I do think it's hard not to be a nihilist. The pseudo-Existentialist imperative that we ought to "make our own meaning" is just complete nonsense that can't be made sense of under rigorous scrutiny. From whence does this "meaning" come?
Obviously "meaning" doesn't come ex nihilo out of your mind (unless you're some sort of solipsist and believe the mind just makes shit up out of a vacuum). It must to some degree come from the external world - whether we have some level of control over this or are completely determined. If we do have some level of control over it, then we're left to explain what makes it possible for us to synthesize our experiences consciously into some sort of "meaning", and if we are completely determined, then how can one be anything other than a nihilist?
This also leaves out the question of what "meaning" even is to begin with. If you're a hardcore naturalist like Quine, something like "meaning" is nonsensical. You could take "meaning" to be a feature of language, but meaning in language (as far as I know; I'm not a linguist, though) is something that we all happen to just agree on as what a certain sound denotes. You could not individually decide to make up a meaning by inventing some word, because you'd be forced to explain to someone in a language people understand what that word means, or you'd not be engaging in meaningful exchange at all.
But then again, being a nihilist is also contradictory in a sense. I don't see how one can conceive of believing in nothing, since "nothing" can't have anything predicated of it. It seems to me that anyone who actively is a philosophical nihilist, rather than someone who is just a broken or empty individual that doesn't care to try to fabricate belief anymore, is only fooling themselves. But I do know that Ray Brassier considers his philosophy to be a nihilism of sorts.
Also why do I feel like I've seen that rabbit image before.