Where as my previous essay “Anarcho-Lifestylism: A Philosophy and Practice” focused on a generalized process of analysis and lifestyle building, here I aim to focus on a specific analysis of Humanism. With this idea of the human I hope to show the ways in which civilization is good, and desirable and creates itself as both goodness and desirability. I aim for this perspective to contrast the common framing of Civilization, the State, Capitalism etc. as purely bad. With this analysis I hope to show how asceticism, or the denial of the material (and immaterial) benefits of civilization is necessary for my attempt to escape its grasp.
I also aim to explore some questions not exclusively focused on, but in the context of Eco-Extremism and certain nihilist ideas. With these questions I aim to explore the tension between being totally encapsulated by the systems that dominate ourselves and the desire to live a life without these systems.
Finally I hope to bring together these two segments, as well as my previous piece in a specific discussion of my aims in the foreseeable future.
An Analysis of Humanism
The human is the ideal by which the humanity – a value indicating ones proximity to this ideal – of humans – things which are deemed to have close enough proximity to this ideal to benefit from it- is judged. The human ideal is not static, but changes over time. It may also change due to other factors such as cultural context which may vary geographically and temporally and can even fluctuate within a certain context, between different people.
Example 1: Whether or not Black people are human has varied over time, and between locations within certain time periods. In many ways blackness is a marginal position still interwoven with the marginal position of the non-human. Not only was this connection rhetorical, with the black person being an ape or animal, but this could also be seen in practices such as both being property.
The ideal is constructed in many realms. It has physical qualities, social ones, mental ones etc. An ideal may have attributes from any field one may imagine.
Example 2: The ideal that humans speak is a social construction of the human the often excludes autistic people. The ideal that humans have four limbs is a physical construction that often excludes disabled people. The ideal that humans live in houses is a material construction and often excludes homeless people. The ideal humans dislike crime is a mental construction and often excludes people who do crime.
The role of this ideal is to create a mapping from what to extract from (the marginalized position), and to what this profit will benefit (the privileged position), as well as to what extent. These two positions are not binary, nor mutually exclusive. It cannot even be described as a spectrum, not only due to the interconnected webs of identities, but also the interconnected flows of extraction and profit within a singular identity.
One is always at least partially excluded from the ideal. There is no perfect human that fits the
ideal, nor with any other ideal.
This process of extraction and profit is never pure. Even for those completely outside of the human ideal there is some benefit. And for those in the ideal this extraction is never non-existent and it may even still be more then ones benefit. This extraction and profit operates by the logic of civilization, not subjective preferences. Subject preferences (desire) is created for these benefits. This is often achieved through ideology.
Example 3: While domesticated animals exist in an state of almost total extraction, such as in the extraction of milk from cows, their young, and even their corpses, civilization still must flow profits toward these animals, such as in the production of feed, or housing in order to maintain this extractive process. This feed and housing is desirable in the context of civilization , especially since the prior food sources and habitats that would be relied on without civilization are limited or destroyed.
The marginal position is at first constructed negatively. Not-humans are constructed as the marginal position purely because they do not meet the human ideal. Marginal positions may be constructed as positive positions by those outside of the ideal. This construction then creates a new ideal which attempts to equate itself with, or work itself into, the preexisting ideal. The positive construction of the marginalized position is a reorganization of the ideal, and the flows of profit and extraction, seeking further profit to the group, which is then still extracted from those outside even this new reorganization of the ideal. Reorganization of the group into the ideal does not exclude them from extraction, this extraction may take a different even less severe form. Reorganization may also be partial/incremental, not being fully reworked into the ideal but instead taking a more favorable less extractive position, but one that is still more extractive then the ideal position.
Example 4: The homo-nationalist movement of the 2000’s was largely an effort to show the heterosexuality of queers. Such as their desire to be monogamous, in legal marriages, to own children and to recreate gender roles within their relationships. This movement ultimately coalesced into a slight increase in profits for some queers who now fit into the category of LGBT such as in some minor housing protections. As well as the limiting of some extraction such as the minor limiting of violence targeting homosexuals through inclusions in anti-discriminatory laws. But while this movement then improved the LGBT position the queer position was then left for the most part unchanged except where they were willing to fit into this marginal position.
Human Identities
The human is only one ideal. Within the categorization of the human are an uncountable amount of ideals. To name a few: the civilized, the white, the healthy, the innocent, the settler, the bourgeois, the right-handed. Ideals do not exist separately from each other but are instead intertwined, even built upon each other. This intertwining nature is not directional but mutual.
Example 5: The white can be made innocent by their whiteness, but the innocent can also be made white by their innocence. Within the Trayvon Martin case the question of Zimmerman’s innocence and his whiteness were ultimately the same question. Similarly whether or not Trayvon was guilty
(and thus deserving) was largely a question of if he was a child.
Identity Politics
Because marginal positions can be reworked into the ideal and this reorganization does not entail that extraction from this group will halt, it is possible that such an organization of the ideal could exist so as to include all things (and non-things) in an equally extracting and profiting system. I’ll label this extreme communism.
As this ideal approaches the opposite then, an atomizing of the ideal to exclude as much as possible with a focus of total extraction from outside the ideal to give as much profit to within the ideal, it could be said to approach Fascism.
The difference then between these two extremes, and everything in between, is an aesthetic choice of from whom or what to extract and to whom or what to flow profit to.
Material Reality and Civilization
Material reality is shaped in two ways by civilization. The first is physically such as the destruction of natural ecosystems, and the building of cities. The second is psychically, altering how material reality is perceived such as the idea of natural areas as barren or even transforming natural things or acts such as drinking from natural water sources or shitting in the woods into unnatural things.
One construction of material reality that stands out is the construction of needs. These needs are often tied to identity. Some needs are naturalized, such as the need for commodities in the form of food. Others are socialized such as the need for community. There are many realms in which these needs are constructed, and they shape the way we understand and engage with material reality in these realms. The process of His-Story projects these needs into the past.
Example 6: The trans marginal position, in an attempt to reorganize itself into the ideal, has constructed the need for HRT and other trans healthcare into its identity. This position then continues the exclusion of past non-cis marginal positions which did not have this need and recontextualizes those it can as having this need before it even existed.
The Benefit of Human Progress
Progress is a means by which profit is expanded. This profit is expanded through extraction. The process of extraction has a necrotic affect. From the degradation of soil, to the heating of the planet, to the social unrest of those extracted from to the finite amount of resources to be extracted. However the necrotic affects of profit, cannot be understood as a hard limit on extraction. As we have seen throughout His-Story, Progress has allowed for the constant expansion of Leviathan through the shifting of these necrotic affects. And the globalization of Leviathan does not
necessitate the end of its expansion.
Example 7: The extraction of profit in the use of horses as a means of transportation had the necrotic affect of producing ungovernable amounts of shit. The reorganization of the automobile then allowed a shift of this necrotic force from that of a fecal matter to that of climate change. Even if electric cars have their own necrotic affect especially in the form of toxicities from certain metals it is possible a shift from CO2 production to toxicity production could shift these necrotic forces yet again.
Because of this, aesthetic formulations such as “Fully Automated Luxury Communism” and “Eco-Fascism” (meaning the limiting of profit and extremely narrow ideal while expanded extraction from others in an attempt to combat these necrotic forces) or even just liberal “green alternatives” should not be understood as impossibilities that fail to address the core causation of the problem, but instead mechanism by which the necrotic forces of Leviathan are shifted to prolong the decomposition as long as possible. There is no reason to believe that these necrotic forces cannot be shifted indefinitely. This does not necessitate they will but any reliance on the decomposition of Leviathan through its own forces is reliant purely on hope.
Part of the process of armoring, or the turning of human subjects within Leviathan into its own machinery, is the appeal of this profit. The physical force of enslavement has turned more and more towards mental enslavement but both are still employed. This process of mental enslavement is not new but as old as civilization.
The compelling force of Leviathan is not any will of its own, Leviathan is only a husk, but instead it must be understood that its human machinery drives it forward. Through our entrapment in the beast, it’s hunger becomes our own, even with fresh memories of the horror of being consumed by it, even while our bodies are still being fed on by the beast. The idea of progress then is ultimately how to feed the beast, including its human parts. The march of progress, His-Story is not just the tale of the beast but also of its human machinery as both feed on the world.
Forms of Profit
By profit I do not mean purely an economic phenomenon. Though most profit is economized. But just as wealth in terms of dollars is extracted from workers so too is “safety” a form of profit extracted from the criminal. These social values, such as sanity, health, Truth, entertainment etc are also extractions. As well profit is material such as the extraction from nature in the form of resourcification, things like agriculture, animal husbandry, deforestation etc.
Against the Marginal Position
It seems clear to most, even liberals, the invested interest those closer to the ideal have in the extraction of profit, since they often receive much more then is extracted from themselves. But we cannot understand Leviathan as driven primarily by this group. If we are to imagine the beast as a
worm or an octopus or a combination of the two, it is more apt to say that this group would make up the mouth, perhaps even the tentacle that brings its meal to its mouth, but there is more to the beasts function. We find ourselves in the beasts stomach and bowels (the least human among us could perhaps be said to occupy the anus (the furthest entrenched yet the closest to the outside) we too feed upon the profits but we serve a further purpose. As this digestive tract we too extract the nutrients not just for ourselves though, we extract it to feed the beast. In a way every bite we take as part of this system gives the beast the energy it needs to find its next meal.
The marginal position is revolutionary in that it often seeks a reorganization of the beast so as to be further up the digestive line. Everyone wants to be the mouth, but no one wants to be the anus. But just as Leviathan relies on its human machinery to keep it alive, so too does the machinery rely on Leviathan to feed it. And so this revolutionary attack from within the beast may be disruptive of the flows but does not stop the flows.
The Queer Position
There is a position outside of the marginal position and privileged position. It is difficult to say if this position is actually existing today or even if it has ever existed. And even if it is not truly attainable it appears to be something that one can move toward. This position has been identified before as the queer (this should not be confused with the marginal position of the non-heterosexual) or “the nameless” position. This position could be described as existing outside of other binaries between privileged and marginalized positions. This position exists outside of the flows of extraction and profit. Again it should be understood these three positions are not perfect delineations but complex webs of relations to these flows. One is more or less in these positions, not in or out.
Violence and Cruelty
The marginal position often describes the denial of some amount of profit to it, violence. And thus seek to receive greater profits through reorganization. In this way the denial of profits to oneself is Cruelty. Previously I have discussed building a lifestyle in such a manner that does not harm oneself. If one wants to build a lifestyle free from profit, it is not possible without Cruelty towards the self.
Another way to formulate Cruelty is as a form of asceticism, a denial of all the needs and desires that Leviathan imbues within ones self. In this way Cruelty is the refusal of ideology in both it’s physical and psychic forms.
Survival Tactics, as I have laid out in my previous essay, such as expropriation, thus fail to challenge this notion of profit even if they do remove oneself from extraction.
Fascism and Liberation
Liberation and Fascism too are two heads of the same coin. Both find common goals in the removal of the self or ones identity from the process of extraction just as violence and Cruelty are both concerned with the denial of profit. The differentiation then is an opposition to the process itself. Where violence and Fascism are dissatisfied with a particular arrangement of these flows, Cruelty and Liberation then are oppositions to these flows themselves.
Note: I use the term Fascism here because it is in a way the attempt to atomize profit as much to particular identities as possible. One could just as easily replace it with the term liberalism, communism or even anarchism as they try to remove one self or group of selves from the process of extraction without altering the process itself. The term politics could be used to describe this general process of reorganizing profit.
Cruelty and Liberation
The expropriation of goods is an attempt to liberate oneself from extraction, without the Cruelty of removing oneself from profit. Without diving into the question of if expropriation, or other survival Tactics are “labor” (and thus fail to remove oneself from extraction) I would like to explore instead the ways that Liberation without Cruelty fail to remove ourselves from the totality of civilization.
Example 8: Property and housing are often thought of as needs in relation to human identity. One means by which housing is secured without ones own extraction is through squatting. While the process of squatting does successfully combat the need to extract value from oneself in order to receive this profit, it does not negate civilized desire for housing, nor for sedentary life. As well the appropriation of the house does not change its occupying role, that not only keeps other humans from their natural ecosystems but also many non-humans and even non-living things, from trees and squirrels to ants and rocks and rivers. And so the profit of housing is still continually extracted from the land it sits upon, as a constant displacement of those things.
Reasoning for Opposing Civility
It is not the flow of extraction that I am against. Not by itself. This flow of extraction cannot be understood fully without the flow of profit. If I simply wished to stop or limit the flow of extraction from my self (however one defines that self), this could be achieved through Fascist reorganization, in the structuring of my identity as the mouth and all else the anus (or to be consumed). It is the system of these two processes together, that I am opposed to.
It is my conception of autonomy that all things (and non-things) be free from this system. I do not limit my idea of autonomy to my self because I do not limit my understanding of my self to what one may typically refer to as their self instead I understand my self as a thing interconnected with every-thing which is at least temporarily disconnected through this system. As such I do not see the freeing of one body from this system as autonomous, but instead the totality of freedom of all things from this system is autonomy. Even though it is this totality I would consider autonomy I
view movement toward this totality as desirable.
With this explanation it is not my motivation to convince or make desirable these things, but to elaborate on my foundation so as to expose possible places ideology may still hide, to open myself to critique, and to offer my understanding in a hope some others may find it helpful.
It is from this reasoning I have formulated the idea of the lifestyle, as not only as a means of escaping this extraction, but also escaping this profit.
Question #1
What is the point of survival in a cage?
For those who find themselves fulfilled by their role in Leviathan, the appeal seems obvious, you don’t have to question where your food comes from, or what extraction is required for a roof over your head is. But there are some who, for better or worse, purposefully or not, have taken a peak behind the curtain. This is not a one time event, but a process. Some people call this process radicalization.
Nearly everyone that makes up the beast is dissatisfied in some regard. Those in the marginal positions are often vying for this or that reform. And even those in the privileged position are often vying for more. Large swaths of this dissatisfaction are recuperated within the beast, but perhaps not all of it is.
There have been those who could not stand to live in a cage. Every day people choose to kill themselves then live one more day in their cage. And there are those like Adam Lanza or Ted Kazynski who not only try and escape their cages, but lash out violently against the cage (and not just the cage as a machinery but even the human machinery of the cage).
But in these examples, while it can be said these individuals have escaped in their death, or have lashed out in their attack against the cage. They have now no life outside of it.
On the opposite end, there are those who dredge on through work despite hating every second. And those who continue to participate in these systems of extraction despite a stated opposition.
Question #2
What is the point of escape if there is nothing to escape to?
Wild Nature is not extinct, but civilization, since the beginning, has occupied more and more of it and today it would seem most of what we think of as nature is not Wild Nature but instead parks or Ziggurats. Within the urban context a tree is not a remnant of the Wild but it too is domesticated, as much a part of the sprawl as the sidewalk it is embedded within. Wild Nature is not found then in the metro parks or nature conserves. Wild Nature is found partially in the weed that cracks the
concrete cage, the marsh that stands between the civilized and their highways, the desert that is hostile to human comfort and the storms that devastate civilized settlements , urban and rural.
If one wishes to exist outside of civilization it is difficult if not impossible, to do so in any space, let alone any one space. Weeds that take root are constantly being ripped up, and chemicals used to eradicate their existence. And yet they still spring up. Wasps and other insects create a great terror to the civilized despite their relatively minimal damage. But so too are their hives raided and destroyed. Even deer who simply try to exist in what little nature and Wild Nature is left most likely find themselves in the hunters sight, or run down by the civilized machines.
I have not been anywhere I would consider Wild Nature. But there are some places that are more natural and some places that are wilder. In the weeds I have found places to hide. At the end of the city, around the train tracks the veins of Leviathan the trees and brush even where it is only a few feet thick offers an escape. Even small groves in otherwise civilized lawns can offer cover in the night. It is not that these places to escape to do not exist, but that we must find them. And they definitely do not look like the pristine wild artificially manufactured, though even there wild weeds might take root.
The idea of escape is not just a question of space. With the idea of survival tactics, which are often used to continue to survive in the beast, we might ask instead in what way one can survive outside of the beast? In the aftermath of its destruction, and in the path of its ongoing wrath. As well we might ask, not just how we can exist outside of the beast, but how we can survive the process of escape itself.
Question #3
What is the role of Attack in escape?
An attack on the beast is always also an attack on its human machinery. The two are interconnected not separate.
Example 10: Even the most liberal attack in the name of reform, a common tactic the occupation of streets to block traffic, hurts even if only ever so slightly, both the beast and its human machinery. The flow of profit and extraction is not halted but slightly disrupted, goods reach the stores and thus the consumers even that little bit slower, which is also a disruption of comfort. And the human machinery being transported as well is disrupted, their labor cannot be extracted for even just an extra minute as they are late to their job. As well this disruption can even in certain cases cause the firing of workers. This disruption of the flows then ties back to violence, for those who now are denied any profit in the form of consumption since they no longer get a wage.
Example 11: An attack then on the human component of the beast is just as much an attack on the body of the beast (the infrastructure). A school shooter killing their teacher disrupts the institution of the school. A worker killing their boss disrupts the factory. The death of police officers is an attack on justice itself.
The process of attack is both a process of disrupting the connection between human machinery and the body of the beast, as well as a way for the attacker to disconnect themselves further from these parts of the beasts and other ideologies of the beast.
Example 12:With the idea of a War on the Nerves attacking humans is a process by which one can reject the human ideal, or human values such as compassion or life. As well attack is a means of attacking the nerves of others, to demonstrate the possibility of an action.
Attack may just as well strengthen the beast. Just as a school shooting may disrupt the institution of the school, so too may it reinforce the institution of gender. Even when it is disillusionment of gender that influences the attack. Similarly an attack may strengthen the beast through the process of progress. Where attacks lead to reforms that mitigate the necrotic dissatisfaction that led to the attack.
Throughout His-Story the tale of attack has been that of tragedy and desperation. Attack is not a means to destroy the beast, or at least there is no evidence that attack can kill the beast. But it is another way some may try to escape or disrupt these flows.
Question #4:
What is the role of reproduction in the Lifestyle?
In the queer context even homosexuals have begun to breed. A queerness against reproduction, and against the future can only exist today. It cannot sow seeds for the future.
There is a thread I have followed from a fundamentally leftist, liberal position, to where I have found myself now. There is a certain appeal in the mass movement that makes itself fertile, ready to implant itself.
Beyond anarchism, beyond the homosexual, there is an incommunicability of total opposition. A rejection of the future cannot be fertile. There seems to be no indication that there is any positive construction that could emerge from a complete rejection of material reality. I at least have found any attempt to communicate this idea repulsive, even my own previous attempts.
And yet still there are those who are, or at the very least I view myself someone who is, desperately looking for an exit, for possibilities. Not possible futures but to find a possibility in today.
Question #5:
What is the role of critique?
I have yet to live a day outside of a cage. And every cage I have found myself in I have been put there by another. The first of whom are my parents who brought me into the cage all life finds itself
within. Critique then for me starts by saying “fuck you dad”.
Regardless of ones intention, even without ones awareness, one either acts in accordance with the rest of the beast, or against it. Our actions either puts others in cages and profits off their imprisonment or rejects not only our cage but all cages.
For those who wish to be free from their cage, critique is the method of showing how their current process of escape may still imprison others.
Beyond Anarchism
Critiques of Anarchism are not new. These questions are not new. Anti-humanism is not new. And all of these things were not even new when they were thought to be new. There are cracks in the linear time of His-Story and these conversations, their cyclical nature, is one such example.
The only anarchism I have known is that of a cage. A limit to place on ones thought, but also new institutions to place oneself within, ones that call themselves decentralized and instead of occupying concrete structures exist almost purely in the mind. I reject the idea that my thoughts now are an “anarchism” or even an “anarchy” despite my previous framing. But again, there is a thread from here to there and I can only speak from my experience.
The rejection of civilization, the rejection of the totality of material reality, what it seems some would describe as a nihilist rejection of all that exists is incommunicable as to be akin to an eldritch horror. And yet there are those who are able to approach the idea. Where I find value in anarchism, and the same can be said even of Liberalism and Fascism to varying degrees, is in the analysis of the cage we find ourselves and a path of critiques (not necessarily linearly) that may lead to possible modes of escape.
The dissatisfaction of daily life is a constant necrotic force of civilization, and yet still it is a deeply recuperative one. The crushing anxiety, depression and paranoia of daily existence within the beast has been the most compelling reason for my fleeing from it. And yet for many this process often leads to a complete numbness through medication that finds them stuck, perhaps even more rooted in the beast.
Anarchism and other radicalisms, even liberalism, is a similar process. A channel by which the dissatisfaction with every day life can be recuperated back into the progress of civilization. But there are those who do not let themselves be trapped, or even who after being trapped for some time continue to move beyond it.
I aim to not be foolish enough to believe I have escaped this recuperative force. Capitalism and civilization are a donut constantly reworking anything possibly outside of itself back in. What I am interested in then is a constant escape from this force, not a one time exit but a constant running away.
The possibility of a positive imagining or living of a lifestyle, a culture in action. Seems only useful as a possible method of exposing oneself to others for critique.
For some, running away and attack are indistinguishable. As well for others running away is manifested in the escape of life through suicide. But for myself I can see these as only a part. While there are warriors who find their life in the war against that which kills them, I do not think the world is only warriors.
Perlman’s story warns us against a culture focused only on a war against the beast. Many who have concerned themselves with only the most efficient modes of attack, have built their own beasts. But while I’m skeptical of the mechanism of total war, it would seem to follow that a disruption of the beast in our lives could manifest in disruptions between the beast and its machinery, or even just a disruption of its flows.
As for suicide, I have given up on a life inside civilization long ago. In a way my depressive desire to die, became my attempt to escape.
The line between the desire for Fascism and Liberation is very narrow. Many people use the language of Liberation to describe this process of reorganizing. I am not confident enough to say where I find myself is fully on one side or the other, just that I aim towards one, against the other. And as mentioned with regard to Perlman, opposition to Fascism or civilization can often turn into more of the same.
If only a nihilist could do nothing. But ultimately doing nothing is the most powerful way to do it all. Doing nothing perhaps is the escape of death but even there the beast has means to animate and use us. But today doing nothing is instead doing quite a lot. It’s doing all the work of a civilized life, without saying so.
With the language of Liberation I do not want to be taken as talking about something good, just as we cannot talk about civilization and Fascism as being bad. It seems many anarchists are concerned with having a project for love, for community, for goodness. If one wants goodness it seems the best and only means is through civilization.
Without a future there is only the question of how I will live my life today. It is not a question of if one will go along with the beast or not, no one is truly doing nothing, but finding where one can, even partially, escape, do less.