Oh, yeah, and if Russiagate isn’t paranoid enough, apparently, the corporate media is now prepared to deploy the “Putin-Nazi Election Hackers” propaganda in any and every election going forward (as they did in the recent French election, and as they tried to do in the Dutch elections, and presumably will in the German elections, and as The Guardian appears to be retroactively doing in regard to the Brexit referendum). Any day now, we should be hearing of the “Putin-Nazi-Corbyn Axis,” and the “Putin-Nazi-Podemos Pact,” and video footage of Martin Schultz and a bevy of former-East German hookers engaging in Odinist sex magick rituals in an FSB-owned bordello in Moscow. Soon, it won’t just be elections … no, we’ll be hearing reports of Russian shipments of rocks, bottles, and pointy sticks to the “Putin-Nazi Palestinian Terrorists,” and … well, who knows how far they’re willing to take this?
. . . what we’re dealing with here is more than just a lame attempt by the Democratic Party to blame its humiliating loss on Putin (although of course it certainly is that in part). The global neoliberal establishment is rolling out a new official narrative. It’s actually just a slight variation on the one it’s been selling us since 2001. I could come up with a sixteen-syllable, academic-sounding name for this narrative, but I’m trying to keep things simple these days … so let’s call it The Normals versus The Extremists, (the Normals being the neoliberals and the Extremists being everyone else). The goal of this narrative is to stigmatize and otherwise marginalize opposition to Neoliberalism, regardless of the nature of that opposition (i.e., whether it comes from the left, right, or from religious, environmentalist, or any other quarters).
Reading Pound’s Cantos, I’m inclined to think that modernism was the last efflorescence of European civilization … and that the modernists, or at least the far-seeing ones, knew it.
And after us shall come: nothing worth mention.
Real education must ultimately be limited to men who INSIST on knowing, the rest is mere sheep-herding.
—ABC of Reading
At some point I began to realize that what goes by the name of “critical theory” is a prolongation of adolescence masquerading as a questioning of norms. This wallowing in adolescence, which includes among other things, the snowflake evasion of the burden of sexuation, is now itself the norm and the only one immune from critique.
Macron’s pro-war, anti-working class and ’supply-side’ economic policies leave us with only one conclusion: Marine Le Pen is the only candidate of the left. Her program and commitments are pro-labor, not ‘hard’ or ‘far’ right – and certainly not ‘fascist’.
One of the disconcerting effects of psychoanalysis is that over time you lose the ability to spin elaborate philosophical constructions out of neurotic fixations. The impulse to rationalize, to intellectualize, remains, but hobbled by a preemptive sense of its futility. Every time you take a position, you’re already on the way to abandoning it because you recognize it to be a cover for something else, something left unsaid. Where once you perceived principles and ideas, you now see only infatuations. You are aware that what speaks through you is always a desire for the desire of the Other but distorted by shabby disguises and feints. Discourses that you were once deeply invested are cast off; you develop an exquisite distaste for “cleverness,” yet you still fall into its traps.
I am losing the desire to say anything. I want to find a way to say nothing.
Notions of the post- or transhuman strike me as quintessentially neurotic attempts to leap over and void the issues of sexuation, sexuality, and desire. Over and over,what is posited as posthuman is a desexualized entity, a cyborg-like figure that has miraculously overcome lack.
The cyborg is where hysteric and obsessional fantasies overlap. The cyborg is a figure who has been fantasmically emancipated from the questions that torture hysterics and obsessionals: Am I man or woman? Am I dead or alive?
In Blade Runner, this fantasy is shown for what it is. The cyborgs are superhuman, embodying everything a human might wish to be but, in a twist of irony, what they wish to be is human. Or, rather, what they wish to be is both human and superhuman, exactly the same as neurotic humans but from the opposite direction, thus demonstrating that the posthuman cyborg is another modality of the human.
Is there anything whiter than white guilt?
There’s no denying that the record of Euro-American colonialism is a record of egregious brutality.
But it is a record notable only for being the most recent episode in a dismal history of human aggression that stretches back to the first traces of sedentary humanity.
Before Europeans set foot in the New World, native tribes were in a state of endemic warfare with each other. Entire civilizations in Central and South America were built on human sacrifice. Africa and Asia fared no better. Had this not been the case, European conquests would have faced far stiffer resistance. Divide and rule only works when internecine warfare is already rife.
Moreover, as centuries of barbaric fratricidal warfare prove, Europeans have not exactly been kind to one another. Indeed, the notion of Europeanness was and remains little more than a Platonic ideal. Go ask the Greeks, whose ancestors invented the idea of the West, what that gets them when dealing with the EU and the IMF.
Theatrical displays of white guilt, such as are common in academia, are little more than perverse, underhanded ways of affirming white elite superiority: See how sensitive we are. How civilized. How European. Virtue signalling.
Freud’s insight that guilt is aggression deflected inward and thereby converted into harsh moralism remains pertinent in an age when wars of aggression are invariably rationalized as humanitarian interventions. White guilt has not produced a cessation of aggression but merely armed it with a different logic. We are being driven toward the precipice of global conflict by a liberal Russophobia that has effectively rendered meaningless the distinction between what were once political opposites.