releasespieces
Poles are shifting, death is looming
- Jun 26, 2022
- 286
I'm trying to psych myself up to go through with it. I'm trying to break through those barriers that our parents, teachers, religions and society as a whole setup to encourage people to stay alive. Why is suicide taboo? Suicide is the ultimate form of rebellion which is one of the reasons it appeals to me so much. I truly hate humans and this world with the upmost contempt. There is fear of the unknown that is only there because of indoctrination, not for any logical reason, we have no reason to believe that an afterlife exists, but if it does, we have no idea what that would entail. Here are some interesting bits I found discussing suicide I wanted to share…
by Unoriginal » Sun Mar 18, 2012 4:17 am
Suicide is only taboo in certain societies. It certainly wasn't taboo for most of Japan's history, it wasn't taboo for the cultures that allowed their elderly/sick/disabled/etc to make the decision to slowly die out in the forest so they wouldn't be a burden on the tribe.
Life is terminal. To suggest suicide is a permanent solution to a temporary problem feels like a dishonest ploy, it ignores the most critical aspect to the human condition: we are mortal yet our lives, to each individual, is in fact permanent. I'm sure this sounds confusing, look at the definition of permanent and you will see it's something expected to not change for an indefinite period of time, and indefinite means not clear, vague, without clear limits. I have no idea how long I will live or when I will die, and I am certain I will live until the end of the indefinite period of time that is my life. My life is both permanent and temporary, by literal definition. We can not shift back and forth at will from a state of life and death.
Suicide is simply an irreversible and absolute solution, as far as I can tell, it's a permanent solution to a permanent problem, and in some cases suicide is simply the best possible solution, in my opinion.
Suicide is pure freedom, and most societies kryptonite is precisely pure freedom. And a society with an economy where it's true currency is an ever increasing pool of people who buy into the same idea of society at some level, suicide can not be supported.
As for a revolution to our current society, I imagine a violent one will fail miserably. Now, a systematic unrelenting series of publicly documented self-immolation for at least a solid month surely could shift things dramatically. You can't ignore it for long, and you certainly can not attack it like any revolution you could study in history books.
I believe as long as people (1) are not in debt OR have completed a filing for bankruptcy, AND (2) they've made arrangements for any dependants to be properly cared for after they're gone, they should be allowed access to safe and painless (or as near-to-painless-as-possible) options for committing suicide. Yes, I'm completely serious. The reason I think so is not just because I think we all should have a right to end our own lives, but because if things were arranged that way on a *societal* level then I feel people would be more supportive of those around them. Sure you could still gaslight/invalidate people with the whole "HOW WOULD THAT OTHER PERSON FEEL?" spiel, but if a person is willing to put in the time to take care of actual societal obligations, and if there was a way for that to be formally recognized, that kind of thinking would ring hollow.
The actual fact is that suicide is taboo not because there is any sincere sentiment behind the "HOW WOULD THAT OTHER PERSON FEEL?" response, but because even the most miserable, hopeless, "unproductive" people are more useful to society alive than dead.
Even if you're socially isolated, homeless, unemployed, and/or marginalized in other ways, you or someone else is still spending money on sheltering and feeding you. That flow of cash is benefiting people. Your social isolation might tempt you into addiction, which contributes to the bottom line of whoever is peddling your desires. Within our capitalist societies, homelessness spins off into spending on social services, charities, police departments, private companies that make "anti-homeless spikes" (google it) and the like. If you're unemployed AND compelled to find a job to survive (i.e. not idle rich so you have to be in the job market), you help keep labour a buyer's market. Some people like to pretend social spending doesn't contribute to economic growth but then these same people will also cite GDP, which includes all of that spending either directly or indirectly. The only way not to contribute is to not spend money yourself, AND not have anyone spending money on you.
And how do you do that? You leave the system. Either live entirely off the grid somehow (essentially impossible) or die.
Because how can society continue to benefit from your existence after your death? For one last hurrah there's disposal of the body, clerical work, a funeral, possibly counselling for the bereaved (assuming there are some), inheritances (assuming recipients spend it and don't just stash it away), maybe a newspaper announcement now and then, but soon it all peters out and then… that's it. Suicide in particular is heinous to supporters of the system we live in because, I expect, the vast majority of suicides are markers for unsolved socioeconomic problems. Those chronic problems are themselves markers that the system doesn't work. Allowing people access to reliable and relatively painless means of committing suicide with records kept on reasons why they chose to die, and then publishing the untouched results regularly, would be the strongest measure of confidence in a fair, free, and open society that there ever could be.
This is a response to Sabi…
Yeah, totally agree. But the economic factor isn't the only reason why society doesn't want you to suicide. People are scared, because through suicides they are shown what an obscure monstrosity our society has become. Suicides rip them right out of their fairytale lives. They don't wanna know about the suffering and evil in our world, especially if it's right around the corner; they prefer illusions of continuous happiness. Death itself is a taboo in our society.
Why is suicide taboo?
by Unoriginal » Sun Mar 18, 2012 4:17 amSuicide is only taboo in certain societies. It certainly wasn't taboo for most of Japan's history, it wasn't taboo for the cultures that allowed their elderly/sick/disabled/etc to make the decision to slowly die out in the forest so they wouldn't be a burden on the tribe.
Life is terminal. To suggest suicide is a permanent solution to a temporary problem feels like a dishonest ploy, it ignores the most critical aspect to the human condition: we are mortal yet our lives, to each individual, is in fact permanent. I'm sure this sounds confusing, look at the definition of permanent and you will see it's something expected to not change for an indefinite period of time, and indefinite means not clear, vague, without clear limits. I have no idea how long I will live or when I will die, and I am certain I will live until the end of the indefinite period of time that is my life. My life is both permanent and temporary, by literal definition. We can not shift back and forth at will from a state of life and death.
Suicide is simply an irreversible and absolute solution, as far as I can tell, it's a permanent solution to a permanent problem, and in some cases suicide is simply the best possible solution, in my opinion.
Suicide is pure freedom, and most societies kryptonite is precisely pure freedom. And a society with an economy where it's true currency is an ever increasing pool of people who buy into the same idea of society at some level, suicide can not be supported.
As for a revolution to our current society, I imagine a violent one will fail miserably. Now, a systematic unrelenting series of publicly documented self-immolation for at least a solid month surely could shift things dramatically. You can't ignore it for long, and you certainly can not attack it like any revolution you could study in history books.
here's why suicide is so taboo
written by Sabi 10/29/2014I believe as long as people (1) are not in debt OR have completed a filing for bankruptcy, AND (2) they've made arrangements for any dependants to be properly cared for after they're gone, they should be allowed access to safe and painless (or as near-to-painless-as-possible) options for committing suicide. Yes, I'm completely serious. The reason I think so is not just because I think we all should have a right to end our own lives, but because if things were arranged that way on a *societal* level then I feel people would be more supportive of those around them. Sure you could still gaslight/invalidate people with the whole "HOW WOULD THAT OTHER PERSON FEEL?" spiel, but if a person is willing to put in the time to take care of actual societal obligations, and if there was a way for that to be formally recognized, that kind of thinking would ring hollow.
The actual fact is that suicide is taboo not because there is any sincere sentiment behind the "HOW WOULD THAT OTHER PERSON FEEL?" response, but because even the most miserable, hopeless, "unproductive" people are more useful to society alive than dead.
Even if you're socially isolated, homeless, unemployed, and/or marginalized in other ways, you or someone else is still spending money on sheltering and feeding you. That flow of cash is benefiting people. Your social isolation might tempt you into addiction, which contributes to the bottom line of whoever is peddling your desires. Within our capitalist societies, homelessness spins off into spending on social services, charities, police departments, private companies that make "anti-homeless spikes" (google it) and the like. If you're unemployed AND compelled to find a job to survive (i.e. not idle rich so you have to be in the job market), you help keep labour a buyer's market. Some people like to pretend social spending doesn't contribute to economic growth but then these same people will also cite GDP, which includes all of that spending either directly or indirectly. The only way not to contribute is to not spend money yourself, AND not have anyone spending money on you.
And how do you do that? You leave the system. Either live entirely off the grid somehow (essentially impossible) or die.
Because how can society continue to benefit from your existence after your death? For one last hurrah there's disposal of the body, clerical work, a funeral, possibly counselling for the bereaved (assuming there are some), inheritances (assuming recipients spend it and don't just stash it away), maybe a newspaper announcement now and then, but soon it all peters out and then… that's it. Suicide in particular is heinous to supporters of the system we live in because, I expect, the vast majority of suicides are markers for unsolved socioeconomic problems. Those chronic problems are themselves markers that the system doesn't work. Allowing people access to reliable and relatively painless means of committing suicide with records kept on reasons why they chose to die, and then publishing the untouched results regularly, would be the strongest measure of confidence in a fair, free, and open society that there ever could be.
This is a response to Sabi…
Yeah, totally agree. But the economic factor isn't the only reason why society doesn't want you to suicide. People are scared, because through suicides they are shown what an obscure monstrosity our society has become. Suicides rip them right out of their fairytale lives. They don't wanna know about the suffering and evil in our world, especially if it's right around the corner; they prefer illusions of continuous happiness. Death itself is a taboo in our society.
Last edited:
