Nihilism Defined

A common, but misleading, description of nihilism is the 'belief in nothing'. Instead, a far more useful one would substitute 'faith' for 'belief' where faith is defined as the "firm belief in something for which there is no proof." A universal definition of nihilism could then well be the rejection of that which requires faith for salvation or actualization and would span to include anything from theology to secular ideology. Within nihilism faith and similar values are discarded because they've no verifiable objective substance, they are invalid serving only as yet another exploitable lie never producing any strategically beneficial outcome. Faith is an imperative hazard to group and individual because it compels suspension of reason, critical analysis and common sense. Nietzsche once said that faith means not wanting to know. Faith is 'don't let those pesky facts get in the way of our political plan or our mystically ordained path to heaven'; faith is 'do what I tell you because I said so'. All things that can't be disproved need faith, utopia needs faith, idealism needs faith, spiritual salvation needs faith. Abolish faith!

The second element nihilism rejects is the belief in final purpose, that the universe is built upon non-random events and that everything is structured towards an eventual conclusive revelation. This is called teleology and it's the fatal flaw plaguing the whole rainbow of false solutions from Marxism to Buddhism and everything in between. Teleology compels obedience towards the fulfillment of "destiny" or "progress" or similar such grandiose goals. Teleology is used by despots and utopian dreamers alike as a coercive motivation leading only to yet another apocryphal apocalypse; the real way to lead humanity by the nose - tell them it's all part of the big plan so play along or else! It may even seem reasonable but there is not now and never has been any evidence the universe operates teleologically - there is no final purpose. This is the simple beauty nihilism has that no other idea-set does. By breaking free from the tethers of teleology one is empowered in outlook and outcome because for the first time it's possible to find answers without proceeding from pre-existing perceptions. We're finally free to find out what's really out there and not just the partial evidence to support original pretext and faulty notions only making a hell on earth in the process. So abolish teleology too!

Nihilism is primarily skepticism coupled with reduction, but in practical reality it takes on more than one facet which often leads to a confusion of definitions. In the most general sense nihilism has two major classifications, the first is passive and usually goes by the term existential or 'social' nihilism and the second is active and is termed 'political' nihilism.

Existential nihilism is a passive world view which revolves around such topics as suffering and futility, and even has connections to Eastern mysticism like Buddhism. In a more direct sense existential 'social' nihilism is manifest within the sense of isolation, futility, angst, and the hopelessness of existence increasingly prevalent within the modern digital world, an effect referred to as the 'downward spiral'. A direct way to describe it might be 'detachment from everything'.

Words used to describe political nihilism include active, revolutionary, destructive, and even creative. Political nihilism is dictionary defined as the realization "that conditions in the social organization are so bad as to make destruction desirable for its own sake independent of any constructive program or possibility." It deals with authority and social structures rather than simply the introspective, personal emotions of existential nihilism.

Political nihilism especially is a world-view that's rational, logical, empirical, scientific and devoid of pointless, extraneous emotion. It's the logical psyche that distills everything down into what is known, what can be known and what can't be known. It's the realization that all values are ultimately relativistic and in some ways the simplicity of nihilism is its own complexity.

An estimable and succinct definition of a (political) nihilist comes from Ivan Turgenev's 1861 novel Fathers And Sons, "A nihilist is a person who does not bow down to any authority, who does not accept any principle on faith, however much that principle may be revered." This nihilist is a serious and mature person with a sharp, cogent mind but one dealing with a double edged sword that can just as easily lead to damage as to enlightenment.

So the two classes of nihilism overlap but the CounterOrder is mostly about this second stage of 'political' nihilism for reasons of brevity, because the existential angle when not stillborn generally leads to political nihilism anyway, because nihilism isn't something to just talk about it's something you live, and finally because political nihilism has real world history and experience as you will read in a moment concerning the Russian revolutionaries in Historical Nihilism below. Ultimately however, the nihilistic direction one travels depends on what the individual wishes to make out of life.

To negate and circumvent the paradoxes and internal contradictions inherent within existential nihilism is the course of the 'political' nihilism you're reading. I don't want to use the philosophy lexicon any more than necessary nor the confusing verbosity of academia (just a few colorful adjectives where necessary); Nihilism is the destruction of idle philosophy, the negation of idealism, the negation of mythology, and the destruction of perplexity along with the disingenuous despots that profit from it as the monopolist interpreters of artificial confusion. Therefore, 'political' Nihilism's definitions are:

1) When conditions in the social organization are so unhealthy as to make destruction desirable for its own sake independent of any constructive program or possibility. 2) A doctrine of skepticism coupled with reduction that refutes faith, teleology, arbitrary morality, sacred values and principles, heresy, blasphemy, and similar beliefs while maintaining that existing political, social, and economic institutions based on these beliefs must be destroyed. 3) A methodology for a biologically-based existence that rejects arbitrary morality in favor of cause and effect and inviolate forces, predicated upon that which is objectively self-evident and without need of belief, within a sustainable mental and physical environment that promotes independent thinking and critical expression.

Historical Nihilism

The first nihilists were likely the Greek Sophists who lived about 2500 years ago. They used oratorical skills and argumentative discourse to challenge the values upon which everyday beliefs rested. The Greek sophists, such as Gorgias, represented the beginning of philosophy and the first conflict between the traditional mystical belief system and a rational, skeptical view of the natural world. It was as basic as the difference between a worldview based on emotion and one on thought. Because the sophists challenged established beliefs they were often condemned by public authorities and critics as moral corrupters or worse.

One of the earliest nihilistic writers of the modern era was the Dane Soren Aabye Kierkegaard who lived from 1813 to 1855. Kierkegaard was a truly unique but also enigmatic philosopher who established the foundation of the philosophy later termed existentialism. Kierkegaard's existentialism was in many ways a negation of the ruling Hegelian philosophy, views deeply rooted in Kierkegaard's Lutheran Protestantism that reflected the ideals of the subjectivity of truth and the nature of life as a uniquely individual pursuit. To be brutally succinct existentialism posits that existence is based on experience and this experience is a uniquely individualized sensation, in other words ‘my reality is not your reality’. Modern quantum physical 'philosophy' returned to this theme of solipsistic reality during the late 20th century using empirical mathematics.

The Russian Nihilists
Political nihilism goes back at least to Russia during the last half of the 1800s as a revolutionary movement with the stated goal of overthrowing the despotic authority of the Czar.

In Russia, nihilism became identified with a loosely organized revolutionary movement (C.1860-1917) that rejected the authority of the state, church, and family. ... The movement advocated a social arrangement based on rationalism and materialism as the sole source of knowledge and individual freedom as the highest goal. By rejecting man's spiritual essence in favor of a solely materialistic one, nihilists denounced God and religious authority as antithetical to freedom.
From: The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

By modern standards the Nihilists attempts at revolution were inconsistent and mostly ineffective - lobbing low quality munitions at the Czar and his family and even getting themselves blown up in the process. But what they lacked in equipment and tactics they made up for with vision, ideas, and an unparalleled intensity.

The nihilists enjoyed shocking their parents by calling for an end to the old moral system, advocating, for instance, the extermination of everybody in Russia over the age of 25. In the 1860's many of these young intellectuals went to Switzerland, where the proper Swiss bourgeoisie were scandalized at the men with their hair cut long and the girls with their hair cut short, at their loud voices and insolent behaviour. [1]

The mark left by the Russian Nihilists was not in ephemeral political change but rather a revolution of ideas and attitudes, one that still resonates today. "The earnest young men and women [Nihilists] of the 1860's wanted to cut through every polite veneer, to get rid of all conventional sham, to get to the bottom of things." [4]

Anarchism
Both modern nihilists and anarchists can trace roots to the intense personality of Mikhael Bakunin in the 19th century who succinctly reflected the nihilist sentiment with his famous statement: "Let us put our trust in the eternal spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unsearchable and eternally creative source of all." Politically, anarchism and nihilism are often confused and in a limited yet tangible sense nihilism is the struggle between law/government (forces of anti-natural order) and liberty (nihilism). Here anarchism and nihilism seem to have certain elements in common. For example the anarchist will say 'no one has the authority to tell another what to do'. But the nihilist would say that if the one giving orders has a gun and the other not, then what do rights or authority matter? Indeed what good is constitution at the moment of any criminal event?

Anarchists are idealists, they believe in subjective concepts such as peace, justice, and especially the ultimately noble nature of the individual (at least under the proper social conditions). The nihilist reality is devoid of such foolishness. The Nihilist realizes that history is often abused and misconstrued through the formation of artificial lines and erroneous connections between disparate events only to substantiate preconceived interpretations of reality, the classic teleological myth.

We draw an imaginary thread through the ages to chart the course we judge to be the 'correct' one. All wrong views are ignored. This approach was dubbed the 'Whig' theory of history by Herbert Butterfield. The name derived from those past historians who treated history as a record of events that culminated in the political system dear to their own hearts: the liberal democracy. [2]

It's an understandable product of human evolution to not only detect patterns but also get carried away and concoct them as well. "[T]he human mind has evolved an ability to recognize geometrical patterns where none exist. What else might it be recognizing that does not exist?" [2] Human nature sees things that aren't really there, just think of optical illusions or Rorschach ink-blot tests. Much of life is nothing interpreted as something. This is because dealing with the yawning nothing necessitates the concoction of a something to grasp the nothing thereby ignoring the perilous obvious by manufacturing a more malleable artificial myth. Yet the attitude of a nihilist is contradictory to this because they desire to discern a more accurate understanding of reality at the moment not as they wish to see which is the tragically typical way divorced from evidence and reasoned hypothesis. This includes the desire to view human character as it actually is and understand purpose within context.

Beyond Good and Evil

Religious believers and philosophers alike frequently ask the question, ‘does evil exist?’, as if they need to be continually reassured that it does and we agree with them. Many are completely convinced that evil is everywhere, yet the same people are equally sure of luck, fate, and mysterious malevolent powers out to defeat all their noble efforts. But all of these imaginary influences are simply projections of a selfish ego. In fact, there is no natural evil, and no malicious intent exists within any forces of the universe.

An old Russian proverb states, "There is no evil, but that it brings some good,” revealing that even in standard manichean theology every god has a devil and every good requires an evil to shadow it. Even to define evil as wholly immoral acts we still have to specify which set of moral of standards we’re using as rule book. Is it the Bible? The Talmud? The I Ching?! Obviously, evil is a variable, yet nonetheless consistent elements of healthy and unhealthy can still be discerned within the boundaries of a species due to the shared genetic material. Actions and events that benefit the growth and well-being of the species, and the individuals within it, are colloquially, but consistently, termed good and the opposite as evil. For instance the chicken, as well as the human owner, considers the fox evil because he sneaks in to commit murder, yet the fox doesn’t consider his species' carnivorous actions to be evil but rather entirely good because they mean food and survival. This analogy also reminds us that we can go much farther with symbiosis and cooperation than with warfare.

For intelligent creatures good and evil are unnecessary categories,  they’re loaded terms that intentionally obscure actual forces and events while impeding our ability to accurately comprehend both. We shouldn’t view life and existence as a conflict between good and evil; to do so is both foolish and self-defeating because it requires us to declare war on ourselves, our instincts, and even unavoidable natural laws!

A Little Perspective

Everybody has an answer, but not just any answer, the answer. If you think about it it's truly amazing the sheer number of people that have the officially authorized monopoly on truth. This fact alone highlights the dissonance of absolute values and the misguided nature of idealism. What quantitative value would you place on your life? A life insurance corporation could concoct an exact dollar amount. But even that figure may be inflated, the chemical compounds that make up your body are only worth a few cents. But isn't life more valuable than gold, oil or other commodities? Think again.

Which is cheaper to create human life or an ounce of gold? Gold can actually be synthesized in a cyclotron but the cost is astronomical, however human life or any life can be created virtually for free. Planet Earth is infested with perpetual self-replicators but the amount of platinum for example is finite. This self-righteous confidence manifests itself as an unlimited capacity for egoistic narcissism and self-magnification. Human arrogance conveniently assumes itself the apex of evolution yet in reality the corporeal being is merely a disposable vehicle for the reproduction of genetic material, not the other way around! Perhaps the most profound realization of the 20th century remains mostly unknown for it is the genes that are the master and not the individual human created by them. This helps explain why many human cravings are harmful to the self but profitable to the genes and the prevalence of certain self-destructive behaviors. And remarkably this is the true solution to the classic existential dilemma, why life is just death or as John Lennon once put it, "Why in the world are we here? Surely not to live in pain and fear," yet apparently we are! The human body isn't programmed for pain-free longevity just long enough to reproduce physically and to perpetuate learned skills, which is why doctors will never run out of business. The biological boss may be too small to see but it's far too powerful to ignore.

If human value could be measured outside the skewed perspective of the collective ego it might look something like this; if only one individual existed on planet Earth they would be the most important human. If two people existed their individual significance would be divided in half (1/2). If six thousand million people existed on Earth what would the individual significance of each one be? A simple equation shows the value as the fractional percentage of the whole population plus any incidental, conjectural additives from education, training, intelligence etc. Presupposing this Marxian values system of universal equality the formula for individual human value is:

Is it any wonder religion is so popular, why human nature so desperately seeks meaning and purpose even in the most ridiculous places? Why do so many people hide behind money fooling only themselves into thinking that wealth gives them significance? Isn't it painfully obvious why society invents artificial concepts such as justice, morality, and ethics? The brutality and utter irrationality of the animal world is just outside the rusty gates of our crumbling civilization. But isn't it comforting to know that as long as we're inside we have the warming sensation of fairness, equality and justice for all (that can afford it anyway)?

Self-delusion seems to be a defining quality of human behavior. Lies maintain our flimsy order, we find consolation in myths like 'what we do has significance' and 'God punishes the wicked'. The constant avalanche of empirical evidence to the contrary simply gets relegated to the third class bureau of irrational philosophers.

Hypocrisy can flourish when goodness is defined not only as kind and altruistic behavior, but as sticking to the rules and obligations of the faith. [3]

Our 'leaders' wage war in the name of peace and establish democracy with an iron fist. Our traditional values are warped; they reflect fantasy not reality. Our values are so removed from actual substance that fantasy becomes reality and truth becomes error. This is the primary difficulty in conveying the meaning of nihilism because all morally loaded concepts are biased against a lucid description of the nihilistic viewpoint. Nietzsche was addressing this issue when he wrote the title and the book Beyond Good and Evil. But it's not just a series of lies it's a debasing and wholly aberrant structure. The problem is so deep that even the words to define it must be replaced with a new lexicon.

Nihilism as Philosophy

Nihilism is a rejection of philosophy and the metaphysical nebulae such reasoning inevitably descends into. Yet if one wants this out of nihilism they can construct it, even more so than other idea sets, but to do so only leads to paradox and contradiction like finding value in no-values or a literal belief in nothing; try the disbelief in gravity for instance. Nihilism is not absolutist voiding of values to create an imaginary milieu neutered of good or evil, up or down because those are absurd situations, indeed idealistic situations that are both impossible to achieve and dangerously delusional as goals. Unfortunately some nihilists get caught in this dim labyrinth of ethics and morality. Others jump head first into the maw as a demonstration of supposed mental prowess which explains existential nihilism's effervescent popularity among certain academics and similar insulated atoms of fantasy. Nihilism is the destruction of philosophy not the magnification of it! Reference Nietzsche's philosophy with a sledgehammer.

This existentialism is superfluous since such constructs are wholly elastic anyhow; they can and do mean whatever the proponent claims generating the same foggy haze of intellectual opacity nihilism disperses. In other words it's myth creation, although that doesn't render them insignificant or impotent in the mind of the public, myths have value for those that believe in them. The nihilists can't simply ignore the myth believers or the myths; instead the wise path is to seek understanding. Nihilism dissolves myth with the acid of reason and logic to illuminate their assumptions and underpinning structures to better understand and better act.

Nihilism challenges the assumptions supporting common values such as 'equality'; 'pity', 'justice', etc. But also terms of conclusion about human existence such as "meaningless", "pointless" and "futile" are equally flawed because their definitions stem from the original morality values that have hitherto been rejected. Simple example: 'justice'. In court it's not whether one is guilty or not but how good a lawyer one has, how cogent the presented argument is and how well manipulated the jury and judge are, did somebody say justice - oh maybe not! 'Justice' is the confusing legalese that your high-priced barrister can spew in the courtroom like an oil slick in front of a pursuing vehicle. The rich go free while the poor go to prison. Why? Find out on the next page Nihilism in Action!

Nihilism is a consequence of the personal realization that modern values and morals are wholly false and unworkable, and the ultimate esteem with which these morals have been uplifted leads to a catastrophic withdrawal to the opposite extreme when the deception is recognized.

While an acceptance of nihilism immediately returns a perspective of utter futility for life and universal existence, this perspective is not the final resolution. As Nietzsche once wrote in The Will to Power, "Nihilism represents a pathological transition phase..." Existence is not futile simply because the edifice of modern morality is inherently dysfunctional. Actually existence has even more purpose now because a proper perspective has been attained and a reason is [finally] clear - the complete destruction of the debasing, theologically derived moral order. Thus the nihilist is at base a creator of the highest magnitude and a survivor of the most intense metaphysical struggle of all time. The nihilist undergoes a personal evolution and has proven themselves the mental superiors to the herd and mob, they have proven their will and 'license' for continued existence and have successfully escaped from the circus of values. Once the transvaluation of values is complete an entirely new and sane perspective is achieved.

280 Million Years of Nihilism

It's a characteristic of the human mind to turn simplicity into subjective complexity and to construe difficulty from life where none exists. Today the archetypal question for philosophers is "why are we here?" Ask a human and a serious response will probably involve complex reasoning involving mystical deities or introspective analysis. But before we leave the final answer with humanity I think we need a second opinion.

Some 280 million years ago the first amphibians began life outside water. These Labryinthodonts named for their infolded tooth enamel typically had large triangular heads and wide, flat bodies that looked like giant road-kill without the tread marks. Tetrapods like these crawled around on land eating worms, maybe a few bugs but basically whatever they could catch and digest. Not much to look at or admire yet they gave rise to all other land vertebrates, reptiles, birds, and yes eventually even literate humans.

If we could ask the same of a Permian tetrapod what mysterious, and enlightening answers would they provide? Perhaps something like "I don't understand the question, I just want to avoid death."

Odd isn't it that they never had any goal or god, no soul or hope of an afterlife indeed they lacked any purpose beyond the brief struggle for life and yet millions of years later here we are reading this because of it, because they existed and evolved. We as humans exist in the same physical universe, subject to the same rules of physics and biology, the same need for sea-water salinity body fluid, the same protein and amino acids ... Decades of scientific inquiry and careful research all to reach the inescapable conclusion that the point is there is no point. The joke is on us because we turned the absurdly simple into the dangerously complex.

The answer to "why are we here" is no different for human, Labryinthodont or jellyfish because we live in the same world subject to the same physical limitations and end up in the same place after death. Well, some leave better fossils than others. Now we see why fear of death is such a natural instinct and why religion exerts so much concerted effort to contradict that instinct.

The human mind creates ethics, moral codes, rules to die by, excuses and justifications for the deepest epiphany and the most trivial event alike. Some even go so far as to hijack random events and misinterpret them as self-created, the psychological principle known as 'illusion of control'. Unfortunately the complexities of the human mind merely make it easier to believe in fantasy and entertain delusion. Such an effort to find greater significance where there really is none and this only leads to wayward guidance and specious justifications. Those concocted reasons are then used to justify what need not be justified like our continued existence except based upon lies, setting up everyone for the fall when the myth erodes. Everything would move onward quite smoothly without any human minds around to believe in God, Satan or any other fictions, it did before us and it will after. Instead the Nihilist is concerned with the things that matter whether anyone believes in them or not; all those forces and factors that influence even the things that don't think.

Although evolution has no goal and our purpose may be just as elusive that doesn't void significance, it doesn't make action and consequence irrelevant, an important distinction too often confused within nihilism. Nihilism doesn't preclude significance or a naive refusal to extract lessons from history just as a lack of the traditional mystical goal does not necessitate futility. Extinction events for example are significant, after all we wouldn't be here without them. The only cosmic justification supported by any tangible evidence is the impetus for continued existence, the self-justifying purpose of tautology. And truthfully demanding any further justification from most simply foments confusion and foolish behavior. Furthermore it's likely that anything beyond that basal maxim is just an artificial construction. So, nihilism is not an issue of existence so much as a series of questions regarding the value if any that those artificially constructed meanings have. Where do they take us and do we really want to end up there? And can we really outsmart natural selection, for instance?

What's Left?

Nihilism can appear very complicated because in the present moral milieu it's necessary to describe it in the terms of negatives and being against this or that. It's about accepting what is and working within that framework to generate a lifestyle of efficacy and natural perspective. Too often our modern hi-tech planet makes us think that if it looks confusing and it takes a Germanic scholar to analyze it then it must be complicated. What I'm saying is that you don't need any of that shit. You don't need to believe in God or Beelzebub or anything else that can't be verified or tested in any way. You don't need to believe that human nature is intrinsically evil or in original sin. It takes so much vain effort to struggle with good and bad. Normal people literally torture themselves with ethical and moral quandaries in self-created dungeons that ultimately never matter. For this reason the nihilistic philosophy takes a beating in the arena of ideas because it's just a nothing ideology. That's why I like to call it an anti-ideology. It simply doesn't play by those rules because those rules are arbitrary; they exist only in the social-mindset. And if other people want to live within that self-torturing, intellect numbing fantasy world then I'm not going to stop them; have fun ... hating life.

It is important to realize too that Nihilism isn’t like every other ideology that places a vague future goal in primacy and forces everything in the present to fit that fantasy. Nihilism is a counter-order, it is the opposite of every other ideology and theology that seeks to impose an absolute conception of the way everything should be because that’s simply not how things really work. Life can’t be controlled by an artificially concocted single universal answer or by building a perfect order that will last forever. Nihilism operates with the expectation that the future and its needs are always unknown and all we can really do is prepare ourselves to fit the present and try to meet whatever challenges arise in the ongoing process of existence; thus Nihilism isn’t concerned so much with the aftermath as it is with the here and now, hence its very definition.

Change and acceptance of heterodoxy does not come without introspection. Human nature is so conditioned to social living that even the silliest social faux pas achieves monumental proportions; people live for the trivial at the cost of living for the critical. "Did I buy the right brand of shoes? Am I using the right brand of toothpaste?" Who really has the twisted perspective?

And what is the point? The point is that even if you reject nihilism your relationship has not been severed because the entire social and political structure that we have to live within is programmed for self-destruction because it’s all based on disingenuous ideas and promulgated through hollow rhetoric and plastic faces for near-term goals. And what do lies breed except vengeance and anger?

You may blame the violence, blame the anger, blame the nihilism, blame the effect not the cause, but nevertheless that dangerous dénouement will remain not far off and no one alive will avoid it. Learn why, read the next page In Action!

Closing Statement

As humbling as it is the scale and perhaps significance of humanity shrinks in accordance with the magnitude of our knowledge. A basic understanding of cosmology leads to the ultimate nihilism. Springing from a cosmic accident life (apparently) has no purpose or value. We’re just small beings crawling upon a tiny world at the edge of one of countless galaxies in an uncaring, unconcerned universe. The product of a series of astounding improbabilities destined to die after lifetime of meaningless suffering alone and afraid ... and if you think God made it all, isn't that even more degrading?!

Without a higher moral judge, nothing beyond life goes punished or rewarded. The fundamental moral quandary is that in order for moral rules to have validity they must have an ultimate arbiter, otherwise right and wrong dive into confusing waters of relativism. That ultimate arbiter has always been God, the final judge, where the buck stops, where even Earth's most evil and wicked run amok with free will get their comeuppance. The Bible says the Earth is the Devils domain (Isaiah 13:11 & Revelation 12:9, even though the Bible also says God created the Earth, Genesis 1:1). If that's what everyone expects, then that's all it will ever be. As a Nihilist I say it's our domain and we can make it a hell or a heaven. But as long as we prejudge the decision absolving ourselves of responsibility then it probably will be a realm for the Devil.

When we conclude that we each only get one life, the goal becomes painfully obvious, as unpleasant as the sight of the predator messily devouring the prey on Wild Kingdom. I think humans are the gods, but the corporal package is a powerful dichotomy. Worm and god side by side. We need no higher power for justification or success, only the desire and willpower. Each human life has the potential, but unless one strives to be something higher they are only a worm. We can do anything the question is will we? Will we struggle in vain with the futile labels of olde, senselessly slaughtering each other over self-imposed polarities while disingenuous despots reap the profits from our collective bloodletting? Or will we choose the exit, and in this very dark room known as life not too many exit signs are visible. The one I used is called nihilism.

Comments?

...and now for a brief audio response...

1. A History of Civilization, Brinton,  p. 300-301, Prentice Hall 1960.

2. The World Within The World by John D. Barrow, pages 334 & 332, Oxford University Press 1988.

3. The Meme Machine by Susan Blackmore, page 189, Oxford University Press 1999.

4. A History of Russia, sixth edition, by Nicholas V. Riasanovsky, Oxford University Press 2000, page 381.