/lit/ - Literature

>>12009846
the point of bringing this up tho was to talk more about the question of individuation in a mechanological society, how to break from the gravity-well of the mass individual. one of the things about totalitarian political organization is a deeply confused sensibility between despots and the crowd, which oscillates between seduction and repulsion. leaders have to both love The People and partly detest The People. you have to know What's Good For Them in a kind of disciplinar and CTRL-fashion, and the funny thing is how much of this comes up in our attitudes about the role of academic critique, thinkpiece (or non-thinkpiece) journalism, and certainly entertainment/spectacle today. Virtue Signal, in other words, becomes not only deliberate but in a sense inevitable and inescapable.

the reason why YH shills so hard for Simondon, i think, is because on some deep level Heidegger puts you in a double-bind: Heidegger himself is techno-phobic (and rightly so) and yet it is only through a kind of technical/mechanological sensibility that anything like a break from the Mass is possible. Reza gets at this too, the philosophical implications of *engineering* in philosophy - that the future comes to link up with the past in a way that rewrites the meaning of the present. this is there in Hegel (and Sartre) also, btw, but in reverse: reflection changes the meaning of the past, such that effects precede causes and so on ('If i hadn't gone to prison, i wouldn't have written this book that now makes me famous, and so...'). you may have heard Zizek make this point before also.

Heidegger is an enormous deal. Dugin is basing his whole 4PT around him, and he's not the first. Dasein is for realsies. but the point YH is making in Cosmotechnics is that perhaps there has to be a sense of Dasein not being irreducibly themselves in a way that opposes them to *what happens with information and mechanics.* it's perhaps a kind of Deleuzian idea, and Land himself basically takes Deleuze's sensibilities and applies those directly to Capital, resulting in the computer and automation *capturing* the fundamentally schizoid nature of the unconscious.

the much harder place - but, imho, the more interesting one also - is in that little sweet spot right in between Heidegger and Deleuze.