The Value of Nihilism

[vixengrl]

Asked by Woodward how history would judge the war, Bush replied: "History. We don't know. We'll all be dead."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17347-2004Apr16.html

nihilism
One entry found for nihilism.



Main Entry: ni·hil·ism
Pronunciation: 'nI-(h)&-"li-z&m, 'nE-
Function: noun
Etymology: German Nihilismus, from Latin nihil nothing -- more at NIL
1 a : a viewpoint that traditional values and beliefs are unfounded and that existence is senseless and useless b : a doctrine that denies any objective ground of truth and especially of moral truths
2 a : a doctrine or belief that conditions in the social organization are so bad as to make destruction desirable for its own sake independent of any constructive program or possibility b capitalized : the program of a 19th century Russian party advocating revolutionary reform and using terrorism and assassination
- ni·hil·ist /-list/ noun or adjective
- ni·hil·is·tic /"nI-(h)&-'lis-tik, "nE-/ adjective

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/nihilism

Bush, with a slight smile, replied, "Yes, you see — you see it on TV, and that’s the power of an enemy that is willing to kill innocent people. But there’s also an unbelievable will and resiliency by the Iraqi people…. I like to tell people when the final history is written on Iraq, it will look like just a comma because there is — my point is, there’s a strong will for democracy."

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/columns/pressingissues_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003156137

What does this administration believe? Or maybe more to the point, what is it they have "seemed to" believe? They believed, and sent Colin Powell to the UN to demonstrate, that there were WMD's in Iraq. They believed Iraq would be better off without Saddam Hussein. They believed that the war would be over quickly, and that our coalition troops would be greeted as liberators. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5145.htm
These are the things they told us they believed. They weren't true. They did not let the weapons inspectors finish their job, because of their "belief". They took advantage of the resolution to use force to actually invade a nation that was no immediate threat to ourselves. This has been a kind of belief-based war. Or so we might very well be led to "believe." But when you look deeper, you'll see a kind of nihilism, a belief in nothing. The outcome, the end game, the fate of the Iraqi people, did not matter. And this is why things are so damn messed up. For nothing.

One thousand, three hundred, and forty-eight days after the Bush administration decided they had their justifications in order, two thousand, eight hundred and seventy-five American lives later, three thousand one hundred and twenty one coalition lives, all told, tens of thousands of coalition wounded, (icasualties.com) and billions of dollars spent (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11880954/ ) we may suppose believing is not actually enough.

Believing we can acheive some kind of "victory" without defining what victory is will not lead us anywhere, no more than sending in another 20,000 troops, if they are simply sent to do more of the same. Referring to withdrawal of our armed forces as "cut and run" seems to suggest that regardless of what happens, we have failed if we don't stay--indefinitely. But given the lack of weapons of mass destruction found, the lack of ties between Saddam Hussein and terrorism, the utter collapse of government & nationhood we've seen precipitate in Iraq following the United States' action--would not some examination of these original "beliefs" seem necessary, since the assumptions weren't true? (Dick Cheney--if you are out there, connecting to DU from your undisclosed location--I'm talking to you.)

We've been told that this war is part of the war on Terror http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030306-8.html
--why? Because Saddam Hussein, an authoritarian strongman who had an aversion to terrorists http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A47812-2004Jun16?language=printer might possibly give some of the WMD's he didn't have to the terrorists to whom he had no connection. But that isn't exactly the reason why we went to war with Iraq.

We went to war with Iraq because it was "always" the US position to have regime change.

Or maybe it was because Saddam Hussein gassed his own people.http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1779.htm

Or maybe it was because Hussein tried to kill GWB's dad.

Or maybe it was because it was time Democracy was brought to Iraq.

Or maybe it was because there were more targets in Iraq than in Afghanistan http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/white_house/jan-june04/rumsfeld_3-25.html .

Or maybe it was just next on the PNAC list.

(Why so many "maybe's"? Because it seems like the justification was so many "unknown unknowns". )

Maybe the reason didn't matter, in quite the way that being a "war president" mattered, or appearing effective in the war on terror mattered. After all, this war was a product: http://trueblueliberal.blogspot.com/2005/08/whig-of-week-andrew-h-card-jr-white.html -- It's Bush's product--brough to you by Halliburton, Blackwater http://thinkprogress.org/2006/03/30/blackwater-army/ and US tax dollars and troops. Maybe it was done for nothing. Nothing at all.

How can I be so cynical? Like Lily Tomlin once said, no matter how cynical you get, it is impossible to keep up. Cynical as I am, though, I can't touch Bushco. I believe for all the talk of "freedom" and "values"--they are at base, total nihilists. I began thinking of them all as nihilists after reading bigtree's http://journals.democraticunderground.com/bigtree/1086 post "Earworms, Decent Intervals, and Quagmires" . The mot juste (yeah Freepers who may be reading, that's French) "nihilist", only made too much sense. Look at not what matters--but what does not:

Deficits don't matter. Well, good thing too, what with the spending and the irresponsible tax cuts. See also: trifecta, for just how much the economy doesn't matter. No matter what happens.

They've held people in Guantanamo for nothing.

They've tortured people for nothing; because our own military has trained people in counter-torture tactics, and has stated that torture is not an effective means of gathering intelligence http://thinkprogress.org/2005/12/01/torture-doesnt-work/ .

They've ordered wiretaps for nothing, because if there was any valid reason to wiretap, a warrant could've easily been obtained.http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/29/opinion/29sun1.html?ex=1296190800&en=4785bb029b806e38&ei=5090

And they've criticised their own critics for nothing, except to point out how this government has become really fond of torture and wiretaps. Just because they don't care--nothing matters.

They've stomped on the Constitution for nothing. If we are hated for our freedoms--why give the terrorists the satisfaction of knowing that our freedoms are curtailed? (But that was "nothing" too--it's not the freedoms or way of life of Americans that the terrorists hate, but certain issues in our foreign policy, a point no more likely to be spoken of than the particular issue of who the Iraqi insurgents are and what they might want.) And perhaps New Orleans died for nothing--an "Act of God" that was forseen and people knew could've been meliorated, or at least, efforts could have been made to save, for example, poor hope-filled senior citizens waiting for choppers on the roof of their old folks' home, or maybe some kind of simple *human* charity,could've brought food and basics to the huddled masses in the Superdome http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9063708/ . Some of these affected people to this very day don't have permanent homes, can't go back to where they were. This government gave them nothing to hope for, and they got it.

Maybe the GOP majority lost because of too much "nothing". They rubber-stamped the White House on too much, and dared not do anything too controversial before the elections. (Flag-burning amendment--my stars and garters, they really went there. Useless, pointless--meaningless.) There was corruption and scandals without necessary oversight. The people will expect something from our Democratic bunch.
And one last thing. If I had to look for a successor to George Bush the Nihilist, I would need look no further than John McCain. He was against torture before he was for it.http://aolsearch.aol.com/aol/search?invocationType=wscreen-searchbox&query=John%20McCain%20torture%20bill
He can "believe" 20,000 extra troops will make a difference. He's the nihilistic front-runner, unless Jeb runs. No one does "empty" like a Bush.

See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihilism

[Old and In the Way]

1. Damn...well said.

I suspect that you are very close to the truth. Bush's whole vacuous life has been a lead up to this moment....a big nothing. Yes, I do think that his motivation was to be a war pResident...trying to out do Dad and make a name for himself in the history books. The invasion was the easy part...I guess he assumed everything would magically be OK as soon as he toppled Saddam's statute and unfurled his "Mission Accomplished" banner. Mission was accomplished, alright. He will go down as the worst pResident ever. He won't need to have an asterisk after his name to find him in the history books. Look up hubristic, arrogant incompetent fool and his smirk will be there for all of recorded eternity. Heckuva job Bushie.

[BlooInBloo]

2. Thankfully, that wasn't Nietzcshe's nor any of the other* so-called "existentialists" view.

*Where "any of the other" refers to: Pascal, Kierkegaard, Sartre, Heidegger. Another way to say it would have been "any of the existentialists with whom I have any familiarity". :)

Nietzsche's project in particular was, broadly, a constructive, edifying one, rather than essentially *destructive*, as would be required to fall under the definition of "nihilism" presented above.

EDIT: Like Hume. Both in terms of what I said, and as concerns the between-the-lines of what I said: the vast majority of his (and his) readers screwed the pooch.

[vixengrl]

4. Bush is no philosopher--

his belief in nothing is something probably even he doesn't really recognize, so I suspect he never really has examined why he does what he does. Whereas another person, more honestly examining his own mind, may have determined that the nihilism, the lack of meaning, was something to be overcome by will and that he must look for a personal truth (especially if aspiring to an undertaking like leading a country), it appears (not presuming that I can read Bush's mind any more than I can read tea leaves, but IMHO) that he really is a "media construct", a second-term tumbleweed blown by an ill wind. Meaning has been replaced by attaining and holding on to power--but it seems like power for its own sake, without a clear use. He considers himself a man of faith--his actions do not seem to match the faith he maintains. Words like "a uniter, not a divider" are just noise--they accomplish the short-term goal of making people like him, without actually having anything to do with his intent. He ignores what is factually true concerning the war in Iraq because he would have to face the moral emptiness that brought him there. And that particular abyss would be terrifying.

In the meantime, he and his cohorts can sleep the sleep of the just, because they have assured themselves that *no one* could judge them for what they have done.

(I hope that made sense--me, I sleep the the sleep of the *too much caffeine before bed*. :) )

[BlooInBloo]

9. Yup - possibly gw could be described as Niet. describes the sheep in Gen of Morals....

... as he'd "rather will nothingness than not will at all". Seeing as how that apparently-jackass-choice arises out of an at least subliminally felt lack of meaning to one's life, there's at least superficial reason to think that this strand of Niet's thought - the sheep's need for meaning - applies to gw.

[papau]

3. Bush as Nihilist,"Thus spoke Zarathustra? I go with evil as I don't believe Bush thinks that deeply

He need not justify because he is Bush - not because he is a Nihilist.

He is just an evil person - as close to the anti-Christ as I ever seen, as he pretends to wear his faith on his sleeve.

[Lilith Velkor]

7. He's sure got a lot of nothing in his head.

[vixengrl]

5. Self-kick.

(Now I feel cheap. And I probably ought to.)

[Old and In the Way]

6. Holiday weekend......very thoughtful post.

I think many are away for the Holidays, timing is everything. I'd love for someone to conduct a serious interview with Bush about his deeply held beliefs. I think the conclusion would be, there are none.

[alfredo]

8. Excellent