/lit/ - Literature

>>14267057
Why no accursed share part two or thousand plateaus?

>>14267313
*accursed share part two and three

I would also add Bataille's On Nietzsche and Land's On Bataille

Interesting thread -- pinn'd

>>14267057
>Nietzschean energetics
Yeah that’s gonna be a big NO from me kiddo

>>14267313
>>14267318
just a mockup. i'd definitely be up for those being in a final jpeg

>>14267322
>>14267323
Deleuze on Nietzsche too

>>14267328
this and probably his masochism too

So thread discussion:

I think drug trade is an excellent example of libidinal economy -- and ain't everythang drugs?

How do y'all feel bout Laruelle?

>>14267057
>crypto-acc
Why'd you abandon your thread and mass report the other one?

>>14267346
i think i'm with you. i've written some brief fragments on this... drug forming a symbiosis with the host.. very similar to other technical and natural symbioses all around us.

>>14267353
lol i was just reading land's bataille book and decided to make this. didn't know another one was going on

>>14267057
Epic misreading of bataille, deleuze and nietzsche. Keep it retarded

>>14267364
"Misreading of Nietzsche"

>>14267057
Ah yes, Deleuze, my favorite Fascist thinker.

>>14267057
>libidinal materialism
What does this mean? I googled it and all that came back was some wordpress blog post. Please no obscurantism.

nietzsche is just neo-paganism. hungover idealism.

hyper-darwinism with a quasi-metaphysical slant. interesting but hasn't absorbed the christian insight: fuck you cucks and your fucking meat grinder.

>>14267421
A materialism that focuses on flows of energy below and behind discourse or words (tending towards nominalism)
It also tries to excise notions of transcendence which ends up in anti-humanism and atheology (and for myself political pessimism)
also imo it should tend towards an aestheticization of thought and being

>>14267421
>>14267437
really i'm making this thread because this is a sort of trend i've noticed in philosophy books i like but it's hard to google

>>14267437
thanks for the explanation; I've been trying to ease myself into Land's work, and the lexicon he draws upon is daunting

You want the real neovitalist redpill OP? Read Ludwig Klages' On the Cosmogenic Eros

>>14267435
https://youtu.be/7tScAyNaRdQ

>>14267437
what does "flows of energy" and "aestheticization of thought and being" even mean on a materialist view.

>>14267421
Wilhelm Reich, some liberal marxists, ancaps, and Donna Haraway.
Basically, instead of orgone energy humans use dilation energy to release capital into an hormone singularity which will create One Big Tranny swallowing the universe.
The teleoplexical rail gun opens up a permanent dilation for all worshipers of capital (non-human by the way).

>>14267488
materialism implies there's shit going on outside your thought of it. that's the flows of energy. put whatever other phrase you want for that: "The Real" big R

aestheticization of thought and being may just be a coping mechanism. i'm open to other ideas and to others having their own coping mechanisms

>>14267488
It's just trannies trying to imitate the voice of capital, where it becomes a ventriloquist dummy that says 'Have sex.'

>>14267490
>>14267495
>>14267497
Basado y rojapilled

>>14267482
>not posting the correct version
https://youtu.be/AtUExOoGx7g

>>14267517
https://youtu.be/9vq63q45qfk

>>14267421
"libidinal economics" will return a lot more results

>>14267488
>what does "flows of energy" even mean on a materialist view
read Anti-Oedipus, Deleuze lays it all out, he calls them flows of desire
>>14267497
yikes

>>14267358
Read High Weirdness. Very excellent stuff tho a bit too friendly with spec realism imho

Materialism is for edgy atheists
posthumanism probably isn't possible

>>14267550
>>14267488
Deleuze on Nietzsche also spells it out.

Try SEP and IEP

>>14267550
Hi N1x

>>14267555
>probably isn't
Meanwhile divine intervention is completely impossible. Fuck off chud

>>14267555
>posthumanism probably isn't possible
then anti-humanism, for you anon

>>14267564
>Pledge, Crest, Tide, Dove, Woolite, Palmolive, Clorox, Rolaids, Pepto-Bismol, Alka-Seltzer, Desitin, Advil, Aleve, Tylenol, Anacin, Bayer, Excedrin, Vitamin C, Kleenex, Kotex, Tampax, Altoid, Barbazol, Almay, Revlon, Cetaphil, Right Guard, Old Spice, Gillette, Q-Tip, Johnson & Johnson, Vaseline, Listerine, Head ’n’ Shoulders, Tylenol, Bayer, Anacin, Safe Owl, Eagle Brand, Jolly Green Giant, Land O’ Lakes, Lucerne, Sealtest, Clover, Blue Bonnet, Half ’n’ Half, Snyder, VanCamp, Wish-Bone, French’s, Skyline, Empress, Gerber, Nabisco, Heinz, Kraft, Quaker Oats, Sunkist, Purina, Vlasic, Oreos, Shredded Wheat, Arm & Hammer, Jell-O, Pez, Sara Lee, Chock Full o’ Nuts, Libby, Pepperidge Farm, Fleischmann’s, Morton, General Mills, King Arthur, Bell’s, Reese’s Pieces

>>14267571
can we not make this into a land-rage thread? there's a dedicated one for that over that way

plenty of philosophers in this current to talk about

add to the list:
Burroughs, Naked Lunch or Nova trilogy
Baudrillard, Symbolic Exchange and Death
Irigaray, Speculum: Of the Other Woman

>>14267578
you cannot say his name without summoning the anti-acc shitposters

>>14267581
good recs. just remembered Artaud. he should definitely be on there in some way

>>14267346
>Laruelle
I think Brassier is really into him; speaking of, Brassier deserves to make it on the list too

>>14267578
>>14267596
samefag

(you)

>>14267613
Nihil Unbound is dope af

>>14267613
afaik brassier was the big laruelle scholar in the english-speaking world but has since broken with his philosophy. he said he found some fundamental flaws or something but i haven't read either of them seriously (read this in brassier's interview with mattin)

>>14267421
This, just without understanding it.
https://youtu.be/aWM4bJNpch0

>>14267421
https://youtu.be/j7MeJionPMA

>>14267615
swing and a miss

Vampyroteuthis Infernalis

>>14267655
enough of the bitter h3h3 shit plz

>>14267643
ty will check out the interview

>>14267490
Isnt this a death cult what with the death worship and all.

>>14267624
>there is a nothing and we can analyze it
Powerful.

>>14267689
Yes, see digits >>14267666

>>14267666
>NOOO!!! YOU CAN'T JUST CONTINUE A DISCUSSION!!!! THE INTERNET IS A SAFE SPACE FOR POST-HUMANS OPPOSED TO THE HUMAN SECURITY SYSTEM!!!!!

I think the anti-acc posters are making the same mistake you see Peterson fans make about postmodernism. "Postmodernist" philosophers were, by and large, against the phenomenon of "postmodernity". They were a reaction to the status quo much more so than a vulgar reinforcement of it. Capital is being reacted to, not simply endorsed. By and large, accelerationists dislike the phenomena of "woke capital" or, god forbid, "capital with a human face". Just look into why Land became a reactionary. He hates shit like this with a fiery passion:
>>14267490
>>14267571
>>14267655
But this is a thread about libidinal materialism so you are even further off base than usual.

>>14267756
dilate

>>14267656
>not getting it

>>14267666
>>14248511

>>14267756
>autism
No you fags are just the bane of this board. You refuse your own advice and just spam countless threads with pseud trash.
Yet another thread died because you couldn't handle memes in your first thread. Don't throw welcome home parties for yourself, retard.

>>14267057
Simulation and Simulacra

>>14267822
probably the mirror of production as well

Erotism? Bataille's novels?

>>14267057
yawn

I'm sure Zizek would fit on here with his work of the form of commodity fetishism

>>14267421
When the non-memes become reality.

https://youtu.be/VCrE9OtyLXo

Klossowski's Baphomet and Diana at the Bath
Orphan Drift Cyberpositive

probably old school Negarestani but not that intelligence and spirit nonsense

Does anyone have ideas for novels to add? Ideally this chart would have both philosophy and fiction

so far:

Artaud - etc.
Bataille - The Accursed Share
Bataille - Erotism
Baudrillard - Symbolic Exchange and Death
Baudrillard - The Mirror of Production
Brassier - Nihil Unbound
Burroughs - Naked Lunch, Nova Trilogy
Deleuze - Nietzsche & Philosophy
Deleuze - Masochism
D&G - Anti-Oedipus
D&G - A Thousand Plateaus
Flusser - Vampyroteuthis Infernalis
Freud - Beyond the Pleasure Principle
Irigaray - Speculum of the Other Woman
Klossowski - The Baphomet
Klossowski - Nietzsche and the Vicious Circle
Land - The Thirst for Annihilation
Land - Fanged Noumena
Lyotard - Libidinal Economy
Negarestani - Cyclonopedia
Nietzsche - The Gay Science

>>14268075
Ballard probably, idk I haven't read him
>>14268081
not a bad start at all anon

>>14268100
i haven't read enough of him to pick something specific out, but i think you're right

>>14267756
Imagine thinking that some trannie discord spam is equivalent to a clash of philosophical systems.

>>14268131
you realize there isn't an Idea of autism, right anon?

>>14268114
huh, which philosophical systems do you see as clashing? I never said anything like that in the post. "postmodernity" and "capital" are not philosophical systems

>>14267322
Fake Nietzscheans can't take the heat
https://youtu.be/KTIJr_qQzLs

>>14268140
Imagine being this retarded.

>>14268165
Only until we take it by force, boomer.

>>14268165
can you tell me what systems you think are clashing or are you just typing words to see them on the screen

>>14268165
You will die within 30 years, boomer.

>>14268165
Okay boomer

>>14268165
>"...to pay for free college, healthcare, affordable housing, and end homelessness.
YEAH. I KNOW.

t. GenX

>>14268202
They'll migrate to the network and fly to Mars. Only poor people die.

>>14268218
Imagine having your whole philosopher based on seething over a meme from the future.
Talk about retroactively refuted.

>>14267353
I invented Tolstoyevsky

is there anyone on here who actually enjoys reading or just bickering about reading related things?

>>14267322

>>14268264
I really do enjoy reading.

>>14268282
>« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ »/acc
Butterfly the cutest acc

>>14268264
Why the fuck would anyone read?

>>14268282
with an aesthetic jpg to prove it! great!

>>14268081
When it comes to Nietzsche and Deleuze you can add pretty much everything they've written to the list. For what it's worth, the quotes I encountered the most in Nietzsche scholarship on the topic of libido and drive (and eventually will to power and perspectivism) were from The Dawn, an often neglected text.

>>14267057
This is a bit misleading if you consider Nietzsche's entire oevre, including his more speculative usually unpublished moments. With Nietzsche and certainly Deleuze it's more of a combination between a "free" wobbly undulation that functions as a chaotic relation that nonetheless has its own logic and the fact that it is itself in some sense "determined" and perpetually differentiating and self-differentiating. Of course this must be understood as always a plurality of competing and connecting logics (relations) that make up the "chaosmos" rather than an isolated relation. So it cannot be called free will in a theological sense, but it isn't hard determinism or how fatalism is traditionally understood. Hence the term vitalism. Also, it's not that there's no responsability, it's just that it's more of a tool of building connections among things already given (the ability to promise, a self-consistency that tries to persist and get stronger by connecting many alternating selves even as it usually ends in failure due to the fragility of matter). In any case, Deleuze's emphasis on this oxymoronic concept of transcendental empiricism tries to get at a kind of opposite of what psychoanalysis is constantly accused of creating: an unconscious that dictates everything before it happens and an epiphenomenal consciousness that obeys unknowingly. The two must be somehow thought together rather, as with the strange continuity of the virtual-actual (virtual being the rich ideality of everpresent relations that make up the world, constantly seeking to actualize themselves, a reality richer than what is already actual and taken for granted in experience).

Even so, as Deleuze and many others often point out, most of what we call thought is rather automatic and repetitive, people in fact rarely think and it's usually due to some external constraint so moments where the movements of differenciation are quite rare so that they can feel meaningless, but in fact function like a weak muscle due to the rarity of their exercise. And if we think consciousness as one thing, one level, we can never understand thinking as anything other than a byproduct of either determinism or chaos on a more fundamental level (matter, unconscious) and therefore we're forced to concede not just that it isn't free (free will is what allows guilt for Nietzsche, it is what makes possible religious judgment), but also that it is entirely hopeless and powerless.

>>14268339
good post

>>14268339
maybe having the land quote in the op was overladen. i like mixing pessimistic and optimistic views in this sphere.
if you haven't read the klossowski book, i really recommend it. it really whirls you around.

https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/11446.Booklist_for_Trans_Teens

Bump

Hmmm

Based
Would also add Klossowski's Living Currency and Sade My Neighbor
Lyotard's Driftworks (partial translation of Dérive à partir de Marx et Freud) and Des dispositifs pulsionnels
And the "Nietzsche's Return" issue of the Semiotext(e) journal (1978)
(a lot of this seems to blend with French Nietzscheanism)

>>14270188
Also Bataille, Visions of Excess (mainly "Base Materialism and Gnosticism" and "The Notion of Expenditure")

This shit is literally just left-accelerationism stop making shit up to sound smart and feel important and pretend like you invented something new

>>14270209
Yeah and logic is just art.

>>14270209
Lol no, left-acc is Srnicek and stuff which are just techno-optimists who don't go too deep philosophically. This is more early Land (while not right, that does not make it l/acc), Thirst for Annihilation, and the French Nietzschean influence of Deleuze and Lyotard - in terms of desire and materialism. Libidinal materialism is coined by Land in Thirst, I believe, though Lyotard also uses the phrase once in Libidinal Economy.

>>14270236
The #Accelerate reader literally has all of this shit except Bataille and Nietzsche(which is a bit superfluous to my point since half the authors reference them at some point anyway) lmao you're a stupid faggot

>not a neolibidinal teleterritoriterialist

>>14268229
kek

Pre-Ghanaean Post-Space Dekkkolonializationist here.

AMA

>>14270203
Theory of Religion is good too

>>14270256
Yes, you're right but the Accelerationist Reader is a bit a failed book in my opinion; as a reader making various texts available it is good, but as attempting to fabricate a genealogy it works less well. Apart from Marx, I don't think the first part is that great (Butler is in there because Deleuze is in there and certain Urbanomic ppl had a hardon for him at the time). The omission of Nietzsche (fragments from the Will to Power on which Klossowski draws, for example) is an egregious gap, imo, seeing how he influenced most of the French Nietzschean libidinal-materialist (what have you) authors in the second part, these texts being the most interesting I think. Anyway, beyond the Ccru texts drawing on D&G, I would say only the last part of the reader - the contemporary texts, from the time the term "accelerationism" has actually been coined - is explicitly left-accelerationist (since that's the only direction academics, or e-flux, etc., dare to venture; and more rightist things would probably be confined to blogposts). And this texts (Srnicek, Brassier, Singleton, Reid, etc.) draw very little on the previous "libidinal materialist" texts, if at all. Almost as if they are not at all related thereto, invoking rather some neo-rationalist, Russian cosmist prometheanism.
There's no need to get anal about the point, but I do think it's worthwhile distinguishing; especially since accelerationism is such a trendy label that ppl like to append to so much things retroactively, something I'd be more wary of. While libidinal materialism or French Nietzscheanism are still generalizations after the fact (like most philosophical labels) they're a bit more specific for the works under discussion.

>>14270316
Good post

>>14270316
So your argument is literally "it isn't left accelerationism (even though it's all the same material) so long as I don't call it that" lol

>>14270412
Not him but it's certainly not left in the american progressive sense but I suppose you could call it a dark precursor of acceleration in general.

>>14270425
>a dark precursor of acceleration
You faggots are so fucking gay

>>14270412
Why do (you) call it left-accelerationist, then? Or do people generally refer to Deleuze, Lyotard, early Ccru etc. as specifically left-accelerationist? I don't think they do.
As Land says in his interview with Justin Murphy:
>The original leftist formulation of it [accelerationism] was very different from anything that we get in what then becomes called left-accelerationism later.
It may sound like splitting hairs but the thought that emerges in France after May 68 - which can therefore very well be called left (even if Land thinks there's something rightist at the heart of D&G) - and that has later been termed accelerationist or proto-accelerationist: this is quite different from the 21st-century discourses that have self-describedly been "left-accelerationists". (Maybe it heads more toward unconditional acceleration, or is a "dark precursor of acc in general" as the other anon said, though I don't feel like dwelling on these contemporary terms)

>>14270209
>>14270256
>>14270412
autism

>>14270463
>It may sound like splitting hairs
It is

>>14270466
Lol its more autistic than calling yourself a level 10000 Post-Nietzschean TransMarxist Deterrotoralized TeleoGuatarrian Lemurian Agender-Ubernensch? And then writing wall of text after wall of text to unironically defend that?

>>14270467
Never gonna make it

>>14270477
Except libidinal materialism is not an autistic term and was around in the literature prior to accelerationism, particularly left accelerationism -- but, sure, we're the autists, whatever helps you sleep at night, sweatie

>>14270573
So it isn't autistic to call yourself a long string of words to feel special despite your philosophy being derivative of a derivative

>>14270729
It's two words, bro. Libidinal materialism. That's it. Hardly autistic by philosophical standards. You got a stick up your ass, m8.

>>14270746
See
>>14270296
>>14270264

>>14267364
Any good reading of philosophy is nessecarily a misreading

>>14270767
see
>>14270466

>>14268081
>>14268106
ballard - the drowned world

>>14270412
>so your argument is literally "communism and fascism are different (even though they both come from Hegel) so long as I don't call them that" lol

>>14270467
welcome to philosophy anon, please start with the Greeks

>>14270767
why is the anti-acc autist in this thread?

>>14271569
It's more like when someone insists they are pansexual when it literally just means the same thing as bisexual

>>14271588
why are you so obsessed with gender and sexual identity? read theory

>>14271608
That's alright bro I would rather read femdom manga it's literally the same thing as every book in this thread

>>14271614
>the power of coombrain

>>14271616
Is that why fanged Noumena is paired with vibrating chastity cages on Amazon you faggots sissy slut

>>14271635
>AHHHH EVERYONE AROUND ME IS A SLUTTY TRANS IN A CHASTITY BELT AH FUCK OOOOH SHIT AHHHHHH YEAH TAKE IT YOU FAGGOT SISSY DETERRITEXTOPLEXED SLUT AHHHHHH I'M COOMING AH FUCK

>>14271653
Seethe. Cope. Dilate

>>14271662
>AHHHHHH DILATE DILATE DILATE LOOK AT ME WHEN YOU DILATE AHHHHHH FUCK

>>14271672
Lol its cute when u little hons get mad

Post-theory theory meta-libidino-postmarxian cybernetics convergent towards alibidinal anti-libido is the only absolute from an Outside in perspective (through the paemononenom). Ashtray nationalism into inside-out, from the outside-in. Culminating in coolminating post-factorial coominating (compounding effects). Neo-Historiography takes into account dialenthlianism and neo-kabballah, the results are stunning once backtested with a long enough backlog of historic data points.

>>14271588
>>14271614
>>14271635
>the anti-acc crowd outs themselves as depraved coomers too obsessed with trans people to read books
huh not all that surprising actually

>>14271683
Poopoo peepee post Marxist meta capitalism teleologizes into convergent astrophysics as disinhibitions institutionalize themselves in quasi-authoritarian cybernetic universes which postulate their own annihilation even at the cusp of their gestation into postmodern neomarxist self satire and Lacananian ejaculation

>>14271689
You act like the vast majority of online acc shit isn't trannies lol

>>14268081
Theater and Its Double is good Artaud

Why not Maldoror and Rimbaud and Baudelaire? Or is that stretching things too far?

>>14271689
>depraved coomers
that's actually most of us accelerationists and it's actually a good thing, slowfag reactionary piece of shit. join us or get left behind

>>14271707
nah. totally colonized by digital media. so sad. if the internet went down accel would evaporate in a flash

>>14271707
>that's actually a good thing

All Schizoanalysis and Accelerationism is just being a neoliberal

>>14271713
whatever. just wanted to point out that people fighting back against a/acc always accept their transphobic or reactionary framing. which you totally shouldn't do. yes many of us are transgender and there is nothing wrong with that, read n1x's blackpaper

>>14271726
>transphobic
Lol shut up faggot

>>14271728
you know zizek would absolutely despise you, right? stop appropriating our guys simply because you there are no substantial reactionary thinkers (is there a bigger oxymoron than that?)

>>14271701
you should get off twitter, it's ruining your perception
>>14271707
learn to larp you lame faggot

>>14271726
>a/acc
what the fuck is a/acc
also
>acc being opposed to reactionary politics
retarded

>>14271735
>our guys
Zizek hates accelerationism you stupid faggot

>>14271735
You should take your titty skittles

>>14271737
>learn to larp you lame faggot
joining a accelerationist discord will destroy this bubble you've managed to maintain because you refuse to interact with real people in the actual movement. let me assure you, many of us are depraved occult sex addicts, many of us are transgender. so? as n1x says capital deconstructs gender and "feminizes" men, it also emphasizes hypersexuality. none of this is bad, you stupid slowfag

>>14271754
>accelerationism
>an actual movement

>>14271704
havent't read baudelaire but rimbaud would fit. i'd put artaud anthology or watchfiends and rack screams for artaud

>>14271735
who care what zizek thinks

>>14271742
>what the fuck is a/acc
anti accelerationism or whatever slowfags are calling themselves nowadays
>retarded
>Le ebin dark enlightenment xD
NRx isn't real acc you dumb fuck. everyone recognizes Land turned into a boomer and nothing post-FN is worth reading and it's all slowfag cope.
>>14271746
he's theorycel core, so what if he is not an accelerationist he's still our guy and popular among accelerationists

>>14271754
>accelerationists discord

do these even exist

>>14271754
>discord
yes, I will base my judgements off discord, the home of the tranny

>>14271771
>everyone recognizes Land turned into a boomer and nothing post-FN is worth reading
why do half the acc fags have a hard on for patchwork then? even the commies are into NRx

>>14271771
>theorycel
Lmao

Is Xi an accelerationist

>>14271707
>>14271754
meanwhile

>>14271772
yes
>>14271777
ohhh slowfag doesn't know most online communities are now using discord? what are you living in the 90s and think irc is where it's at? fuck off grandpa
>>14271786
patchwork yes, NRx sure depending on what you mean, definitely not reactionary bullcrap like Moldbug meant it

>>14271807
>NRx sure[...] definitely not reactionary bullcrap
cope and read theory

>>14271803
>minor accel e-celeb has to tell his accel following not to celebrated "destroy dick december"
Doesn't this prove the a/acc crowd right? In what other circles is DDD a thing?

>>14271820
>In what other circles is DDD a thing?
literally all of twitter

>>14267437
If you want to aestheticize your thought and being, why don't you use correct punctuation and formatting?

/acc/ is gay and lame -- this thread should be about the superior libidinal materialism and the freudian-marxist-nietzschean coomvergence

>ITT:Everyones typing one handed.

>>14271807
>yes
where

>>14271829
marx is lame

>>14271827
Jazz versus classical
Vroom vroom
Gotta go fast

>>14271831
>OOOOH GOOOD/CAPITAL IM NEO-COOMVERGING, AAAAAAAAAAAAAH PRAISE GNON.

>>14271838
Zoomer pseud, start with the greeks, resume with the romans, commune with the christians, egress to the east, meditate on the moderns, poopoo peepee with the postmoderns

>>14271850
And after all that he'd still be right.

>>14271797
xi is the only true inheritor of centuries worth of enlightenment development. completely unironically

The heck is all this about? What I'm reading appears to be deracinated manchildren trying to shirk responsibility for their turpitude by claiming it was the inexorable result of Capital. It's like you want to talk about degeneracy, but are determined not to use any language of the Right because that would be gauche. Tell me I'm missing something.

>>14271874
Honestly, you are also a huge pseud if you too underestimate how bigly important and intelligent marx is

>>14271901
What you view as degeneracy we view as progress. What you wish to conserve we see as degeneracy.

>>14271901
>>14271913
wat
how does any of this relate to libinal materialism

>>14271920
Fuck off centrist fash bootlicker

>>14271913
Does that even reflect what Accelerationists believe? Because I thought the point of acceleration was to make the system collapse sooner, because it's horrible and you want to start something new. You seem to be saying the opposite.

>>14271932
They are larping or false flagging but they don't read so they aren't doing a good job

>>14271920
Is there a kind of libidinism that is not material, or vice versa? Seems like a redundant term.

Tell me we are all doomed already so I can sleep in peace

>>14271941
It's updating marx to freud.
>>14271932
Think non-euclidean politics. Multi-dimensional chess. Discord trannies are hardly working for the deep state.
>>14271938
See: >>14271929
>>14271943
Civilization or Barbarism. Or both. We have never been modern. Maybe one day we will be.

>>14271941
I think it's pretty easy to imagine the libido as subjective

>>14271955
libidinal economics comes out of Lyotard not Freud you pseud

>>14271967
>I wonder who popularized the term libido

>>14271955
>Civilization or Barbarism
>Implying civilization is not brutal too
The only thing it changes is the self-reinforcement ideological dimension to justify it's own excess. Ideology is the ego of the leviathan, we are all doomed

>>14271981
that isn't how philosophy works you utter brainlet; if you had read Freud and Lyotard you could see pretty easily how it developed. don't have sex, read theory

>>14272016
Have sex

>>14272005
>implying we have civilization and not a liminal state at best
Read

>>14272037
this literally reinforces my point, that Lyotard greatly expands the theory of libido and to call it "updating Marx to Freud" shows you can't even comprehend a laymans explanation of the idea

>>14272050
Lol. What point? That you're pedanix? I meant it dialectically anyhow -- freud to marx too. Stop being such an autistic slowfag.

>>14272079
>dialectially
>slowfag
ask me how I know you are larping as an accelerationist

>>14272079
*pedantic

>>14271726
If anything, I'd say the libidinal materialism of this thread and Land's Thirst for Annihilation is closer to the no-future masculinity (the 'nihilist refusal of production', the luxurious loss of extinction) that n1x criticizes (or happily sees go) than to the transfeminine autoproduction of gender acceleration.

>>14272088
I'm not an accelerationist. I just like libidinal materialism. Seems pretty solid as an analytical tool.

>>14271827
>correct
this is 4chan, though. my actual style is closer to klossowski

>>14271967
the term libidinal economy actually comes from Freud. Not exactly where tho. But people discuss the term in relation to Freud with no connection to Lyotard. Stiegler does this, for example. Of course, the eponymous book is Lyotard.
Relatedly, I feel like Lyotard's book is still largely overlooked, people just quote the passage where he says the English workers enjoyed their destruction by capital. It was translated by Grant and there's a blurb by Land on the back cover. But after I feel like it wasn't discussed much by Ccru (there are a few references) or Land, not as much as Deleuze & Guattari. Especially seeing the libidinal materialist thing in The Thirst for Annihilation.

>>14272095
>gets called out on acc larping
>I-I'm not acc I'm into libidinal.materialism
>I-ignore the fact I thought it was Freudian libidinalism, I swear I know wat I'm talking about
don't have sex, read theory

>>14267613
Nihil Unbound era Brassier, maybe. Current Brassier and basically anything after NU, definitely not. He's literally a neorat, the opposite of a libidinal materialist. Should not be on the list.

>>14272091
Two sides of the same coin

>>14272132
I do both.

>>14271932
Sure its about exit or whatever, but the exit is not for humanity. People gotta stop getting this mixed up.
Accelerationism is the process of Capital exiting humanity. Anything promoting 'systemic collapse' to 'start something new' is j reactionary humanist shite.

>>14272216
Libidinal materialism is not accelerationism

?

>>14272624
Looking sexy (i.e., libidinal) - memes are kinda like libidinal materialist semiotics, eh?

I am a huge fan of D's Logic of Sense altho perhaps not truly related. What about Kojeve and Lacan? Chaosmosis is pretty dope too -- read it in a psych ward on schizo break time

>>14272644
kojeve... might work. he does do stuff with desire + materialism. i'd have to reread to really reach an opinion
i haven't read enough lacan to decide definitively if he fits. he does seem to

>>14267581
>>14268081
>Baudrillard - Symbolic Exchange and Death
have you people even read Baudrillard? Symbolic Exchange and Death (and more so Forget Foucault) is an attack on "libidinal materialism," which he rightfully considers totally retarded.

>>14272780
haven't. a lot of these are suggestions i've taken from people. i can take it out. sadie plant's description of the mirror of production seemed to fit the bill, though what with his supporting of meaningless expenditures

>>14272780
how so? Fisher literally recommends it alongside Libidinal Economy

>>14272453
No disagreement there. Read what I was replying to pal. They were asking about accelerationism not libmat.

>>14272788
>>14272819
Sadie Plant's writings on Baudrillard are shallow and selective. Mark Fisher is more sympathetic than Plant, sure, but follows her in blithely twisting Baudrillard's work into his own image.

All of his work from For a Critique of the Political Economy of the Sign and on, and especially The Mirror of Production and Symbolic Exchange and Death, explicitly critiques the ideas of "desire," "production," "economy," "energy," "posthumanism," "the unconscious," and "materialism" upon which any "libidinal materialism" must rest. He had a thing for Bataille's general economy (though not for long after SE&D), sure, but so did Derrida.

>"To put the theory of the unconscious into question is also to put the theory of Desire into question, in that here, at the level of an entire civilization, it is always simply a matter of a negative phantasm of the rational order. Hence Desire becomes an integral part of our reigning prohibition, its dreamt materiality becomes part of our imaginary. Whether it is dialectically related to its prohibition, as with Oedipus and psychoanalysis, or whether it is exalted in its brute productivity, as in Deleuze and Guattari's Anti-Oedipus, it remains the promise of a savage naturality, the phantasm of an objective, liberatory pulsional energy to be liberated -- a force of desire inherited from the mobile field of revolutions: good old labour force...We must write the 'Mirror of Desire' as we have written 'The Mirror of Production.'"
>SE&D, p137

>>14272900
SOMEONE ACTUALLY READ THE BOOKS?

SOMEONE ACTUALLY READ THE BOOKS BEING DISCUSSED? ON /LIT/????????

>>14267564
>chud
what does this word mean and why am i always seeing it used by faggots

>>14272900
The whole thing is a lot more nuanced, when he speaks of mirrors he doesn't mean that, for instance, "production" and "desire" never existed, but rather than capital has changed over time to simulate this concepts rather than simply operate on top of them. Desire, as production is, is still simulated by capital

>>14272992
when you are talking to a cool hep cat internet "dirtbag leftist" and he wants to show off how he's just as badical and irreverent as any stupid alt righter, he really wants to call you a fagget, because when men want to insult eachother on the internet they call each other FAGS. but he can't do it, because his tranny friends will cry. so he has to make up a new gay word that sounds like it's an epic post-ironic burn his in-group thought up and chose to use, not out of necessity (because they arent allowed to say FAGGOT), but out of CHOICE. they CHOOSE to SAY "CHUD".

beneath their cognitive dissonance, they know it sounds toothless and lame. they wish they could use the big boy swear words like you can, as an actually cool internet racist. but they cant. ironically, using this weak and feckless word, CHUD, makes them sound like the word they made it up to avoid in the first place, namely, A FAGGOT.

>>14273020
pretty sure it's from a movie

>>14273020
it's not a terrible insult, without knowing what its supposed to mean you still dont want to be whatever a 'chud' is, it just sounds bad. The progs really do have a problem with insults though because they have to always maintain their moralizing posture which just makes them sound lame. Their best one is probably incel which they didnt even come up with, incels themselves are just so low status that they fuck over anyone they associate with by proxy, like an own goal

>>14273002
Yes it does get very nuanced very quickly (although whether something is a simulation or not makes all the difference: libidinal materialism is itself nothing but a simulation of the master discourses of production). Be that as it may, just ask the simple questions:
Does Baudrillard think any of the concepts, theories, or attitudes adhered to in "libidinal materialism" have any bearing on the present world of simulation? Are they even worth ironically defending as simulations, when you can instead opt for seduction? No, and no.

>>14273043
>libidinal materialism is itself nothing but a simulation of the master discourses of production
You do know what Baudrillard defined as the real right? That which could be simulated

>>14273043
seduction recs? other than baudrillard by seduction

I heard somewhere that after reading Heidegger, Bataille was excited to conclude that philosophy had become more or less a branch of fiction.
Other philosophers who agree with this?

>>14267057
Do people like Deleuze actually defend materialism or do they just assume it? It doesn't seem justifiable to believe in all these stupid concepts like "flows of energy" and then turn around and say that everything is just material, including all those bullshit concepts he made up.

>>14273085
>Do people like Deleuze actually defend materialism or do they just assume it?
they defend it. read the books

>>14273052
>You do know what Baudrillard defined as the real right? That which could be simulated
The real and the hyperreal are related but still different things, just as the simulacra and the simulation are, at least in SE&D. This changes by the time of Simulacra and Simulation, and certainly once he starts talking about integral reality and virtual reality in the 90s, which are also different from the real and the hyperreal. The real of production in Marxism and psychoanalysis is a second-order simulacrum, per the three orders in SE&D. If hurriedly conflating the real and simulation is supposed to somehow redeem anything related to libidinal materialism in Baudrillard's eyes, you're just plain wrong.

>>14273103
it isn't a conflation, it is literally the defining quality of simulation. you can't handwave something away because Baudrillard says it's a simulation, on the contrary, simulations are only simulations insofar as they retain a semiotic link to the real. I haven't read any Baudrillard later than SE&D so don't assume this is an S&S perversion

>>14273055
Kierkegaard's Diary of a Seducer

>>14273124
It is a conflation, and one that is historically produced by the collapse of the real of production into simulation by the code. He obviously never waves away the importance of simulation, but only as simulation. Everything he wrote past Mirror is an attack on desire and production, real, simulated, or otherwise. I don't give a shit if you understand simulation and the real or not; just understand that he isn't part of this faggoty little libidinal materialism club and everything he wrote explicitly demonstrates this.

>>14273156
>just understand that he isn't part of this faggoty little libidinal materialism club
yeah he's not a part of the faggy postmodern club either but trying to keep him off pomo reading lists is a good way to catch brain damage

>>14271689
>because accfags read so well

>WE'RE NOT SAMEFAGS
>entire thread is them bitching about strangely potent a/acc

>>14272016
>if you had read Freud and Lyotard
kek just why?

>>14271932
That's not Landian acc. He's Steven Pinker and Martha Stewart staring blankly at Adorno.

>>14273090
I can't, it's all pretentious jibber jabber

OMFG CAN WE STOP THE STRANGELY BITTER BULLYING

Hey guys, Justin Murphy here, everyone's favorite 2/acc.

Just wondering if any a/accs would like to come on my podcast and defend the counter-accelerationist position.

We'd love to have you.

>>14273273
>>14273260
>>14273240
>>14273231
>>14273219
>when the anti-acc fag shows back up and starts spamming
we were talking about books

>>14273286
>we
>>14273258

>>14273085
I'm not entirely sure what point you're trying to make, but basically Deleuze, like Nietzsche and Bergson among others, was focused on relations (connections, forces, durations) over substance as a kind of persistent identity. It's sometimes described with the more general term of new materialism to indicate that it's processual.

>>14272624

>>14273304
>processual
this is a SFW board anon, please keep the lascivious language to a minimum

>>14273286
Two of you discord fags were pretending to discuss the books in order to slide.
Fuck off you turboautist.

>>14273304
all-powerful stardust poster

>>14273321
>no one reads or discusses books
look we already confirmed you are a coomer into femdom hentai who doesn't read, can you please stop projecting and fuck off now

>>14273341
What's this i know you are but what am i bullshit?
Were you too stupid to realize you were being bullied in school?
Tell us about your mother.

>>14273350
AAAAAHHH YOU SISSY FAGGOT DISCORD TRANNY UHHHH I'M GUNNA COOM OH SHIT QUICK TALK ABOUT YOUR MOM WHILE I COOOOOMMMM

>>14271726
Based.

There's nothing wrong with being transgender. Incels are just mad because they don't have their own way to increase the chance of having sex.

>>14273366
Try not to break your wrist punching that keyboard.

>>14273085
<not understanding the heleoterritory of quantustitional subpraxis

literally autism guy

Is this what you guys are calling the accelerationism thread now that accelerationism is a big bad word on the Homeland Security radar thanks to Atomwaffen/Tarrant/etc.?

I'm trying to figure out what this accelerationism thing is all about since there has been some buzz about it. What's a good book to start with and a good book to follow with if I'm interested in the first one? What's some important slang to know to understand any of this (you guys use lots of weird colloquialisms?)? What is an "a/acc" as opposed to a "b/acc/," "l/acc," "r/acc," or "u/acc?"

>>14273637
Zeroes and Ones by Sadie Plant

Nietzsche would likely gouge his eyes out if he had to see this.

>>14273731
For real? Looks like garden-variety feminist lit at first glance but I'll give it a shot if it means understanding this stuff.

>>14273637
Don't get memed by what discord spammers say anon. Just read Deleuze if you're interested in the same thought.

>>14273831
he's memeing you anon, Zeros and Ones is good but it will teach you about cyberfeminism not l/acc, r/acc ect. Read Nick Lands intro to accelerationism

>>14273875
Not at all. Nick Land's philosophy is built from cyberfeminism. If you can't understand Plant and Haraway you will never understand Land.

>>14273905
Plant and Haraway are each referenced a whopping zero times in Fanged Noumena

>>14273845
I've read some Deleuze in college, but none of it struck me as particularly related to this ideological thinking. A lot of it rubbed me the wrong way (especially once I saw his name on that petition against age of consent), but it was interesting nonetheless. Is it relevant material in the stuff he wrote with Guattari?
>>14273875
What is cyberfeminism and is that a real thing? I'm familiar with feminism (especially the second wave and early third wave because of a general education course), but I have never heard the word before.
>t. non-trad neoplatonist Christian

>pic unrelated, it's just how they got their snow rover out of that crevasse

>>14273941
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberfeminism

>>14273941
Yeah, the Anti-Oedipus writings are the most significant. And if you thought that was bad then all of the cringe shit from there is only turned up to 11 in Land.

>>14273932
Fuck off autismo. He was literally in a cyberfeminist collective and all the ideas are based off of The Cyborg Manifesto.

>>14273981
If this stuff is the background of the accelerationism that has become a big deal recently, then what the hell happened to Nick Land? Dude went from hanging around with post-structuralist feminist academics and socialists to hanging around with Yarvin and the the neoreactionaries? Is any of this related to the accelerationism the Atomwaffen crowd adhere to, or is that just unrelated/tangentially-related militant thinking sourced from that creep Mason?

>>14274039
topkek the CCRU was not a "cyberfeminist collective" and he disagrees with Haraway on nearly every issue

>>14274061
COPE
he literally calls for armies of amazons to defend capital

>>14274041
unrelated to Mason, although surprisingly, closely related to Kazynski
people make a big deal out of g/acc on this board because anything trans is a meme on 4chan. in reality there are like 12 g/acc followers in total and they don't stray far from twitter

>>14274077
What are these letters? I assume "acc" stands for accelerationism. "L" and "R" seem to be left and right, and from what you just said I assume "G" stands for gender? Are the g/accs the cyberfeminists, or are they their own trans thing? What are a/acc, b/acc, and u/acc?

>>14274077
>12 g/acc followers in total and they don't stray far from twitter
How is this different from r/acc?

>>14274072
oh you mean in that essay he calls lunacy? even then, an Amazonian uprising has literally nothing to do with cyberfeminism, Amazon implies the opposite of "cyber" lmao

>>14274118
>twitter
Look at this fucking retard.

https://youtu.be/2xgC6RebSLo

>>14274139
Where else would you go to get Nick Land's opinions these days?

Land only left Britain because he couldn't take the bantz.
https://youtu.be/15Z5nsyLDbE

>>14274169
Why would I give a fuck about some literal who's opinions?
Fucking samefags.

>>14274176
>I bring up Nick Land's opinions when I think they suit my argument but when they don't he's a literal who

>>14274205
>he's a literal who
Yes you're slowly catching up anon. Keep with it and some day you can start on a book.

>>14274253
retard he is the king of lit

>>14273020
Hell yeah brother. Self censorship is for faggots.

>>14268339
no actual thought, just pseudo-dialectical multiplication of binary operators

What exactly is this libidinal materialism?

>>14273020
have sex

>>14272780
Yes, when Benjamin Noys talks about accelerationism (he coined the term) at the beginning of The Persistence of the Negative, he mentions Anti-Oedipus, Libidinal Economy, and Symbolic Exchange and Death, but notes that Baudrillard's is rather a 'negative accelerationism'. Still, they do relate to the theme, even if critically, (while Lyotard criticizes Baudrillard's Mirror in Libidinal Economy), so - provided people are willing to read things counter to the view (or read anything at all) - I wouldn't object to including it in a list.

>>14273785
Then he was already doing that since Cerisy, 1972
>>14273932
Plant was his contemporary, he doesn't cite her but they literally wrote collaboratively (Cyberpositive, Ccru). And he does cite Wittig and Irigaray.

>>14274095
Yes. G/acc is related to or an outgrowth of cyberfeminism (Plant, Amy Ireland, xenofeminism) but different, but then again it isn't really a movement; like another anon said, only a few people on twitter actually advocate it, and the only real text on it is the "blackpaper" by n1x. "A" is anti, "U" is unconditional (which is the most discussed besides L/R); not sure about B. Most of these are little more than names (z/acc is zero acc), coined and discussed by only a few people, so I wouldn't take them all that seriously. L, R, and U are not that absolute either, but they're the ones people seriously discuss; though before that it was just "accelerationism" and before that (Land never uses the ism in Fanged Noumena; nor any of the precursor authors such as Deleuze) it wasn't used at all. There are some good lists (Xenogoth for example) but there isn't one text (that isn't an after-the-fact summary) that captures accelerationism. It's an ill-applied term (without even considering the nominative appropriation by white far-rightists), and I'm not entirely sure what "it" is at the end of the day.

>>14274694
Just a way for accfags to keep multiple threads up and try to sidestep criticism.

>>14275060
Cyberfeminism is far bigger than acc. They actually have a following outside twitter and are taught in universities.

>>14275176
Right, wasn't implying it wasn't

Hottest thread on lit now.

acc is b/acc, baby!

>>14275200
But it's not (simply) acc. I think the people defending libidinal materialism itt want to distinguish it from acc (not necessarily to disavow acc, but not to advocate for it sub rosa either)

>>14275205
stfu

We're reaching levels of hyperbasedness you just wouldn't believe.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/07/style/modern-love-when-a-boyfriend-joins-the-marriage.html

>>14273020
im here for posts like this

>>14273020
kek
make sure you save it gentlemen

>>14267057
>monstrous thought
What do you mean by this? I know Klossowski talks about monstrosity in relation to Sade; but how does the rest relate to the idea of the monster? I'm rather interested in this concept; is it elaborated elsewhere among these authors?

>>14276567
Just add edgy bullshit to your theory.

>>14276585
serious answers only pls

>>14273020
Yeah, i'm thinking this is based

>>14276695
That is serious. There's nothing more to it.

>>14276736
Well, that's disappointing --

>>14276567
monster in the biological sense
a mutation which doesn't fit into prior conceptual models