/lit/ - Literature

>>15115774
I am willing to reject rich/poor facticity as long as I also reserve my right to liquidate the moneyed classes

The state should have special You're Not Being Very Nice flamethrowers for incinerating faggots who don't treat their employees like human beings

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dm8KpltgMFM

>To punish the oppressors of humanity is clemency; to forgive them is cruelty.

We wish an order of things where all low and cruel passions are enchained by the laws, all beneficent and generous feelings aroused; where ambition is the desire to merit glory and to serve one’s fatherland; where distinctions are born only of equality itself…

Where the citizen is subject to the magistrate, the magistrate to the people, the people to justice. Where the nation safeguards the welfare of each individual, and each individual proudly enjoys the prosperity and glory of his fatherland. Where all spirits are enlarged by the constant exchange of republican sentiments and by the need of earning the respect of a great people. Where the arts are the adornment of liberty that ennobles them. And where commerce is the source of public wealth, not simply of monstrous opulence for a few families.

We wish in a word to fulfil the requirements of nature, to accomplish the destiny of mankind, to make good the promises of philosophy… that France, hitherto illustrious among slave states, may eclipse the glory of all free peoples that have existed, become the model of all nations… That is our ambition; that is our aim.

What is the fundamental principle of democratic or popular government – that is to say, the essential mainspring upon which it depends and which makes it function? It is virtue. ...

The splendour of the goal of the French Revolution is simultaneously the source of our strength and of our weakness. Our strength, because it gives us an ascendancy of truth over falsehood and of public rights over private interests. Our weakness, because it rallies against us all vicious men, all those who in their hearts seek to despoil the people… It is necessary to stifle the domestic and foreign enemies of the Republic or perish with them.

lf the attribute of popular government in peace is virtue, the attribute of popular government in revolution is at one and the same time virtue and terror, virtue without which terror is fatal, terror without which virtue is impotent. The terror is nothing but justice, prompt, severe, inflexible; it is thus an emanation of virtue.

>>12417943
>The contemporary polis, after all, is on the shoulders of Apollo. I, when dealing with the state as a Deleuzean, will always beoming-Anansi. I will Bugs Bunny the shit out of them. Accept not their framework.
i can relate, but i found in my own reading that a rejection of all state frameworks became in the end impossible. hence the love for RG the Don. ritual, sacrifice, eschatology and murder are things upon which the Law is founded. the Law is a stumbling block: i have a great deal of regard for Lacan, Kafka, or Dostoevsky also. with Lacan we have even a proto-Land figure: at some point, the state metastasizes and we find ourselves in it, beholden to a Hegelian enterprise that unites free markets and social democracy, and yet governed at every turn by the spectre of negativity, a negativity to which we are deeply wed, and which torments us.

the Sphinx controls your future because it controls your past. mythologically, it stands between two worlds, like a seal over the old cthonic realm that is nevertheless present in our (Oedipal) new one, with its ostensible reason and regard for human nature and respect. *this* framework *cannot* really be rejected, i don't think, because this is the one that allows even for philosoraptors to think, and as such it is worth preserving. when it produces a Robespierre, with his hand on the lever of the guillotine - or the Grand Inquisitor, who rejects Christ in favor of the cold iron and the mechanism - something has gone wrong, and it is something for which we cannot appeal to the gods in the same old way. we find ourselves as such trapped: we cannot accept this framework, and we cannot impose on it a Higher one, or merely substitute it for another. so what then? we go deeper.

this is where Girard does interesting Girard things, in sussing out the role played by religion in society as a thing which is not bound up with the law in the same way as the state is. it is also i think Confucius' ontology: relations, not things. and the Way as such cannot really forcibly brought down to earth; all you can do is perhaps allow for the conditions of its appearance. things that i think are also right there in Heidegger's wheelhouse also. and Lacan's: the analysand has basically been overwritten with laws and rules that he produces himself, and cannot keep up with, and which are coming to him both from within and from without. but the goal isn't to overthrow society, it is - as Heidegger says - to enter into the circle in the right way.

i don't quite know what the computer programming analogy for this would be. perhaps it would be something like understanding the difference between a hackable PC with an open-source code, and consoles dedicated to the running of particular games, or programs. or how, perhaps, we eventually discover the existence of the internet, and the a priori collective wiring of a great many computers, through glitches and encrypted signals left behind by mysterious precursors.

>>12321198
I'd like to subscribe to your newsletter

>>12143625
>Fundamentally, these are eusocial creeps obsessed with status and attention. They are not people so much as they are insentient and fleshy nodes of social information. Look at their faces and you will see they've got that "Innsmouth look," a sort of hollow and perfectly groomed, over-socialized self-satisfaction characteristic to sociopaths and Nancy Pelosi. Sometimes I feel the urge to pop their heads like pimples and see all the likes and "good boy" pats on the bottom come pouring out like pus.

Is it time?

Recently I was watching this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5zx1xzzi7k
and the woman in it, in the middle of her clueless ranting that seems borderline deranged to a normal working class person who doesn't see the world in terms of status and string-pulling, says at multiple points something like "Do you know who these kids are?! She's a PHD STUDENT, at YALE!!"

And I realized, 80% of the people I associate with on a daily basis have this woman or someone like her as their mother. They are the products of this kind of parenting.

We really need a reset or something.