/lit/ - Literature

>>12446523
Laozi, to his credit, also arrives at a similar idea. there is no Good Anger - there is anger, full stop period. in Star Wars parlance: if it were up to me, i would write a one-off film in which the Rebels cease to have the ability to use the Force, while the Sith can. how many LARPers get exposed in the Rebel Alliance? how many people find themselves wondering, well, shit, if only the Sith really understand how the Force works, then...and whether or not this all turns out to be only a kind of mysterious anomaly, and the Force returns later on, or if the Sith wind up abusing this dichotomy such that it engineers their own ruin, whatever. it doesn't really matter.

the question is the role of Force itself. Deleuze isn't wrong on this: what else should philosophy be but a study in forces and operations and networks? that makes sense. the current love for victimology narratives proceeds not even from a rejection of Deleuze's thought, but from a refusal to countenance it altogether, which is precisely what leads to the thirst for censorial power, which is every bit as nakedly forceful as what it is purportedly opposed to. the entire fucking West Coast as such gets sucked into a neverending spiral of questions: what do we do with all of this illegitimate power that has been thrust into our hands? it has to be *moralized,* that is, deprived of its power. it is like spray-painting the side of an atomic bomb with the instructions, Only Use For Good - Not Evil. but it's ridiculous. a bomb is a bomb, however it is used.

the problem of continuing to believe that 'separation of Church and State' is possible proceeds from the need to update what exactly is meant by a church, and what exactly is meant by a state. to be fervently committed to erasing Hate from the polis is Protestantism by another name, and it is one that corporations are happy to lend a hand in. Woke Capital is the result, neither church nor state, but a Frankenstein's monster of moral hybridity. for communists and fascists alike, the actual church always was the state, and the actual church only stood - stubbornly - in the way of this. you cannot make laws and rules for psychology - not only because of the profound relativity of the unconscious mind, but also because of the impossibility of actually dealing with other human beings in a state of brutal honesty (unless you are a schizo shouting at traffic, which is where i am going to be in about eighteen months).

humans are a problem for other humans, and for themselves. they always have been. we have wisdom traditions for this massively superior in governmental power to any chartered state. contracts are good for business, and business is indeed what the world is into. it has to be that way, there's no question. but in September 1914 everybody thought the war would be over by Christmas then, too. what was actually happening was a permanent displacement of power away from the Occident, and never to return.