Sunday, 26 April 2015

Nepal

The Gadhimai Festival in Nepal, which sees thousands of animals slaughtered for the purpose of religious ritual.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/26/nepal-earthquake-death-toll-climbs-towards-2000-as-world-responds

Thus is worked out, from maggots up to man, the universal law of the violent destruction of living beings. The whole earth, continually steeped in blood, is nothing but an immense altar on which every living thing must be sacrificed without end, without restraint, without respite until the consummation of the world,the extinction of evil, the death of death Joseph de Maistre

35 comments:

  1. That's karma, as people from that part of the world might say and indeed might be saying right now....

    Awesome quote too. I will have to look up this de Maistre fellow.

    ReplyDelete
  2. You abject monster.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I really try to feel sorry for the victims of the earthquake, but when I watch this idiotic, barbaric and nauseous animal mass slaughter, I think their God perhaps changed His taste and sent them a hint so that they would change His menu.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am so proud I have not created another demon (human). Even human babies sicken me. They are little giggling demons born only to destroy. Hopefully God will destroy them before they torture any more animals.

      Delete
    2. Your comment is unintentionally hilarious, anon. Or is it intentionally? Still hilarious, though.

      Delete
  4. There's no moral here, other than that over and over, every level of sentient life pays a sum of gore to the more powerful force of nature.

    We're all eligible towards such.

    ReplyDelete
  5. http://antinatalismo.blogspot.in/2011/03/these-days-another-one-of-those.html

    ReplyDelete
  6. Bit off topic... I'd just like you to know that I'm going to put a link on the Trigger Warning site—my new project, with Rachel Haywire—to this blog, cos I love it. Can't find your email, hell of a week, so I'm letting you know here, Karl. Cheers!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Ann! Am liking the new project:-)

      Delete
  7. The first comment is not nice. At least think of the suffering children who didn't do anything wrong.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What makes you think he doesn't think of said children? His comment doesn't mean he accepts the notion of karma either.

      Delete
  8. "There are some things no-one can bear. Problems in this universe...for which there are no answers...for which nothing can be done. Nothing."

    Muad'Dib

    ReplyDelete
  9. +1 for quoting de Maistre. I've come to the conclusion that reactionary/conservative and many religous writers/philosophers (let alone pessimists) not only wrote better than optimistic atheists and their ilk, but also had more profound things to say. Think of Kierkgegaard, Pascal, Gomez Davila, Bloy, Maurras, Donoso Cortes, Pessoa etc. (Paul Valery, for example, wrote: "Optimists write badly.")

    NB: I'm not even religious, or at least I don't believe in a religion, but have been enjoying such writers way more. (Cioran and Schopenhauer, too, had been studying various religions.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Addendum: I might add that of course Cioran and Schopenhauer studied mostly eastern religions -- Islam I don't like at all, for obvious reasons. In Soumission, Houllebecq made the claim (quite fitting, I think) that Islam is the only real life-affirming religion, and that's what people in the west nowadays want. They want to be sugar-coated and what not, they want optimism and future-oriented worldviews. Now, according to Max Weber, protestantism was world-affirming and one reason for Europe's (especially England's and Germany's) rapid industrialistation. Though I think Schopenhauer is right when he calls the Quran a "bad" book, and praises the Upanishad's. There is little wisdom in the Quran, and the fact that it's the favorite religion of the left -- which once was known for its Ideologiekritik and criticism of religions -- is another reason I find it abhorrent.

      Anyway, I gotta say I'd be fine if suicide was legalized in the whole world, no ifs, buts or ands. If it was simply allowed to walk into a suicide clinic and commit suicide peacefully, without all the terror and pain that usually goes with it, I'd be fine. Antinatalism is doomed anyway due to the rise of Islam (especially in Europe): while especially far-east asians like the japanese and south-koreans as well as white europeans have a low birth rate, the same can't be said for muslims and the third world in general. Africa will be home to 4 billion people in 2100. They will, of course, try to get into europe and install their backwards culture there that praises fertility. And so on. So it's the third world we need to convince of antinatalism. If we keep them at bay, we might have a chance. But I doubt it. I mean, how would you convince indigenous people of not breeding? They won't understand.

      So a worldwide legalization of suicide is really the only option I see so far. People are simply to stubborn to be convinced of such a lofty goal as not breeding. I mean, even the japanese don't breed because of antinatalism, but because of hedonism. A child is work, after all.

      So, where to go? I think the best one can do is inner emigration. There is no other option I'm aware of. To renounce the world, I've also thought of joining a monastry, but I'm not religious, and I wouldn't be able to praise life and other such bullshit.

      Sorry for the wall of text, I'm simply frightened by the future of Europe and the west, since I can't or better: won't go anywhere else. I'm already feeling alien in some parts here in Germany due to the growing numbers of immigrants, and if the birthrate of natives stays low, it will be only worse in the future. And I gotta live for another 40-50 years. Even Japan wouldn't really be a culture I'd feel comfortable living in, as a foreign westener. I'm also frightened that the growing number of muslims will make legalizing suicide in Europe even harder, since they represent primitive backwards values. Soumission did frighten me, I got to admit.

      So yeah, where to go, what to do? I think if suicide was legal I'd make use of it during the next few years, but as it is, I don't feel like gassing myself to death, or jumping from a building, or hanging myself. It's really quite arrogant to presume everyone shares your life-affirming mindset.

      Delete
    2. Well stated, anon. I don't live in Europe, but I share your lament over the gradual loss of its culture. I haven't ever been suicidal, however. The tragic nature of life is painfully apparent to me, but I agree with Schopenhauer that committing suicide is a capitulation to life rather than an overcoming of it (although I agree that it ought not to be criminalized). As a result, I've also thought about joining a monastery, even though like you I'm not religious. Part of me thinks doing so would be completely disingenuous but another part of me says that in a way I already accept many of the central doctrines of Christianity, for example, and that I could be made to accept those I currently don't accept without great difficulty.

      I don't like all the praising of life either, but I think it can be easily interpreted as shorthand for praise of compassion. Paradoxically, on one reading, the anti-natalist is an anti-natalist precisely due to a love of life. I don't hate what humans are, but what they do, and what they do in almost all cases creates and sustains a withering amount of pain and suffering, such that I choose not to bring more humans into existence. Passing judgment on who they are makes little sense, since they have no control over that. Nor am I alone going to change the fact that people will continue to procreate in droves. In Matthew, the disciples discern that Jesus' teaching directly implies that one will not marry or have children. Jesus then replies by saying, yes, but that not everyone can be eunuchs (the context of which refers to celibate people and possibly even anti-natalists), but that if one can be such a person, one should.

      Delete
    3. In less than 2 decades, the population spawned from reintroduced beavers has grown a tenfold; if we don't start building pest-exclusion fences around the regions they haven't spread into yet, I fear for the future of every forest and stream in Belgium!

      "the Quran, and the fact that it's the favorite religion of the left"
      Your blanket accusation begs for precision -- any.

      "it's the third world we need to convince of antinatalism. If we keep them at bay, we might have a chance."
      I can see the ingenousness of this! The best way to spread awareness is to strain contact and strengthen the barriers of world hierarchy. Then our child-low hedonism borne by fraudulent affluence will trickle down onto the pensionless savages.

      Delete
    4. Nice straw men, Bazompora.

      Delete
    5. You neglect to contradict supposed strawmen of mine though. I however have never heard of non-muslims on "the left" (the Anglo-American left of liberals and christian-democrats or the Continental European left of socialists and ecologists?) who have islam as their "favorite religion", so I would like to hear at least some specifics.

      Delete
  10. This is a bit unrelated to the article, but would anyone know of a master list of anti-natalist/pessimistic authors, or books/authors that at least have such themes? I know the big names, but someone like de Maistre is relatively unknown and not someone you would expect to have written that. Just curious....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You can start with the list on the Ligotti forums and go from there: http://www.ligotti.net/showthread.php?t=7327

      Delete
    2. Excellent list. Thanks.

      Delete
  11. Hey folks,a long time anti-natalist here.Just wanna find out if anyone knows as to why Mike of Xhentric blog & Whybother message board is not posting anything these days.I even wrote him a number of mails but he has not responded.Its just not like him. I am a close friend of his & I miss him & I am sure other readers also miss him.Does anyone know anything about him? I am really worried.
    Thanks.And special thanks to Karl for keeping this blog alive.

    ReplyDelete
  12. It'll be nice when the old guard of antinatalism dies out and we can have a pessimism that isn't fucking garbage again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mind elaborating?

      Delete
    2. Or you could drop dead, and then you wouldn't have this problem.

      Delete
    3. Oh, I will likely die before the vestiges of garbage are cleaned away and a new pessimism can grow that isn't ceaselessly hypocritical, evasive, dishonest, self-obsessed, unempathic, boring, unimaginative, authoritarian, and parochial.

      I was using "we" in the sense of a universal we, not a we that necessarily includes myself.

      Delete
    4. Aw, what happened, did the kids piss you off maybe?

      Delete
    5. Care to answer my question, original anon? If the new pessimism is going to be filled with random, evasive hurlers of ad hominems such as yourself, then I doubt it will be much better than the old. So for starters, who is this "old guard" and why do you impute the things you do to them?

      Delete
    6. Well, first off, you should probably learn how ad hominem works. If I say "X is wrong because he is an idiot" I am committing the fallacy of ad hominem by addressing X's character rather than his given reasons for holding a position. If I say "X is an idiot" I am merely disparaging X's character.

      The "Old Guard" is the mainline group of Post-Ligotti, Post-Benatar antinatalists. Sister Y, Jim, Karl, Chip Smith, Anne Sterzinger, and Inmendham's feuding brood.

      For the truth of my accusations about their character, simply binge through their writings.

      Delete
    7. Those are the old guard? Goodness, I was under the wrong impression. I thought you were going to list Hegesias, Schopenhauer, Leopardi, etc. Surely they would qualify as the "old guard" of pessimism. They're also the ones who influenced me to identify with pessimism. The people you mention, half of whom I've never heard of, appear to be internet bloggers and other unknown authors. I too find many of the names you mention to be rather uninformed, overbearing, and pretentious ego-maniacs. But that's why I avoid them as best I can. Conversely, I find Karl's blog is fairly circumspect, which is why I frequent it. Am I missing something with him? For example, the entry we're currently commenting on has enabled me to discover another of the old guard of pessimists, in my sense of that term that really means old. I would likely never have heard of de Maistre had I not stopped by here.

      Delete
    8. I said the old guard of antinatalism, not the old guard of pessimism. Pessimism is an ancient philosophical position, while antinatalism is a recent form of it attached to Ligotti and Benatar. I wouldn't disparage let's say Schopenhauer or Leopardi in the same way.

      Delete
    9. You seemed to equate them in your original post.

      Delete
  13. Why are you guys feeding this attention-seeking troll? Please stop.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Dear Kark, I know this is a late comment. Please dont stop writing. Your blog is very enlightening and disturbing. Greetings from Paraguay. Raul

    ReplyDelete