There are two questions you should ponder because you've made assumptions.
1. Is killing innocent people without declaring war at the very least the intention of a nihilist?
2. Do the majority of moderns want to be challenged at all? I'm not speaking in physical terms, but ideological which threaten their absurd conception of reality.
You say these victims weren't useless. Warrior tribes would say otherwise.
You are correct; I am making assumptions. My assumptions are based on the underlying theme that permeates this forum and feel are appropriate for your post that I was replying
1. In short; no. I don't think a true nihilist wants, nor has an agenda, to kill innocent people at random. But that is my point! There isn't neccessarily a viable,
philosophical, nihilistic (or whatever-istic,ism) reason for these shootings. You say you have the answer. Well does your answer include the possibility that it could be no
more than some crazy, angry p.o.s person with a thirst to shoot someone reaching the end of his rope, going on a killing spree? I've read a few posts on this forum that almost
seem to approve and empathize with these sickening actions of cowardice and try to back it up with their quasi-Nietzschean/nihilist/metal philosophies. Why is SHOOTING UNARMED,
UNSUSPECTING PEOPLE the answer?
2. There are plenty of people in our society that want to be challenged. They may not be the majority, but then are we to take violent action against them for it? There are
many platforms and venues for one to debate, express opinions and emotions in a constructive manner with other people. There are many other ways to spearhead an ideology. Do
you really think ANUS posters or Hessians are the only people that are capable of ideological challenges? Most people may not care about what you care about, and indulge
themselves in the commercialization and industry bombardment of material product, but SO WHAT? That is why they are called commoners. They are the inevitable rabble.
I don't believe that it is in anyones best interest for me to take violent action on someone that I render useless. If I see you on the street, my friend, and disapprove of
your stupid hair style, clothes, opinions, music; does that give me the right to destroy you? Assuming I am more warrior-like than you; would this"might-is-right" philosophy be
ok with you? You speak of warrior tribes. What tribe are you from? Is my tribe stronger? Are you a warrior? Was Kazmierczak a warrior? What test would you give me to
reward me with your moral, ideological graces? A wrestling match? An IQ test? Sitting in a classroom, dodging your bullets?
To me, this is a no-brainer. These mall, schoolyard shootings are dispicable and bad for society. There is nothing positive in it, and reflect the lowest, poorest example of a
One more thing on my mind: Too many people in this forum focus on the stupid and the shallow; comparing themselves to so called "normals" to make themselves feel better and smarter. How about comparing yourselves to the higher cast? Comparing yourselves to the true creators. The ones that do more than post on forums and bash people that listen to the "wrong music" and wear backwards hats. It takes more than hating Necrophagis, quoting a sentence from Thus Spake Zarathustra and worshipping Burzum to be intelligent IMO.