It looks like Letters is back: www.lettersjournal.org
I'm not sure I understand what the new writing is all about.
It is on ands on, a gains!
WhAT iS the NEW? IT IS, LETTERS JOURNAL.
i am glad to see it back. the writing about mathematics is baffling though i am sympathetic to the notion of underground surrealists. i am emerging from my cave slowly.
"But heaven help me, Wittgenstein made me an ultrafinitist!"
Wooow... This site's so full of anarchist luminaries. I guess they'll be reopening their under-the-table dick-sucking sessions at the SF bookfair this year.
(I meant that Letters Journal site)
They will stay far away from the radical milieu and let its current form die off into history.
As with all of academia's philo-wankers have been... basically immortal, due to two factors:
1- too socially/politically irrelevant for the pigs to even care about their very existence (or almost anybody else, for that matter)
2- parasiting off the faculty for conversational spaces, docile bodies/minds to sexually abuse, and even a bit of money for the wine & cheese events
Yet they aren't creating anything much neither out of their "conversations". Not even critical thinking on the world that is.
" One of my goals in beginning this journal again is to find ways of thinking that are not critique. "
..and then calling Debord a reactionary.
So anyone can remind me why is this posted on this site? Oh yeah! Emile went butthurt for the continuous exclusion of his textwalling, then went back to what he used to do best... circle-jerking with pen pals.
I imagine 'the pigs' would take an interest in a professor if he were sexually abusing his students. But no one involved in Letters is a teacher or professor, so I'm not sure what you're talking about. Nor do we eat wine and cheese.
As for social and political irrelevance: yes, indeed. Intentionally so. Not being bothered by the police is a good thing.
What makes you think that people who write intelligently are academics, you big bully?
The one about prefigurement. Anarchists are just as entrapped by language binary logic and history as every other ideologue.
Also, yes, Debord was a reactionary. I would ultimately say that revolution and reaction is two sides of the same historical coin.
"Also, yes, Debord was a reactionary."
Yes it is true! Because reasons. And also those pesky binaries that turn everyone that is not pro-status quo into a reactionary.
For as you know... cops and fascists are the only true anarchists, duh!
does not mean one is pro-status quo.
Yes it does. If one is being consicously and intentionally uncritical to any status quo, fabricating himself an hermetic worldview "sanitized" from it, this means a system of thiugh, or in this case here a rhetoric, that is acquiescent or at least non-oppositional to any order or condition. In theory this means accepting whatever irrational, CONFUSIONNIST make-belief that is spread around to the choir, and in practice this translates to "letting the train pass".
Doesn't entail a binary orientation. Also the continuuance of a given order of things is not something stoppable in any physicalistic sense. People are stopped belief is not.
I know you'll be endlessly seeking a rhetorical flight out of your gross statement, as you always do, but the author in this entry has clearly talked about ways of thinking that are not "critique". Not a critique shaped through binary orientations... no matter what that may "entail". As if there is such a thing as non-binary purity, or as the very exercise of binary-hunting is of any relevant purpose, to anyone other than this crowd of circle-jerking reactionary hairsplitters (hey that might include you!), who're the only reactionaries here.
And I am also in agreement with that Dupontian line of doing nothing which does not entail an acceptance of the order of things. Critique in the formal sense does become the reification, organization and mediation of doubt.
I know it's hard for a western binary based thinker to understand this, but again eschewing formal critique or constituted opposition does not entail love for the status quo. If anything it is the qua rejection of ANY status quo. It is about divestment and detachment from power which means no positive proposals or ellectives.
That's because Dupont rejects any pragmatic view of human agency, and believes that the mindset makes any difference between...
- pretentious keyboard warrior pedant staying in his basement when his friends/family/neighbors are being packed into trains to death camps
- pretentious armchair pedant staying in his faculty office when his friends/family/neighbors are being packed into trains to death camps.
Certified Binary Free TM!
For other readers... I know the analogy is extreme, but you can replace it with any situation of contemporary oppression where taking action can improve a condition, save lives, or change the social reality. It can be your mom being beaten regularly by stupid macho dad, your kid and neighbors kids being abused by school managers/teachers, and yes some Black people being shot by State-covered uniformed brutes in the hood.
What Dupont and his followers are bluntly promoting, is nothing more than sheer apathy. And through constraining social relations this always gets to result in complicity with the oppression.
Sorry it just is unless we are talking about the individual or the dunbarian corporeal. It's just elective proposed nonsense outside of those immediate references.
The scenarios you describe are immediate corporeal threats, of course me and D won't stand by and let that happen if we can help it. That is not the same thing as a power and belief totality and you know it. Need I remind you that death camps are functional outgrowths of a belief based system of power. The problem is belief and ending a BS has nothing to do with physical attacks outside of defending one's self.
Enlightened apathy can very much be a part of undermining a BS. Better then another round of history's initiations
[this is a repy to #10-- "Anarchists are just as entrapped by language binary logic and history as every other ideologue."]
check this out
Look "change" & the ' status quo" are clearly a false binary smuggled in by language to try and embarrass loud-mouthed impotent anarchists.
ake Emile & the Zigger.
changes of power always bring about a new status quo. Everyone from Stirner to the Chinese know this.
Why not have change be a personal apolitical affair only.
i agree with sire about about the feb 20 letter. it's frightening and surreal to see this prefiguration of capitalized identity and lifeways blossoming from anarchist inclinations, aesthetics, attitudes. it's also very funny. the cave systems in the middle of this vast land offer little opportunity for such blunders...
i am curious as to why they feel excited about the "young reactionaries." is it because of their interest in literature? maybe if they read more stanislaw lem i would find myself more amused than their idiosyncratic twists on the canon. maybe if their dark laughter wasn't so touched by clearly racist motivations, a nihilistic belief/unbelief in this country and identifying with it...what will they do with debord that's far better?
maybe LJ will read this and engage, maybe they will laugh from afar, too curious to enter into dialogue with their sympathetic anarchist oriented companions.
More mere level interest in what a new reactionary reading would lead to. Debord and company are pretty much akin to a rekt, ruptured, rosebudded asshole at this point from traditional radical sources.
I find them overrated and beyond the antecedents of Bob Black and Peter L Wilson they haven't spawned much things that are likeable from my pov.
Yes, not as stimulating as Milo, right?
As in Arnold shoots you in the head wrong.
The young reactionaries I have in mind are interesting because they have a remarkable amount of intellectual freedom and a love for literature. Smart, irreverent young people playing with ideas without fear - exactly the sort of thing that doesn't happen on the left. Unlike anarchists, they don't rub shoulders with supporters of Cuban and Venezuelan national socialism (or the would-be American national socialists of the Sanders or Leninist variety). I'm reading them from afar, curious to see where they end up. Probably nowhere good, but that's true with most people. At least they're interesting.
In any case, thank you for reading. Drop a note sometime, won't you?
"Unlike anarchists, they don't rub shoulders with supporters of Cuban and Venezuelan national socialism (or the would-be American national socialists of the Sanders or Leninist variety)."
Oh yeah... a shitty straw men always come in handy, right?
i also agree that ideas around reaction are just as worth engaging in as revolution. revolution seems like much more of the modern nightmare.
and bless their profane brotherhood. it's lonely in these caves, empty shelves and total darkness illuminate so little.
And unlimited potentialities for shaping new whorfian resonances through these caves, while circle jerking!
Then at the dawn of spring a young boy came to his mom after venturing through the depths a cave he has found in East Bay.
"Mommy! I was down there and there was... there was an bunch of insane anti-anarchist gay monsters doing... weird things in their underbellies. A few pigs too, with Bob Black bumping on their backs with his pants down for no reason! These relational languages they were yelling... it got me so scared! Then they noticed my presence... their eyes went watery and their tongues stuck out at my view. They went after me! I saw the salivating face of that Hakim Bey ogre coming out of the dark as they approached, and they even had three cave trolls..."
This is vulgar.
If we're lucky, maybe we'll get a few new pieces from Frere Dupont in their pages. That and their essay "The Parallax View" from issue #3 (I think) were about the only parts of this journal I enjoyed.
More information about text formats