless, and it was the best thing that ever happened to me. I didn’t have to walk a tightrope or belong to groups.

    Like

      1. I’ve never seen you lose patience with a dense person, right?

        Knowledge carries a burden with it. Democrats and tea party members seem happy. For me, there is great joy in understanding. I do not like being anyone’s stooge.

        By the way, and fwiw, fear overrides intellect. What appears to be stupidity is merely rational thought systems overcome by it. Ellul said as much in the 60’s – that constant agitprop, which is what we have, destroys intellects.

        Like

Leave a comment