/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.13148117]

EXPLAIN POSTMODERNISM TO ME OR I'LL FUCKING KILL YOU! DON'T DUMB IT DOWN INTO SOME VAGUE SHIT! EXPLAIN PSTMODERNISM TO ME RIGHT NOW OR I'LL LITERALLY FUCKING KILL YOU! WHAT THE FUCK IS A META-NARRATIVE? WHAT THE FUCK IS DETERRITORIALIZATION? DON'T DUMB IT DOWN OR I'LL FUCKING KILL YOU

[Anonymous No.13148132]

A stale pasta? You know what would go perfectly with that? That's right. An ice cold and refreshing Coca-Cola®.

[Anonymous No.13148133]

>>13148117
Only bodies without organs can understand that.

[Anonymous No.13148428]

EXPLAIN THE CONNECTION BETWEEN NEOLIBERALISM AND POSTMODERNISM

[Anonymous No.13148577]

>>13148428
David Harvey IS the connection

[Anonymous No.13148598]

No literally. Explain please.I want to btfo all people who keep using this word and "deconstruction" to describe literally anything.

[Anonymous No.13148616]

take modernism and move past it

[Anonymous No.13148620]

>>13148598
If you don't understand what deconstruction is, then there is zero hope for you. No one is going to spoonfeed you a crash course in critical theory

[Anonymous No.13148661]

Giorgio Colli and Mazzino Montinari publish Nietzsche's work after WW2 both in German and Italian. Heidegger's lectures on Nietzsche are also published. Deleuze writes Nietzsche and Philosophy at the beginning of the 60s. A French philosophical culture dominated by the three Hs (Hegel, Husserl, Heidegger) through which Marxism is criticized and interpreted, now turns over to Nietzsche. Nietzsche was already an important influence on the Institute for Social Research, better known as Franfkurt School, so Horkheimer, Adorno, Marcuse, etc. too began getting attention in Paris and Turin.

By the time the Warsaw Pact invaded the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic (August 1968), an event that opened the eyes of even the most dogmatic of communists - effectively instuting the "tankie" as we know it today for those that kept them closed - most readers of Marx in the French intellectual panorama had already jumped ship years before, you could think of a Sartre insisting in identifying himself as a Maoist but that's about it. This happened because, starting with the 50s, people in the Western side of the Berlin Wall became more and more aware of the atrocities done by the Communist experiments in Russia, China, even Korea. Wester Marxism itself had already developed independently.

Marx's humanistic-flavored early Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, also known as Paris Manuscript (Paris, see the pattern yet?), for example, were discovered as early as the 30s. György Lukács's History and Class Consciousness and Karl Korsch's Marxism and Philosophy were published in the 1920s. Horkheimer supported the Vietnam War.

While it is true that some people didn't get it even after the Fall of the Berlin Wall, sooner or later, the West did finally come to the realization that Marx is dead and we have killed him.

Marx's story is one meta-narrative among others that the West has gotten rid of. A meta-narrative is a grand historiographical claim that seeks to explain all human history in a few words, our past, our current predicament, our resolution.

Christianity sees its founding as the beginning of a salvation project for a man who fell from grace and Eden culminating in the messianic return of Jesus. We don't believe that.
Hegel sees reason at work behind everything as the absolute spirit discovers and frees itself. We don't believe that.
Marx tells us prehistory and capitalism are over, install socialism.exe and everything is solved. We don't believe that.
1800s Positivism wants us to believe that science is all one and all good and will emancipate everyone without an Auschwitz. We don't believe that.

We no longer have one totalizing, unifying vision that reduces the most complex thing to ever exist, the history of this sapient species, to two stupid concepts and throws a redemption myth at the end.

Compare the idiocies with N.'s take @ On Truth and Lies in a Nonmoral Sense. This very short text is also foundational for po-mo's attack on truth.

[Anonymous No.13148743]

>>13148661
Nietzsche calls truth:
>A mobile army of metaphors, metonyms, and anthropomorphisms—in short, a sum of human relations which have been enhanced, transposed, and embellished poetically and rhetorically, and which after long use seem firm, canonical, and obligatory to a people: truths are illusions about which one has forgotten that this is what they are; metaphors which are worn out and without sensuous power; coins which have lost their pictures and now matter only as metal, no longer as coins.
You're a po-mo if you understand no human being has any privileged access to a politically netural truth to judge history, a text, whatever with.

All we have is a conflict of interpretations.
>>13148428
You have neoliberalism and postmodernism when you understand truth as an enemy of democracy. Democracy requires a plurality of truths. Lyotard calls "paganism" this situation where multiple conflicting interpretations, a plural "truths" without a neutral criterion to tell which is right and who is wrong, much like Cicero in De Natura Deorum saying that people are saying different, even contrary things on the gods is not because people are wrong but because there are multiple truths.

Foundational thinkers in Post-Modernism are Lyotard, Deleuze, Baudrillard, Foucault, Derrida from France, and Vattimo, Perniola, Agamben from Italy.

Italy in particular had a current called "pensiero debole" (weak thought or weakening of thought), where the strong thought is obsessed with influencing, forcing conquering and dominating the interlocutor, and choosing to speak your mind, yes, but without being this violent ideologue who speaks like he has received the final Word from the One True God.

Neoliberalism's stateless, multicultural enterprise where commodities, ideas and people circulate freely requires a theoretical justification for the proliferation of dialetheism, simulacra, religious hatred, terrorism, culture wars, ignorance and fake news.

Karl Rove, chief political strategist of Bush Jr. famously said
>"That's not the way the world really works anymore." He continued "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors … and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."
This will be the legacy of Post-Modernism, and a democracy without truth.

[Anonymous No.13148748]

>>13148117
onions

[Anonymous No.13148826]

>>13148620
Deconstruction means "I like that show/movie/book because I think it's super deep".

[Anonymous No.13148854]

>>13148743

Thank you

[Anonymous No.13148867]

>>13148826
read a book nigger

[Anonymous No.13148871]

>>13148867
Are you retarded?

[Anonymous No.13148886]

>>13148117
Game of Thrones

[Anonymous No.13148892]

>>13148117
white man bad

[Anonymous No.13150309]

EXPLAIN 'EXPLAIN POSTMODERNISM TO ME OR I'LL FUCKING KILL YOU! DON'T DUMB IT DOWN INTO SOME VAGUE SHIT! EXPLAIN PSTMODERNISM TO ME RIGHT NOW OR I'LL LITERALLY FUCKING KILL YOU! WHAT THE FUCK IS A META-NARRATIVE? WHAT THE FUCK IS DETERRITORIALIZATION? DON'T DUMB IT DOWN OR I'LL FUCKING KILL YOU' TO ME OR I'LL FUCKING KILL YOU! DON'T DUMB IT DOWN INTO SOME VAGUE SHIT! EXPLAIN 'EXPLAIN POSTMODERNISM TO ME OR I'LL FUCKING KILL YOU! DON'T DUMB IT DOWN INTO SOME VAGUE SHIT! EXPLAIN PSTMODERNISM TO ME RIGHT NOW OR I'LL LITERALLY FUCKING KILL YOU! WHAT THE FUCK IS A META-NARRATIVE? WHAT THE FUCK IS DETERRITORIALIZATION? DON'T DUMB IT DOWN OR I'LL FUCKING KILL YOU' TO ME RIGHT NOW OR I'LL LITERALLY FUCKING KILL YOU! WHAT THE FUCK IS A 'KILL'? WHAT THE FUCK IS 'WHAT THE FUCK'? DON'T DUMB IT DOWN OR I'LL FUCKING KILL YOU

[Anonymous No.13150709]

>>13148743
As to deterritorialization, for example here:
http://eipcp.net/transversal/0507/weizman/en

Territorialization = striated space = troops acknowledging the city's architecture by walking along the streets, respecting walls and not trespassing into the indoor territories contained between houses' walls

Deterritorialization = smooth space = troops moving freely and smashing through walls to reach their objective as if they weren't even there

In the case of neoliberalism, deterritorialization is the product of the great iconoclasm of global capitalism, that destroys cultures, borders, wages war against emerging powers (see Libya) and then forces their citizens into nomadism and mass migrations to become what Marx calls the reserve army of labour in the countries doing the offensive.

An example of reterritioralization is the ongoing trade war between the US and China with the tariff and this business of neo-protectionism. Another example in architecture are people in London or Brazil building physical barriers to make life worse for the homeless.

For Deleuze deterritorialization is accompanied by reterritorialization: a new power comes, reacts and restructures to control the new flows opened by deterritorialization.

These concepts are connected with Virilio's dromology: capital and humanity's eternal arms race against itself are always pursuing speed.

But I cannot help but notice that there is a thriving business in caging and abusing would-be migrants in North Africa before they come to Europe. Capitalism is not a monolithic entity always in favor of speed, there is a market for controlling, selecting and slowing things down.

Badiou points out how Marx's dichotomy bourgeois/prole cannot work today. There is a stateless globalist capitalist class who answers to nobody, there is a proper proletarian class who has literally nothing, and a sizable middle class.

What passes for "left" submits to the first in exchange for the acquisitions of "rights" for elements of the third and a selection of protected groups. What passes for "right" promises to "save" the middle class from being impoverished and proletarianized, by preventing the actual proles from coming in and enlarging the reserve army of labour (Badiou calls these "democratic" and "conservative", but I prefer to use their self-designations under scare quotes).

And yet the "right" is not completely foreign to capitalists. There is a political and economic market for reterritorialization: tariffs, border security, and what many of the voters of the "right" desire the most after ending their precariat: cultural regeneracy.

Even the IMF in 2016 was wondering if all these open borders and ever-expanding global trade was inherently a good thing, or was instead increasing inequality across the globe:
https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2016/06/ostry.htm

Reducing capitalism to an ever-increasing speed and open borders and trade is not a viable paradigm in the current year.

[Anonymous No.13150761]

>>13150709
With this in mind, and the difficulties we have in believing meta-narratives, one should probably see why I can't take the predictions (i.e.: wishful thinking) of accelerationism terribly seriously.

[Anonymous No.13151108]

>>13150761
Not that anon but Deleuze differentiates between relative and absolute deterritorialisation– the former is always accompanied by a subsequent formation of a control centre to catch and codify the deterritorialised flows snaking out across the world. Land would argue that this process is actually a positive feedback loop that constantly pulls us in a vector of absolute deterritorialisation, whether we like it or not.

If you've read any CCRU material you'd know that they distance themselves from the postmodernist claim of 'nothing is real' by instead positing that 'nothing is true', where there are only pseudo-histories that are in the process of becoming real. A hyperstition is the point at which a meta-narrative becomes functionally 'true', or rather, the point at which a fiction is able to make itself real.

So Accelerationism is essentially a critique of our preconceived ideas of prophecy and prediction by situating itself in the overlap between them– the simulation argument, roko's basilisk, even pascal's wager is proof that hyperstitious "technology" does work, though mostly in insidious ways. Whether or not we can as independent agents "accelerate" the process to our advantage is another question entirely.

[Anonymous No.13151127]

>>13148133
You mean bodies without a brain (organ)

[Anonymous No.13151160]

>>13148133
Bwo is such a stupid concept.

[Anonymous No.13151475]

>>13151160
only if you're too stupid to understand it. I bet you suck at Operation

[Anonymous No.13151546]

>>13148117
i don't like this image

[Anonymous No.13152421]

came here thinking i'd find some lobster-fanboys.
arrived and was pleasantly surprised.
there's hope for /lit/ yet.

[Anonymous No.13152422]

>>13151127
Yeah

[Anonymous No.13152599]

>>13148743
I didn't realize that was Nietzche's stance. It's not really a good argument.

[Anonymous No.13152641]

>>13152421
I like lobster man

[Anonymous No.13152647]

>>13148132
wtf i love coca cola now

[Anonymous No.13152672]

it's radical skepticism plus irony, that is it's the application of skepticism to every dogma and rule that exists alongside a sense that nothing is really inherently valuable
another explanation (but ending up meaning the same thing) would be full subscription to cultural relativity but in a cynical sense; cultural relativists usually take the neolib stance that every culture is worth respecting, but pomo goes the opposite way and says every culture is equally shit

[Anonymous No.13152702]

>>13148117
Post-modern stuff is ironic, often cynical and critical.

Traditional and post-postmodern stuff is archetypal and celebratory

[Anonymous No.13152718]

EVERTHING IS FUCKOING RELATIVE MAN. EVERYTHING IS LIKE IN DOFFERENT PERSPECTIVES. THATS WHAT POSTMODERNISM IS ABOUT RILLY
DELEUZE MADE UP A BUNCH OF RETARDED PHRASES AN SHIT BUT TO HIM THEY MADE SENSE BECAUSE ITS ALL FUCKOING RELATIV ok
DETERRATORIALIZARION IS WHEN》 U TAKE SOMETHING AWAY FROM ITS ROOTS N SHIT, OUT OF ITS TERRITORY.

[Anonymous No.13152730]

>>13152421
>go to community college for liberal arts degree
>creative writing
>learn nothing except being exposed to that incredibly strange poem
>this dude is teaching the fucking monomyth to me
>get a 115, A+
>did every single essay on the public bus i took to get to class

>dont go to my second semester
I mean I guess I know I'm not a brainlet now at least but suddenly I feel even more stupid

[Anonymous No.13152733]

>>13152730
>poem
short story bs or whatever
I live in new england (prof. is from mid-west) so the metaphor barely even worked for me

[Anonymous No.13152987]

It's a consequence of the idea that contexts constitute things. As the context is changeable things are changeable. New contexts create new things and new things create new context. Pomos don't know how to break this cycle so they rely on cynicism and irony to make it seem like they are just playing a game.

[Anonymous No.13153221]

>>13151108
>the postmodernist claim of 'nothing is real'
Deleuze is the token realist among the Post-Modernists.
>positing that 'nothing is true'
That's Nietzsche and his epigones, particularly Baudrillard.
>there are only pseudo-histories that are in the process of becoming real. A hyperstition is the point at which a meta-narrative becomes functionally 'true', or rather, the point at which a fiction is able to make itself real
I don't see why would anyone prefer fictions "making themselves" real to the epistemologies of say, a Foucault, or a Peirce without the optimism.

We need to examine whether the powerful believe in the fictions they are propagating, or whether they don't because they consider themselves members of a seperate species like certain readings of Nietzsche. Yes, it's a technology, but the technology has an inventor, a company holding the copyright, and perhaps the CEO of the company doesn't use it all that frequently. Like pic related. And why is that? The victims of said technology aren't equally distributed not only among classes, then, but also nations, etc.

It's not the fiction itself that makes it real.
>hyperstitious "technology" does work
We're still in Nietzsche here. Man needs his delusions in order for himself to function. New values and interpretive frameworks are needed when older ones stop working.

Nietzsche wouldn't join the accelerationist crowd and would seek proper iconoclasts and innovators, definitely not a form of neoliberal fundamentalism.

[Anonymous No.13153421]

>>13148117
Postmodernism is more or less what happens when communications tech decentralises and democratises booming consumer societies so that intention and reason don't matter as much as how a person reacts 'immediately' to something based on their own internal algorithms of determining value

[Anonymous No.13153431]

>>13153221
>We need to examine whether the powerful believe in the fictions they are propagating

it doesn't matter honestly because their propagations don't have a one-one relation with their intentions, and 'they' aren't necessarily a single, secure group either. even at an individual level no one is in completely mastery, comprehension, understanding of themselves and their fictions, which is why the facebook archive is such a threat to our autonomy because the robots that collect this shit don't care if we mean to do certain things or not, if they "don't count"

[Anonymous No.13153443]

>>13148826
OH good lord

[Anonymous No.13153453]

>>13148117
post = after
modernism = modernism

[Anonymous No.13153600]

>>13153431
>which is why the facebook archive is such a threat to our autonomy because the robots that collect this shit don't care if we mean to do certain things or not, if they "don't count"
And it is also why the powerful don't want to use it. The search for the sovereign may not be that difficult, you could begin by asking yourself who determines what the robots have to do, and who is allowed to suspend the law. When it comes to finding where the power might be, more Schmitt and less Structuralism, please.

Admit it: 'they' will be the first to use pigeons and paper once the panopticon's construction is finished. Because 'they' are the ones that commissioned it to begin with.

[Anonymous No.13153642]

>>13153600
imagine if you had structuralists in charge of fighting fascism in Italy, would anyone even manage to propose: "What if we kill Mussolini?"

[Anonymous No.13153658]

>>13153600
machines need to be coded first, and coding is never 'complete' despite our intentions to think outside of metaphysics and more like a program. the sheer number of interpretations are tests of systems against other systems, with intention only playing a small part in those interpretations. what someone intends may be borrowing from a system that, while citing it, may not carry with it the full comprehension of that system, despite whatever metonyms we may cite. there are other connections to be made when interpreting, ordering our experiences of the world we sense to inhabit, ones that we cannot keep track of. there are holes and gaps in the expressions of these systems without that mastery; open for exploitation. the 'powerful' may do this well enough on their own, but there are others who they insist are enemies who will also believe this, believe the fictions, and imagine themselves to be the rightful force against, for example, 'exploitation' legitimised, by another system, as exploitation of the weak by the strong. an injustice. whereas might makes right, law is the force of the mighty, the sovereign may suspend the law, etc., there is something about this fully sovereign and self-present subject that passes this belief onto others, that they are yet to me emancipated, or as sovereign subjects to emancipate themselves in a double-edged sword of what sovereignty entails in present culture (post-enlightenment). and something further still beyond the law, in the place of determining value and exchange that reveals a kind of justice outside the law, in the gaps of the law, the codex, the codification

[Anonymous No.13153661]

>>13153453
kek