/lit/ - Literature

>>13008635
I don't think this is necessarily true, at least not to the core. I would agree that theory in the strictest sense always maintains a somewhat bougie quality in that it requires lots of time to just read, an understanding of history, an education that supports critical thinking, a relatively stable position to start out from, essentially, which many people never get to experience. However, one might make the case that the common laborer need not read all of Marx and Engels work in order to envision (and help to actualize) a differently structured world outside of capitalism. Towards this end we can see the fundamental element of /acc that is applicable to all people. The Lovecraftian horror aspect need not necessarily apply in all cases (but it's always there if people decide to delve deeper - as it always was).

A good example of this in practice might be something like the Xenofeminist manifesto. The thing is barely 40 actual pages long, but it does make an attempt to get the reader to conceptualize different societal structures while suggesting that you may actualize change in the world through the manipulation of hyperstition, and this is essentially aimed directly at the marginalized groups who suffer most under the current system. It would be a real stretch to call this 'theory', but it does provoke accelerationist thinking.

>nothing will please me more than seeing those horrors eat you, devour you.
Most of us are already into vore, so this is consistent with our values.