/lit/ - Literature

>>11780436
>I assume his Dark Enlightenment essay is chronologically after Fanged Noumena?
yeah. like two decades later. i don't really know what he was doing in the meantime, but you can read the various blog entries and emails he was sharing with fisher, negarestani et al here.

http://hyperstition.abstractdynamics.org

fanged noumena still holds up well tho, even today. and some diehards are kind of hoping he's at work on his bitcoin book. NRx took a weird turn after 2016, since nobody - not even land himself - anticipated a trump win.

>>11780438
>Is this basically what Accelerationism is about existentially? And from what Land seems to be saying, does he predict that from this new dynamic of man and created cyber nature, man will become what Nature previously was, and the creation will similarly replace us with its own constructions?

speaking for myself, this is one of the things that i found interesting about land, although like you it really shook up the way i looked at things. i was in a very cozy place talking about heidegger and lacan and feeling like they had more or less solved everything, and heidegger ofc has no end of interesting stuff to say about technology. but land has his own perspective, and also it was because of him that i started to get interested in deleuze also. so i like land because he's a true blackpill on a lot of political stuff that i really detest because it seems to be a failure to understand (or a cynical understanding of) the relationship of economics to technology, and it comes out in the culture in increasingly stupid and circular ways.

but still, as pessimistic as land can be, he has his own pessimisms, that even after having sided with modernity as the harsh remedy for what 21C civilization needs there's no guarantee that that will happen. it's why he talks about the possibility of capital *escaping* from culture. some pretty intense turns of the screw going on there. it's not even unlike ayn rand, in a sense, except without the hero-mythos (he says somewhere that he is 'qabbalistically joined at the hip' with her, make of that what you will.)

anyways. for all that he's still just doing, imho, old fashioned marxist economic analysis, but from the far side of postmodernity, and with all the usual cultural critique lumped under the banner of transcendental miserabilism. in a way, deleuze still agreed that marx was basically right, but he took out both hegel and freud. land does a similar thing - removes hegel, puts in D&G in place of freud/lacan, minus the revolution, and with a return to kant stuck on top. marxism without hegel or even a communist revolution is a weird thing for sure. but it's still marxism.