Wednesday, 12 November 2014

Tinned chunks - an introduction to the rejection of everything through moments in the description of deep opposition (part 3 in an extended series)

Great ideas die twice, once when they leave the thinking of the world and a second time when their edifices disappear - The Bridge over the Drina (modified)
The flight of thought from human society is increasing exponentially. Numerous and diverse ways of thinking are exiled from the world only to arrive in the wilderness where they are tended and sustained in their half-life by dwindling numbers of ascetic adherents.  Unwilling to face its own desuetude, marxism becomes just another thinking system in flight, and departs unknowingly for its final resting place in the desert. Like others before it, it has become indistinguishable from its defence mechanisms and seeks only to conserve the internal organs of its way of thinking at the expense of processing the catastrophic losses which constitute the entirety of its external relations. As a coherent and identifiable thread of consciousness, marxism's theoretical elaborations function as a compensatory displacement activity for its practical incapacity, its defeat as a world force. It corrodes in the wilderness, and focuses on its core programming: the ritualised return to Marx. But the desert has always served as the mythological site where man goes to avoid himself - although in its current strategised form, the wilderness is now reproduced as a warehousing facility for containing all that sheered-off consciousness. Self-sustaining niches of desertified awareness, at the very furthest edge of their viability, and preserved only by the licking of virtual drops of moisture transpired upon the walls of their hermit caves, has become the internet's stock-in-trade - holy fools index the success of their arguments to numbers of views, likes, followers and retweets. Then, it cannot be denied that deep opposition is equally (and deliberately) a flight into the wilderness, a flight undertaken for the same purpose: the defence of the integrity of a way of thinking under circumstances of its social untenablity. The internet supplies an interactive desert cave to every way of thinking against the world - an endless wilderness of interiority that is re-situated with innumerable equivalents in a stockpile of disconnections. Then, deep opposition must also crouch within the given confines of its monastic cell. The divergences, the differentiations, between this way of thinking and that, congeal as the only borders of the desert - so much outside for a thinker to dissolve into and yet also so many peace walls, constraints and impediments. The desert has soaked up an entire city's worth of internet thinkers who nonetheless are destined never to cross each others' paths. For example, the impervious border thrown up between marxism and deep opposition is equally derived from differences which appear at a level where they are destined to make no difference. Marxism opposes waged labour not labour as such. Deep opposition opposes labour as such. Marxism opposes capitalist production, not the place of production as such. Deep opposition opposes the place of production as such. Marxism opposes the commodity form taken by technology, not technology as such. Deep opposition opposes technology as such. Marxism opposes the repressive state motifs in organisation, and not organisation as such. Deep opposition opposes organisation as such. Marxism seeks to break free from the extraneous fetters that are attached to objective historical forms. Deep opposition opposes historical process. Marxism is a critique of ideological thinking. Deep opposition opposes thinking. Marxism wishes to preserve the most social components of human society. Deep opposition opposes society. Marxism identifies external errors and by this qualification awards itself the subjective capacity to correct error - deep opposition is perturbed by, and perhaps fixated on, its own category errors, and the ever shrinking terrain of its possibility. Marxism interprets a dual history of repression and liberation, which bind together in a true lover's knot. Deep opposition intuits a profane co-dependency between repression and liberation. Marxism argues for the perfectibility of human society, it derives its certainties from incorporating the ideal of potential liberation whilst externalising the muck of repression. Deep opposition empathises with the fallibility of humanity, it seeks to live alongside errors as a necessary loop of its life-world, and pursues uncertainties as its true life-goal. That is to say, at every point of divergence between these two ways of thinking, deep opposition notes conserved fragments of the opposed world which not only pass unexamined but are integral to marxism's way of thinking. Deep opposition finds the ruthless critique of everything to be an inadequate, even perfunctory, procedure which rushes to predictably hubristic conclusions, and thereby precisely delineates a space for the absence of critique. Deep opposition discovers that marxism's self-selection, by which it seals itself against the so-called judgment of history, is the falsified outcome of considering itself to be objectively overdetermined as both historically conditioned and the carrier of a real movement which sublates historical conditioning. Then, deep opposition's one advantage over marxism lies in its awareness of having been consigned to the desert. Deep opposition denies the actuality of a real movement and thus refuses the theoretical advantages which this confers. Deep opposition is systemically perturbed by the proposition that everything belonging to the desert is assigned the same value - vanity. Then, the project of self-differentiation by means of registering distinct traits of significance immediately encounters itself as a ruin where everything in the world equally expresses its conditions.

No comments:

Post a Comment