Jump to content

drillkicker

Members
  • Posts

    1911
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by drillkicker

  1. I saw someone walking through downtown bmore today who I know from a different town a long time ago and who I never expected nor wanted to see again. Currently planning a move to São Paulo.
  2. I think the primary difference in our ways of understanding capitalism is in our treatment of the unconscious and social aspect of it. You seem to have a more material and structural worldview. My understanding is that the State is a tool used by Capital, entirely at the command of Capital, and powerless against it. Theoretically, the State, being the largest capitalistic organ, could potentially effect an expedience to overpower it and restructure human society; however, being a contingent structure, it isn't (in its predominant representative-democratic form) capable of lifting itself up out of the mire of capitalistic influences and reclaiming an absolute regime over its own unconscious abstract machines.
  3. Ok I wasn't sure if you had intentionally repeated Jehu's point about labor theory or if it was just a coincidence. It seems your idea of transition into communism is a very structured, top down approach that involves rigorous "education" of the workers (realistically, the youngest, pre-Oedipal generations) and the crystallization of a state with an impenetrable security system against capitalistic transformations. This security system is upheld by ongoing education, and the result is a hyper-Oedipal, repressive power structure that will ultimately become infested with diagrammatic intensities that obsolesce the signifying system of the communist dogma. Is that correct? The word "molecular" isn't used as a reference to chemistry, it's a term of convenience used to describe an assemblage acting as a singular unified entity as opposed to a loosely connected rhizome, for which the word "molar" is used. Why do you disagree with the notion of oedipal semiologies? Do you not believe that repressive systems can become embedded into the language and cultural expression of a society?
  4. Ok but what about the article? I understand that you envision some transition into a dictatorial communist ecosystem, but where would it come from? What kinds of intensities are extant that would allow for this? Capital is more pervasive now than at any point ever before and it hasn't indicated that it's capable of introducing any kind of negative feedback into its process. I'm not concerned here with what should happen, but with what will happen. By semiological assemblages I mean the crystallized forms through which expression and communication happens through signifiers. For example, currency as a signifier of Capital and buying power. As a material alone, currency is almost entirely useless, but as a signifier it equates to power. This isn't imaginary, it's a real semiological relationship that affects the world just as concretely as gravity. These structures are upheld by the unconscious processes of their respective social ecosystems. They constantly change in a machine-like way over time, through intensive forces that displace (or deterritorialize) signifiers and attach them to different signified/referent couplings. Among the different modes of transformation are molecular revolutions, or internal shifts away from a certain semiological foundation to a new central structure entirely. A good and well known example might be the Protestant Reformation. Since there are still capitalistic semiological assemblages in place that are enforced through things like repressive schooling and currency, a molecular revolution would be a necessary requirement of a political structure that seeks to quash capitalistic movement. The even bigger problem is that capitalism isn't dependent on a specific semiology, but is itself a force of transformation within assemblages. A repressive structure that hopes to throttle Capital would somehow need to prevent a capitalistic cybernetics from infiltrating. I don't have any vision of what this would look like. If you didn't want to participate in the discussion, then why bother posting?
  5. I'd be interested in reading your response to this old article by Jehu. Personally, I'm unconvinced of the viability of an anarcho-communist future in our current stage. At best, it would necessitate a gradual reappropriation of capitalistic use-values and division of labor but also a massive (no, even more massive) molecular revolution of semiological assemblages. This would be the K-punk modality of communism as I understand it (also certainly the Deleuzo-Guattarian). Without these, I see no hope for a successful eternal return of a communist event. Oedipal semiological structures would resurrect capitalistic intensities and infect the commune, and the old enemy would reappear.
  6. Don't you see that Twitter threads are capitalism? Twitter is a proprietary platform that exists as a machine with which Capital can contain a hyperintensive cybernetic overcoding of semiology, advancing its own reterritorialization of language at a pace far beyond what anyone can critique. Speaking on a proprietary platform is not the same as speaking openly in the physical air. Once you have adopted the expressive worldspace of capitalistic cybernetics you have adopted the faciality of a deterritorialized schizo-voice.
  7. Capitalism is only "evil" in the sense that it's the enemy of humanity. But that alone doesn't make it evil. The reason why is because Capital is so powerful that it has risen above morality and even found a way to disguise its devastation to the worker-consumer (desiring-machine). Morality today is one of the most deterritorialized, flexible tools that Capital uses in order to build itself from our elapsed labor-value, and eventually even this purpose will deteriorate (once capitalism qua capitalism — Capital in its purest, asignifying manifestation — has actualized itself).
  8. What kind of people are you socializing with? Friends aren't supposed to pressure each other into making personal life choices they aren't comfortable with. This sounds like a negative social environment.
  9. I'm moving into a much better and much cheaper place in a more convenient part of town in less than two weeks. I met my roommate today and he gave me one of the t-shirts that he screen prints himself. Today rocks, even in spite of the labor day hangover.
  10. I love it. It's a big middle finger to anyone who has a taste in music (good or bad).
  11. I've finally been converted by 100 gecs. It's becoming a regular feature in my life. I've realized that good music is overrated and overrepresented in the world. Bad music needs a chance, and awful music deserves a place of supreme privilege. Too many people make music with the intention of it being good and I for one am completely bored of it. I'm trying to listen only to music that is made with absolutely no consideration of quality, and 100 gecs has mastered this attitude. Out with the good, in with the bad.
  12. I just discovered that I actually enjoy mixed drinks. No longer am I a naïve and brutish neat-drinking Philistine, burning my throat with every sloppy gulp as a testament to my own impatient lassitude. No, I now have the sophisticated airs of an enlightened cocktail mixologist. I'm almost 25 years old and I now mix my drinks. Currantly (pun intended) consuming an el diablo with a Camarena añejo. Last night I had a dark+stormy and a couple gin+tonix (all supplied by my wealthier friend's private bar, from which I shamelessly mooch on the reg).
  13. Sennheiser HD 280 Pro. I'm actually wearing mine right now (listening to Richard Devine's Sort/Lave).
  14. Let me guess, the inside of your home looks like this
  15. I've started using fish sauce as a substitute for salt. It's making my cooking much more flavorful, I'd recommend it.
  16. I'm really fucking pissed off right now. I want to scream at someone. I don't know why I feel like this but I want to make someone feel terrible right now. I can't sleep because of how angry I am.
  17. It's already lived the majority of its life. When it's in its winged form it only exists to reproduce once and die. That moth is one of the successful ones.
  18. @Cryptowenthanks for pointing that one out. My goal at the moment is to read everything that influenced Land and everything influenced by him, both positively and negatively. Right now I'm in The Machinic Unconscious by Felix Guattari. It'll probably be a while until I move on from D/G.
×
×
  • Create New...