💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › feral-faun-mini-theory.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 09:58:46. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

➡️ Next capture (2024-06-20)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Mini Theory
Author: Feral Faun
Language: en
Topics: insurrectionary, anti-civ, criticism and critique, society, technology
Source: Retrieved on August 4th 2022 from http://www.geocities.ws/kk_abacus/mini.html

Feral Faun

Mini Theory

Ruins are playgrounds whether Zapotec or Mayan, Egyptian or modern.

Rather than preserve them, why not play with them ’til they wear away

into nothing, and forget the cultures that created them? The memory of

culture is the preservation of culture - and culture is merely the

sacred limit placed on creativity and play. Insurgents destroy sacred

limits.

The consensus process subjects the individual to the group. It subjects

the immediate to the process of mediation. It is conservative by nature

since it only allows change when the entire group agrees to it...It is

internalized control, not anarchy.

For society to function, desire has to be tamed. It has to be colonized

by the economy - turned into lack/need, the fulfillment of which is

attributed to the commodities offered by society. To so direct desire

requires restrictions and structures. As these increase, desire fades

into a mere ghost of itself. The restrictions and structures gradually

come to exist only to learn secrets which can be used against them.

My interest in ruins stems, in part, from attempts to develop strategies

from deconstructing cities playfully, through active, conscious

encouragement of unconstrained rebellion. This requires extensive

explorations of cities to learn secrets which can be used against them.

There is more than one way to create an elite. Ruling classes,

intellectual classes and aesthetic classes create an artificial

inaccessibility of their power, knowledge and skills to "the rabble" to

reinforce their position. On the other hand, self-proclaimed

"class-conscious" radical activists deny themselves access to knowledge,

vocabulary and well-honed analytical skills which are readily

accessible, in order to prove their "class purity" or some such

nonsense, and, by their absurd self-denial, create an involuntary elite

of those radicals who are unwilling to impoverish themselves in this

way.

Many...anarchists are actually leftist or liberal libertarians or, in

some cases, simply angry people who still "think" in terms of the images

created by the social context, trapping their thought within society’s

discourse. Until one gets beyond this discourse, thinking outside of its

categories, one’s rebellion remains part of the structures of authority.

Most anarchists are quite content with society’s discourse, happily

creating an "anarchy" that is thoroughly unchallenging, mild-mannered,

tame and palatable - all in the name of "education" and "action."

Cybernetic technology is dependent upon industrial technology for its

existence. So much for the pipe-dreams of cyber-utopia.

Barter is still economic exchange. Money allows for a more efficient

flow of economic exchange. Why not just get rid of economy altogether?

Often "health" opposes vitality. Those who value "health" often pursue

it in an ascetic and passive manner - by giving up something. Their

longing for health is not a vital, intense desire-trajectory - it is a

business transaction or a manufacturing process - an attempt to achieve

an end - but such a process is never satisfactory, because it is the

nature of a longing to reproduce perpetually the void that is its

origin. Vitality, intensity - these are the only reasons to have

health - and living them creates health or makes it irrelevant.

The best of post-modernism fails because it removes the drift to the

realm of the intellect - static lives moved by random thoughts rather

than ecstatic lives created by the dialect of active conscious thinking

and ec static doing?

If the "subject," the "self," has been destroyed/deconstructed, then all

that prevents one from creating one’s own self, one’s own subjectivity

in each moment is the continued belief in something greater than oneself

that is creator - i.e., the continued belief in god. In the present era,

god is society.

The Revolution of Daily Interactions

Confronting separate annoying incidents without confronting the mini

social context from which they spring in its totality is no different

then protesting issues instead of contesting the larger social context

in its totality. Nothing essential changes. Failure of imagination,

despair, feeling overwhelmed by circumstances: these are evidence of

interactions gone awry.

The entire "interior" of the "mind" is merely a social creation...a

relationship created by a social context and which would best be

destroyed with that context...Then maybe imagination could cease to be

mainly a fantasy mechanism and become a means for creating intense

moments perpetually. By the "interior" of the "mind," I mean the

thoughts, imaginings and dreams that are separated from an active life

of self-creation.

No one owes anyone anything. Debt is an economic concept and I refuse to

recognize it in any form. Back to

Venomous Butterfly