Monthly Archives: March 2016

Discussions about Materialisms. PDF of October, issue 155, already available

The depths of denial can yield some interesting mixtures. Pretty cool though. 

REPOST: 
As Michael F. pointed out to me several hours ago, the PDF link at the bottom of THIS PAGE already provides a free download of the entirety of “A Questionnaire on Materialisms.” I was unaware of this because my laptop gave me only Russian error messages when I clicked on PDF, but then it worked […]

https://doctorzamalek2.wordpress.com/2016/03/31/pdf-of-october-issue-155-already-available/

WHY KEEP INTENSIFYING? Brassier on Land

At some point (probably in Absolution part 2) i will develop a point upon ‘culmination’, as well a suggestion of ‘deep time’. 

This post is pretty good for now.

REPOST: 
Nick Land’s work is a “mad black Deleuzianism”. What is really interesting in these texts is the way in which there is an extraordinary re-elaboration of negativity, a kind of non-conceptual negativity, and these texts bristle with this kind of sublimated fury, and that’s what makes them really powerful.

https://rediposture.wordpress.com/2016/03/30/thanatropic-acceleration-brassier-on-land/

Explosions in Brussels: What is our Responsibility?

First, a primer:

  1. Now; on one hand Terry Gilliam has got it right: The situation and the response as well the irony (humor). But Im not going to propose some sort of ‘zen peace’ will solve it.
  2. Yet the seriousness that such ‘terrorism’ is countered by is just plain insanity. The respnsibility is just take the fuckers out, as well as, just accept that every counter measure feeds another responsive violence into the pipeline of the real.

Excuse my insensitivity, but the problem is that in taking the fuckers out we cant get all the fuckers, so there is always a back lash. The families, the friends, collegues who have nothing to do with the actions of their known person, but also the ones that are ‘not activated’ until something triggers them to blame. As well, always someone else who has a gripe for what ever reason.

If we can choose what religion we want to beleive based upon what we already think about things, why cant people then choose to ‘become’ terrorists, just because it is justified anger, or matyred self righteousness? 

I like what someone said recently (paraphrase): there has always been terrorism. Its just now the trope is being (over) used to consolidate power, to manifest the True (one) ideological state.

There is always violence. There is always a ‘whole’ world that is coming to an end. People are always dying for one reason or another. We deal with it as we do, in our personal ways. But when the state is taken to hold the responsibility of ‘we’, as if there is a ‘nation that is mourning’, meaning some sort of grand unitive entity that is having an emotion, well, that opens the door to a ‘father’ state, a state that must have a cause, and right now, the cause is terrorism.

The funny thing is, is that the ‘terrorrist’ is reacting the the very ideal that calls out terrorism as a big problem. It is only ‘big’ because the state is being challenged. Are not gang killings ‘terror’? Are not drug deaths ‘terror’? Why are we locating occasions where quite a few people are actually dying? I mean 1000’s of people die every day due to gangs, drugs, racism, bad meat and veggies, domestic violence and car accidents. Are they not also terrible?

How are we segregating these terrible items in a scaffolded hierarchy of ideals?

Not to be too overreactive, but Nazi Germany did as much to consolidate ideology. It does not matter what some actual thing might be (for example, the Jews were just people and families); what matters is what meaning is imbued into real categories to mobilize ideological support.
Ok. Heres the REPOST:

Explosions in Brussels. A friend on Facebook asked: “What now constitutes an overreaction or under-reaction?”… I think you’re right, our so to speak Western Civilization is morally bankrupt, unable to act, unable to make up its mind and accept the responsibility of this issue as its own. We pretend with ourselves that we are not […]

https://socialecologies.wordpress.com/2016/03/22/explosions-in-brussels-what-is-our-responsibility/

A Conversation with Theodor W. Adorno (Spiegel, 1969)

The question i consider most often is: How did i know what Adorno was talking about before i knew that he existed? 

“…has already happened and was missed…and so never occurrs.” —Nonphilosophy and Aphilosophy. 2015

REPOST: 

Originally posted on communists in situ: Translated, edited, and with an introduction by Gerhard Richter  “Philosophy, which once seemed passe,” Theodor W. Adorno’s Negative Dia­lectic begins, “remains alive because the moment of its realization was missed” (“Philosophie, die einmal überholt schien, erhält sich am Leben, weil der Augenblick ihrer Verwirklichung versäumt ward“). (1) This perspective…

https://jewishphilosophyplace.wordpress.com/2016/03/18/a-conversation-with-theodor-w-adorno-spiegel-1969/

His Name Is Robert Paulson.

I am trying to wrap up my latest book. The part I’m on is concerning the plight of the operator of truth and the real appropriation of meaning.

I was reminded of this part in the movie Fight Club:

It is so perfect, and so funny !

It illustrates so perfectly the philosophical plight.