Anarchist Philosopher speaks of environmentalism, fascism, morality, religious cults and Nihilism. All are, of course, connected.
Anarchist Philosopher Persona, we welcome and congratulate you here and now! How have you been?
Well, of course, you know.
Yeah?
The truth is that, fundamentally, we’re all going to die.
Of course. What would life mean if it weren’t for death.
What? That is, what does it, in its essence, even mean? It means nothing. I truly hate these sentences. As in, if all days were days off and we had no work, they wouldn’t be days off. That’s slave mentality. It’s like saying, for example, that freedom is meaningless if there’s no oppression. This kind of depleted scholastics contribute to nothing but legitimizing the current state of affairs.
Well, death is pretty much the current state of affairs. It is a fundamental truth, just like you said.
That is not what I meant. Why, I find it hard to understand, why exactly would I state that we’re all going to die as a fundamental truth?
I don’t know, why did you?
What I intended to say was that we all – as in humanity – are going to die.
Oh.
There aren’t enough resources in the world to sustain our current way of life, which is not going to change in time, and the growing mass of people who wish to partake in this life style. Because, of course, when I said ‘our current way of life’ I was referring, by ‘our’, to the global north. Resources are dwindling globally. Basic resources, such as water and nutrition.
Is this new to you?
This is not new to me, no. but I’ve been engaged in a long discussion which is, of course, far from being over, with some of the residents in our anarchist commune, where we discussed recent years apparent world over inclination towards authoritarian, far-right and fascist leaders and ideologies. One of my friends, who is a strict Hegelian Marxist, well, for example, all he had to say had to do with dialectical shifts, which isn’t a sufficient explanation for me. You’d expect more from a materialist these days, I said to him. And so, we started to talk about why now. Of course, as a strict Hegelian Marxist, I believe he had a great part of the picture right. but not all of it.
Are you going to thoroughly explain how current global political inclinations came to be?
Well, of course, I cannot explain it. I can hypothesize about it. Firstly, if we look at the turn of the century, the 20th century of course, pre-first world war –
Can you keep it short somehow?
No.
Right.
Pre-first world war, well, better yet. I’ll start from the present. Basically, essentially, we all agreed that the current shift in politics today, and when I say shift, I mean, of course, changes that had taken place in the past 45 years or so, well, we all agreed that the current state of affairs has to do with massive waves of immigration. These waves are, on the surface, caused due to political disasters, to which who should be held responsible is a question for an entirely different discussion.
Hmm.
But then another friend in the commune said, well, she’s been working on her thesis in history about Germany between the two world wars, but of course has vast knowledge of European fascism, well, of course, it is alright to just say fascism without adding European. But, as I was saying, she commented that the rise of fascism is Europe in the 20th century had in fact very little to do with immigration. And since nowadays many people are inclined to compare politics today to that which introduced the rise of fascism in Europe, which is, of course, both an enlightening comparison but also a very narrow, a very, I should say, disabling analogy, which prevents us from fully investigating prominent current factors. So, firstly –
Firstly –
One cannot simply discard the massive impact the weapon industry had before the first world war had started. So, what I intend to say is, that this is a factor in history which supports the comparison rather that deflate it. In the sense that, true, immigration was not a catalysator for the rise of fascism we’ve seen some hundred years ago in Europe. But it was a major, materialistic of course, catalysator. Just as it is today, in finer, more delicate ways. Also, there was a lot less understating, or concern, or perhaps, well, more to the point, a lot less exploitation and depletion of resources back then.
Well we learn from history. Not only its lessons, but its mistakes as well.
Well, yes. What are you saying with this?
I’m saying that what formed itself to be fascism some hundred years ago came to be because of reasons and factors relevant to that time. But it’s left a mark on political discourse, and once it’s there, it’s there. It’s up for grabs.
Yes. I don’t understand.
I’m saying that history is uh… is not a theater background poster. It’s being drawn from.
So you’re, well, essentially, as a figure of speech, Hegelian?
Hmm, as a figure of speech.
Yes. Very much so. So, if we push for the conclusion, there will be a survival war for resources.
And we’re all going to die.
Well, we, and when I say we, I refer to, of course, the global north, but of course, the most prosperous, weaponized parts of the global north, we will probably live a little longer. But we’re all going to die due to global warming. And this makes one think about how one lives hers or his life. Fundamentally, and I don’t normally speak like that, it’s either, well, yes, it’s either some cult-like, religious environmentalism, and I say cult-like and religious for the simple reason that it has very little, or perhaps none, impact on reality, well, it’s either that, or nihilism.
Nihilism!
Yes. Essentially.
So you’re either in a cult or a nihilist? Which would you choose?
Well, obviously, of course. You’re intelligent enough to come up with the answer without making undesirable assumptions about me being a part of an anarchist collective.
So it’s a cult that believes that no matter what we do, we’re doomed anyway? Isn’t that a nihilist cult?
That’s a very good, purely philosophical, question. What would you call a cult that believes its members’ actions change nothing of their fate, and yet, they continue doing whatever they define as actions towards changing their fate?
It must have something to do with predestination and Christianity.
Well –
Oh yeah! Calvinism, right?
Well, no. no.
Are you religious?
I’m an anarchist philosopher.
I’m so confused.
Well. Yes. Indeed. We live in a very confusing time. But I’m sure, well, I believe and I hypothesize, that we will die less confused.
Right. Good to know.
And the cult-like way of living I have mentioned, well, it’s a purely philosophical, and in a sense of course religious, question. A question of morality –
I wish we had the time –
Which I am far from formulation even the slightest outlines of an answer to.
Right! so let us know when you get there.
There will not be an answer, of course. These things have no answers. Only weighing of choices, and perhaps, in this case, well, somewhat regardless of their actual consequences. I would recommend reading Darren Allen, in this aspect.
Oh he’s brilliant! Well we… wish you well, here and now. We thank you and congratulate you!
Thank you. Of course.
The Sewers 