/lit/ - Literature

>>11597592
sorry, there's a sentence stub in there. i meant to say, murphy is a little weird but he's pretty sharp too. and i kind of like the idea of somebody going around and interviewing all of the Secret Accelerationists on the twittersphere, there's a whole bunch of them, and from all over the spectrum: xenofeminists, eco-fascists, reactionaries, the whole nine yards. amy ireland wrote perhaps the best single essay on land ever, maybe he'll talk to her at some point as well:

https://www.urbanomic.com/document/poememenon/

and this one's good too, for other acceleration-y things:

https://www.e-flux.com/journal/80/100016/black-circuit-code-for-the-numbers-to-come/

personally, i don't know how you can constructively deterritorialize any further than land. r/acc seems to be the result, but it's far from certain how tenable of a prospect that actually is. even xi jinping seems to be struggling these days. and it's actually at that point that one (read: me) finds oneself (read: i find myself) asking, okay, so am i really about to begin unironically rooting for a singapore-style ethnostate? because only super-paranoid corporate formalism can box in the golden goose that is human schizophrenia? maybe i should clean my room instead rather than larp yet another form of 20C modernist political experimentation in another guise. because maybe, just maybe, we should know better than to hope for another miracle brought about by harried people running ideological programs on the state in periods of economic crisis, rapid and unpredictable technological advance and psychological confusion. maybe we did that already and history repeats itself and all.

and so, enter everyone's favorite surrogate father-figure. or, going another route, perhaps linking up with the cosmic spinozistic deity within is more your style. or just taking your raggedy, degenerate, fuckwit self to mass on sundays. or [insert desperate eleventh-hour spiritual lifeboat here]. any, really, will do, i think. but what these have in common is the *actual* rather than tacit or figurative religious dimension, which is expressed in hysterically reactive politics in increasingly horrible ways. contemporary leftism, the animus that people feel about trump, cannot be attributed to political difference. we're really talking about different axioms, ideospheres in conflict with each other and in flux amongst themselves. left/right in america today feels more like catholic/protestant during the thirty years' war than the 1960s. maybe it's just me, but still. it's not like i was there.