A nihilist breaks the boundaries of established value to seek and find the truth, he then assigns to life his own values to help his pointless survival to make it as meaningful as possible, even though he always recognizes that, apart from the organic instinctual satisfaction to himself and his fellow humans, his accomplishments can mean nothing; so does that make him a realist or a romanticist? It is my opinion that he can be no more or less than both. To be solely a realist one would fall into fatalism because one would no longer care to satisfy the organism, and therefore will feel a sense of pointlessness and dissatisfaction in every action taken. To be solely a romanticist one would become ignorant, believing in what one wants to be and then accepting it as established value. The nihilist is both the realist and romanticist in his association of rational thought towards what is scientifically true, and personal values of efficient realistic growth and then contemplations and art dwelling in the realms of fantasy to appease the romantic nature of the soul.

Romanticism glorifies the power of the individual, describes nature with beautiful prose and admiration, and envisions the most basic aspects of existence as magical gifts. It can be ignorant in many respects, which is not necessarily a bad thing; if we weren’t ignorant then we would all be fatalists. Romanticism believes that if the strength in will, bravery, and honor are powerful then the individual becomes heroic and indestructible, which is obviously not the case; if you ran first into the battle then by logic you are just opened up to a more likely chance of death in bringing attention (and bullets) towards yourself.

Realism focuses on what is true to reality, attempting to dispel all ignorance and illusion. Realism is what shows us that a god, in the literal sense, cannot exist; it is also an idea that teaches us how infinitesimally small we are, virtually nothing, we could never comprehend exactly how meaningless our lives are, nothing more than specific arrangements of atoms in a coincidental chemical reaction spawned by a cold, unthinking, frivolous cosmos.

When we ask ourselves which person lives a more satisfying life, the answer is obviously the Romanticist. Ignorance truly is bliss, anyone who says otherwise is ignorant themselves; but once enlightened an individual cannot return to the warmth in the primitive fantasy world; no individual can be totally enlightened with an organic mind, our instincts can be fought but never destroyed and they will always convey a beautiful, ignorant, romantic idea that helps us pursue life and better our survival. Personally, I think that once one has reached realist thought, one can then apply the romantic idea to life and live in union with nature and the organic self to perform a more efficient and logical thought process to forming the romantic fantasy.

This is how I see nihilism, at union between the cold logical reality, and the beautiful, ignorant, romantic fantasy of the instinctual organism that is man (or further differentiated as the individual). To be a little more personal I had been exploring these ideas before I made my way to this website; I had questioned how we can claim knowledge to certain universally established 'truths,' such as the existence of a good, human loving god, but when one considers science and math, all that we have learned points to an existence where only organisms can feel such things (or any things at all). So when we have concepts such as an infinite universe that we cannot understand, cold mathematics and sciences, and unforgiving events that seem to have no logical order or point, then how can we conclude that the claims of primitive savages from days past would have any real literal truth? Well, I am going to save these things for another discussion, but surely one might understand the truth in which I had considered. Then I had reached the point of realizing that my life was essentially pointless; but that didn’t depress me for long because I then knew that I was invincible. I could live my life any way I wanted, all established values were nothing, I could do anything and the only real repercussions would be those of this physical organic world, which were all also meaningless. At that point it had been about pleasing the self.

The discoveries from the past paragraph (which were done at a fairly early age, obviously) are what many people are just learning today; the main point of Satanism. After that though, I considered what it is I actually wanted to do not just in the present, but what future I wanted to see, what would be most satisfying for my life. From there I had been led to several other areas of thought (liberalism, racism, fascism, etc.), but my main point here is that it does not truly matter which direction one takes after the 'enlightenment,' my main goal is to spread this philosophy because different modes of politics will always be needed to adapt to a changing world and a changing people. I am truly not interested in politics, not only does it bore and frustrate me, but I wouldn’t truly care about politics at all if I knew there were thinkers running the world and lives of my fellow humans, thinkers that are not plagued with false morality and ridiculous, illogical values that hold no place in an organic community or even the natural world.

We need a leader that can think realistically but still have the desire to maintain the romantic spirit (which is illogical outside of our organic minds). By this I mean, a totally dominate robotic government could easily control the lives of each individual with full force and therefore maximize efficiency in every way possible, this would be the most realistic course of action but it would have no soul, and the illusion towards our purpose in life is stripped away and we have no reason to live, much less move forward. On the other hand we could just destroy all government and live off in the woods and let people act as they please, but then we would be guaranteed an early extinction and no value beyond that of the other more primitive creatures of our world (not that we do have any more value than them, but the ability to dominate them and think 'intelligently' maintains this illusion). So what do we need? A leader that will strive us towards improvement, furthering our knowledge in science, technology, and colonizing other planets; a leader that will allow for the freedom to live our personal lives as we see fit as long as drastic harm is not made to others; a leader that will pursue uniqueness and beauty in the race and culture of each nation, with strong emphasis on art (replacing entertainment).

So to be a nihilist one must understand the values of both romanticism and realism; if they are separate then one is not a nihilist, they would either a fatalist or a Christian. We understand the cold nature of reality, but we also understand what life means to us. This is the philosophy that will create the ideal humanity and should be spread wide and far as the philosophy of life. Worldviews such as these come before politics and religion, it is pointless discussing either with someone who does not understand nihilism; the views will appear illogical or too extreme. Obviously if any decision is too immoral that the instincts for pity and guilt outweigh the long-term happiness then it is too extreme, but that would be a rare situation and the nihilist knows that what is best for the child may not be pleasing to him in the present.

November 8, 2006