discipline posted:I guess because they exist within a community of the oppressed, not as atomized individuals, and as suicide disrupts communities, wastes resources, and is selfish bourgeois behavior it should be called out as such and there should be an active campaign to combat this bourgeois "it's your choice" bullshit
but "communities of the oppressed" do not necessarily exist nor are they necessarily emancipatory. the abused can exist in communities of abusers, the oppressed can exist in communities of oppressors. stable and productive communities of the oppressed do exist but what on earth does that mean to those who don't have access to them
this empty critique of the individual actions of the oppressed is just as vacuous for exactly the same reasons as "it's your choice" bullshit
tpaine posted:
on the basis of this post. You are now monitor of this thread. ganbatte ne
tpaine posted:you should probably tell them it's not a good idea to drink pesticide first!!!
lol
blinkandwheeze posted:there are always going to be members of the oppressed who do not have the opportunity of belonging to a community of the oppressed. condemning individuals for not taking advantage of opportunities they do not have and do not have the ability to bring into existence is reproducing the bourgeois privileging of categories of individual agency and choice against material circumstances
tpaine posted:discipline i think the fundamental problem here is that i don't think you trust in my self-righteous suicide. i cry, when angels deserve to die.
turns out conec is a posting persona of Zizek
it's a line of thought that identifies "romanticism" and cultural perception, as petrol does, as primary causative vehicles - this wholeheartedly enforces bourgeois notions of agency because it explicitly suggests that changing cultural perceptions and impressions in a community is sufficient for its members to seek alternative opportunities. even if you do not use the word individual, this is directly placing the site of the problem at the hearts and minds of individuals
i absolutely abhor any line of thought that suggest those who are victims of exploitation and abuse that is cultivated and fostered by the only social bonds available to them, who are saddled with debilitating mental illness without any opportunities for external support, are the same people who pulled the trigger at the point of suicide in anything but the most literal sense
it's reasonable to assert, as huey p. newton did, that suicide is a sign of weakness and capitulation, but this is in the sense that innocent victims of "fascism, brutality, aggression and murder" are typified by the same
On the contrary, it is in the nature of our society to produce many suicides, while Tartars do not kill themselves. Hence all societies do not have the same products. That is what we must tell ourselves, so as to work for the reform of our society and make it rise to a higher stage. As for courage, if it is considered courageous to defy death in broad daylight on the battlefield, under the domination of every form of excitement, there is nothing to prove lack of courage in one who administers death to himself in dark solitude. Such a debatable question is not disposed of by insulting the dead.
What kind of society is it, indeed, where one finds the profoundest solitude in the midst of millions; where one can be overwhelmed by an irrepressible desire to kill oneself wthout anybody being aware of it? This society is no society, it is as Rousseau says, a desert inhabited by wild animals. In the positions which I held in the police administration suicides were part of my responsibility; I wished to learn whether among the causes motivating them there were any whose effect could be obviated. I undertook extensive work on the subject. I found that any attempts short of a total reform of the present order of society would be in vain.
Edited by blinkandwheeze ()
A person's suicide is entirely determined by circumstances. Was Miss Chao's original idea to seek death? On the contrary, it was to seek life. If Miss Chao ended up by seeking death instead, it is because circumstances drove her to this. The circumstances in which Miss Chao found herself were the following; (1) Chinese society; (2) the Chao family of Nanyang Street in Changsha; (3)the Wu family of Kantzuyuan Street in Changsha, the family of the husband she did not want. These three factors constituted three iron nets, composing a kind of triangular cage. Once caught in these three nets, it was in vain that she sought life in every way possible. There was no way for her to go on living; the contrary of life is death, and Miss Chao thus felt compelled to die....If, among these three factors, there had been one that was not an iron net, or if one of these nets had opened, Miss Chao would certainly not have died. (1) If Miss Chao's parents had not had recourse to compulsion but had yielded before Miss Chao's free will, Miss Chao would certainly not have died; (2) if Miss Chao's parents had not resorted to compulsion but had permitted Miss Chao to explain her point of view to the family of her future husband, and to explain the reasons for her refusal, and if in the end the family of her future husband had accepted her point of view, and respected her individual freedom, Miss Chao would certainly not have died; (3) even if her parents and the family of her future husband had refused to accept her free will, if in society there had been a powerful group of public opinion to support her, if there were an entirely new world where the fact of running away from one's parents' home and finding refuge elsewhere were considered honourable and not dishonourable, in this case, too, Miss Chao would certainly not have died. If Miss Chao is dead today, it is because she was solidly enclosed by the three iron nets (society, her own family, the family of her future husband); she sought life in vain and finally was led to seek death. ...
This has always been the case, though, and, because of the always unsatisfied nature of human desire, it will always be this way.If the lack of the communities we "want" is a justification for suicide, than suicide is not only acceptable but the most rational decision anyone at anytime can make. And I don't think that's the argument you are trying to make.
"for the overwhelming number of people on this earth, communities with emancipatory potential do not exist."
"Communities with emancipatory potential" are a different type of thing from "communities we want." The former exists everywhere wherever there are human beings who actually want to improve their lot instead of killing themselves out of despair. And this potential for liberation can only be seen by those who want freedom and ever greater abundance of life for themselves and others. China in the 1930s, France (or Haiti) in the 1790s, Vietnam in the 1960s-those were places and times of great suffering, hardship, and degradation. What turned them into revolutionary moments was not the present happiness of the situations, but the choice by some to prefer resistance to servitude or self-annihilation.
"they can exist, but the problem here is that you need a plurality of people to form a community. how do you realise the plurality when those around you either ignore your suffering or directly benefit from it?"
You can't know how many like minded people there are, and what you can do together, if you're dead. Refusal to assent to one's own destruction is the first negative recognition of the reality of one's own freedom in a world that is larger, stronger, and more worthy of affection than you or your local tormentors. Without it, you pass out of sight, becoming an object at best of compassion for others instead of a person capable of rendering judgment on anyone or anything in your own right.
"Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might; for there is no activity or planning or knowledge or wisdom in Sheol where you are going."
Ecclesiastes 9:10
Edited by RedMaistre ()
conec posted:RedMaistre posted:You can't know how many like minded people there are, and what you can do together, if you're dead. Refusal to assent to one's own destruction is the first negative recognition of the reality of one's own freedom in a world that is larger, stronger, and more worthy of affection than you or your local tormentors. Without it, you pass out of sight, becoming an object at best of compassion for others instead of a person capable of rendering judgment on anyone or anything in your own right.
point well taken, but in my mind, possibilities are not endless. say, for instance, that you were repeatedly raped by your father/grandfather growing up.. now you`re an adult and your coping mechanism over the last 15 years has been compulsive eating. now you weigh 700 pounds. the truth is, no one wants to be your friend. at best, you might be able to find a circle of friends on secondlife or something. you could lose weight naturally if you really tried, but some people reach the point where they can hardly walk. you could potentially have gastric bypass surgery, if that`s within your means. it could very well not be within your means. i'm curious to know, what networks do they have? what likeminded people are swimming around in such close proximity that they meet them and this will assuage their anguish?
if you have pain, there is a way out. you don't owe your life to the world, in fact, the world doesn't need you at all. this is of course true, because we all die one day anyway. memento mori imho
1. Of course possibilities aren't endless. The belief that they are is one of the great causes of despair,and a common enemy of both peace of mind and of effective, rightly ordered action.
2. Why not ask someone who answers to your hypothetical description why they haven't killed themselves already?
As for those with that sort of life story who have killed themselves, they can have no opinions either way on what the living think of them. And no number of apologias for their actions can do them any good.
(And there is no end to such story telling.It does not get to the essential principles at stake in such arguments. Someone could write in response an inspiring story about an overweight socially isolated rape victim overcoming their challenges, and it would be just as besides the point, though it may or may not be as rhetorically persuasive as your impromptu character study)
3. "You don't think you owe your life to the world" I won't contest this, here, but I will point out that if true, it goes both ways. The suicide, by taking himself out of existence like a thief, has indeed demonstrated in action he feels no obligation to anything in the world. And the world, in turn, is not obligated to the suicide in anyway, not even in terms of tears.*
I would observe the fact that you are intent on justifying the suicide's actions shows you don't really believe that there is nothing that binds us here. Else there would be no need for this lawyering.
*under your pov, not mine.
"In seeking salvation for all men, love feels impelled to embrace not only the world of the living but also the world of the dead, the underworld and the world of the as yet unborn – that is, the whole race of Adam."
-Fr Sophrony
Edited by RedMaistre ()
Understanding is Not the Same as Justification.
Compassion is Not the Same as Approval.
blinkandwheeze posted:imo every community that facilitates and normalises exploiters and abusers should be torn apart and have their resources destroyed
You and what army?
blinkandwheeze posted:imo every community that facilitates and normalises exploiters and abusers should be torn apart and have their resources destroyed
talk about combat liberalism!