/lit/ - Literature

Will there ever be a deconstructionist or some article about deterritorializing all these feminist junk or "toxic masculinity" "rape culture" and even rape itself?
I love how academics are quick to point out how masculity works as a myth around society, but never use it on the rape myth or on the foundations of any "emancipatory" movement. I often seen some anons here posting about Deleuze similar things from time to time, but it boggles my mind how there hasnt been any reactionay movement to take post-modernism to the word and create a "dogmatic reactionary" type movement and equalize the ideological field.
The diagram is simple:
The "left" demystifies "men" to push their dogmatic ethics/ femine supremacy.
The "reactionary" demystifies their dogmatic "ethics" and concepts and pushes their counter supremacy.

>>16292906
>Le fascism is le ideology of hatred and resentment
>t.leftist
If anything the left has been the one that in the long term has helped capitalism even more, with social movements trying to deterretorialize social forms and reterretorialize with other forms more fit into the capitalist machine. The mordern day left (new left) only managed to decode communities with codes that resisted to capital, codes that created social formations of identity capable to bringing people together in orginazed ways and fight capitalism. All it has done in the last decades is lube the cogs of capitalism to expand ever more.
All of this because they managed to create a social machine, a machine that said (coded) there was some desire needed to be set "free" and gave it a holiness similar to any religion of the past.

I would love to vore the rich just as any guy next door, but i find the holiness and ethics the "left" has to be just as the same as any other religion and cult.

>>16185522
Always wanted to see some Deleuzean take on this shit and deterritorialize this whole feminist talk of rape culture, maybe even decode the meaning of rape itself or slowly picking apart this stupid ass pyramid machine, or replug it somewhere else that would make feminism short circuit itself.
Its kinda hard to come up with, but im sure one day i will warp my head around this and find a way to do it.

Am i the only one who finds his philosophy to be more damaging to the "left" rather than any other movement?

Desiring production creates all the social machines that in turn trap desire and make us invested in it, we then find ourselves aroused by the things that we can code; flags, religions, cultures, body parts etc. What is the use of trying to use capitalism's affects to get closer to the body without organs if we just gonna reach it and bounce back again to other terretories to invest desire into?
Whats more is why try to justify doing it for any emancipatory affect when those concepts of oppression and exploitation just gain form if you code them in a certain structure. Wouldnt movements like feminism or socialism lose the value they have today if you simply decode their desires, wouldnt things like class interest lose their objective if you decoded that even classes exist to begin with, wouldnt a person that is deep invested in religion or some other structure that isnt socialism be really oppressed when they havent even coded what class they are part of and what material needs he should want? Couldnt the same be said about a woman who has no desire to vote and isnt allowed to vote? Does all of this invalidate the objectivity these movements seem to have today?

These notions of revolutionary preconscious and unconscious libinal invesments also just gain shape based on the context you use it, if they are being used to take down any currrent status quo notion that is predominant today. If everything that is deterretorialized is followed by a reterretorialization then why claim that we are escaping some micro fascism when we are just inevitably gonna jump into a new form of it, like with a trans person that starts off by deterretorializing the man-woman binary and in turn creates something new, a new category to invest desire into but it is nonetheless just another part of the coin.
I honestly think Deleuze in trying to defang fascism just created better tools at killing everything else that isnt fascism. Am i missing something here?

>Ah yes all these "western values" of family units, parenthood, monogamy, gender codes, alliances and filliations are bourgeoisie and only exist to repress and support the capitalist machine, we most be done with them if we want "emancipation" from the desires capitalism make us want to. Anyone else disagreeing with me is a neurotic oedipal monster that cant save himself and must be stopped.

>What values do i support to combat this capitalism and inner fascism? I value this hypersexual fluid consumerist, atomized invidualism that doesnt engage in any big emotional connections that envolve commitment with his family or SO and uses drugs to achieve "new forms of thinking" but is instead just to escape and cope with the burdens of life and not do anything about it. This is the kind of people we need for the society of the future, free of ideology and mean "repressive" social codes running in our heads.

Seriously, are there any modern day leftist writters who attack this set of utopian values that the left adopted during the 60s that wanted to attack capitalism but instead simply reinforce it, make it more ruthless and efficient? That arent this naive to treat these "social codes" as if they are simply something that is easily changed like some computer software, and love to mask their solutions as if they are the end of all codes but its just instead a new code that will probably repress people aswell?

Please, /lit/, recommend me introduction books to postmodernism.