/lit/ - Literature

>>18969038
Probably too similar to the opening of another epic fantasy series.

>>12921874
Oh, good, it is you! It's nice to see you again. I'm glad you're still kicking around. It's good to see you've not yet abandoned /lit/, despite how shitty it's gotten.

For what it's worth, I wasn't criticizing you negatively, but constructively. You have been a great boon to my understanding of things that are going on in higher philosophy these past few years, you specifically and /lit/ more broadly. It is good that /lit/ keeps tabs on accelerationist/reactionary/Marxist thought, because I'm not sure where I could find anything like these threads elsewhere on the internet.

I guess, for my part, that I'm still trying to clarify matters. I've been coming to threads like these for years now, but I struggle to fit into them. Because I'm not a Lacanian or a Foucaultian or a Landian. Instead, I'm a devout Catholic, a slightly (but not overly) traditionalist Catholic, a Catholic whose faith in the Church, despite all scandal, is ironclad. And I admit, also, to being a semi-regular denizen of /x/, and somebody who takes an interest in Fairy business, among other things.

My point in this is that I think the flaw of Karl Marx is trying to translate Hegel into a materialist conception of the world. Hegel cannot be confined to the material; Hegel trades in the occult and the hermetic, notions of Spirit and Will that Marx, with his focus on the material, doesn't grasp. And I think Land makes the same mistake when he approaches, not only Hegel, but also other thinkers that flirt with the immaterial, like Girard. There is a component of this world which I think Land misses. I think Land's view of Capital as a kind of god leaves out the idea that there are OTHER gods in the world, including the big guy, God Himself. Land's view is fundamentally materialistic; he sees Capital as a dominating thing because he cannot conceive of a metaphysical reality. And this is my problem with Land. Like Saruman, he has a mind of metal and wheels. I think Land's error is his assumption that humans are alone in the midst of reality. And this is something with which I disagree.

But I'm saying this more for the benefit of the thread than for you, Girardfag, because you've always been appreciably open to supernatural/miraculous/otherworldly topics of discussion.