against the logic of submission
Against the Logic of Submission (2005) by Wolfi Landstreicher via 21 pg kindle version from anarchist library [https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/wolfi-landstreicher-against-the-logic-of-submission]
to me.. against ness (any form of re ness) is still submitting ness
on Wolfi Landstreicher .. just one of the links i found after reading the below.. only adding this one since he wrote it himself [https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/wolfi-landstreicher-an-open-letter-concerning-a-witch-hunt]: To end this, a bit of a declaration: I have *nothing but contempt for all racism and all racists, no matter who they are…. I have nothing but contempt for all nationalism and all nationalists (and these days, that isn’t political correct). I have nothing but contempt for all fascism and all fascists (including the red fascists who hide behind their hammer and sickle)…. and I also have nothing but contempt for ALL political systems and those who uphold them: democracy and democrats, republics and republicans, socialism and socialists, communism and communists. .. **I relate to others as individuals, not in terms of categories (except to the extent that they embrace a categorical identity, whether through proclamation or through their choice of identifying symbols), and I recognize that any freedom that is not a mere abstraction has to rest in individual autonomy. In this sense, I encounter my worlds individualistically. ***I refuse to be ruled to the extent that I have the strength (and so also to rule, since all rulers are ruled by the system of ruling). In this sense, I encounter my worlds anarchistically. And I have no need for a god in my worlds. So in this sense I encounter my worlds atheistically. ****I don’t have time to waste any more on someone who is either a complete nitwit, utterly unaware of the significance of the symbols he displays and the methods he uses, or, as I strongly suspect, a crypto-stalinist half-wit trying to appear as an anarcho-communist-egoist. Dr. Bones is not a worthy foe, so he gets no more of my time. If I get around to it, I may also write the “declaration of independence from politics” I promised, but I am done with dealing with an ideological idiot’s shit-slinging. – Wolfi Landstreicher
to me *contempt ness is **category ness et al
to me.. any form of m\a\p ness.. any form of re ness is already ***rule ness..
****any form of us & them.. is already a cancerous distraction.. et al
notes/quotes:
(which i read/noted before i googled him)
3
Introduction
Submission to domination is enforced not solely, nor even most significantly, through blatant repression, but rather through subtle manipulations *worked into the fabric of everyday social relationships. These manipulations — ingrained in the social fabric not because domination is everywhere and nowhere, but because the institutions of domination create rules, laws, mores and customs that enforce such manipulations — create a logic of submission, an often unconscious tendency to justify resignation and subservience in one’s everyday relations in the world. For this reason, it is necessary for those who are serious about developing an anarchist insurrectional project to confront this tendency wherever it appears — in their lives, their relationships and the ideas and practices of the struggles in which they participate. Such a confrontation is not a matter of therapy, which itself partakes of the logic of submission, but of defiant refusal. It requires a subversion of the existent, a development of different ways of relating to ourselves, each other, the world and our struggles, ways that clearly reflect our determination to refuse all domination and to reappropriate our lives here and now. I am talking here of a real revolution of everyday life as the necessary basis for a social revolution against this civilization founded on domination and exploitation. The following essays appeared in Willful Disobedience as the series “Against the Logic of Submission”. By no means do they exhaust the question, but I think they provide a basis for discussion as to how we can create ourselves, our relationships and our struggle as our own in defiance of all domination.
*structural violence.. spiritual violence.. et al
**yeah.. need to stop perpetuating survival triage et al.. but.. revolt/against/resist/refuse/confront ness.. et al.. same song.. not diff.. nothing to date has gotten to the root of problem
legit freedom will only happen if it’s all of us.. and in order to be all of us.. has to be sans any form of measuring, accounting, people telling other people what to do
how we gather in a space is huge.. need to try spaces of permission where people have nothing to prove to facil curiosity over decision making.. because the finite set of choices of decision making is unmooring us.. keeping us from us..
ie: imagine if we listen to the itch-in-8b-souls 1st thing everyday & use that data to connect us (tech as it could be.. ai as augmenting interconnectedness)
the thing we’ve not yet tried/seen: the unconditional part of left to own devices ness
[‘in an undisturbed ecosystem ..the individual left to its own devices.. serves the whole’ –dana meadows]
Against the Logic of Submission
A distinguishing factor of the anarchist idea of revolution is the importance of the individual in bringing this about. Although collectivist ideology has dulled this realization even in most anarchist circles, it still manifests in such choices as abstention from voting and military service. But for those seeking to develop an insurrectional practice, this realization needs to go much further than a few abstentions.
needs to go beyond any form of m\a\p
No revolutionary anarchist denies the necessity of a large-scale uprising of the exploited to destroy the state, capital and every institution of power and privilege. But revolution is not a gift that falls from the sky or is granted by an abstract History. Actions of individuals help to build the circumstance which can make uprisings occur and can push them in the direction of generalized revolt.
destroy ness is a cancerous distraction.. so this defn of anarchist ness is not deep enough if we want legit free people..
need a quiet revolution that resonates with 8b people today
we need a problem deep enough to resonate w/8b today.. via a mechanism simple enough to be accessible/usable to 8b today.. in an ecosystem open enough to set/keep 8b legit free
ie: org around a problem deep enough (aka: org around legit needs) to resonate w/8b today.. via a mechanism simple enough (aka: tech as it could be) to be accessible/usable to 8b today.. and an ecosystem open enough (aka: sans any form of m\a\p) to set/keep 8b legit free
This means that rather than waiting around for the revolution like certain marxists, trying to read historical signs so that one will be ready, it makes more sense that we anarchists consider ourselves to be in revolt at every moment of our lives and attack this social order without worrying about whether “the time is ripe”. Individual acts of revolt which are easily repeated and imitated provide the basis for the development of forms of mass action in which the individual is not lost and delegation is absent — that is to say insurrectionary action that could destroy the present reality and open the possibility for creating a world in which every individual is able grasp all that they need to fully realize themselves.
attack/insurrection et al.. a cancerous distraction to opening up ness..
But equally important is the anarchist recognition of the primacy of the actual, living individual (as opposed to the collectivized cog and to the abstract concept of the individual) is the recognition that we need to become a certain sort of being, a being capable of acting on our own terms to realize our own desires and dreams in the face of the most fierce and powerful enemy: this entire civilization — the state, capital, the technological system…
brown belonging law et al
To live as a rebel, as a self-willed anarchist revolutionary, requires a great deal of will, determination and spirit in the face of dizzying odds. Thus, one essential aspect of developing an insurrectional practice is the transformation of oneself into such a spirited, willful being. *Such a transformation does not take place through therapy but through attacking the social order both in its manifestations in the world and in oneself and one’s relationships. An uncompromising cruelty may prove essential to this task, because there are so many chains to be broken, so many limits to be destroyed. As one comrade has said, the individual quest is “the appropriation of everything that has been subtracted from him through family, school, institutions, roles, in order to find his specificity, totality, universality, lost… in the process of domestication and the construction of symbolic culture.” So the point is to make the decision to take one’s life back in its totality, a decision that requires just the sort of ferocity that will be necessary to demolish this society. And such a decision will transform all one’s relationships, demanding a clarity that will leave no room for submission to the demands of social protocol, disrespectful tolerance or pity for those who fear the energy of unchanneled desire more than its suppression. In making this decision (and the decision is only truly made as one acts to realize it), one is completely rejecting the logic of submission that dominates most relationships.
*ooof.. so.. same song.. us & them ness.. perpetuating survival triage et al
4
A Projectual Life
An understanding of how the decision to live in revolt against the present reality relates to desire, relationships, love and friendship requires an understanding of *how such a decision transforms those who make it. The logic of submission — the logic that the social order seeks to impose on the exploited — is a logic of passivity, of resignation to the mediocre existence offered by this order. According to this logic, life is something that happens to us, that we simply “make the best of”, **a perspective that defeats us before we’ve begun to struggle.
*decision making is unmooring us law.. need 1st/most: means (nonjudgmental expo labeling) to undo hierarchical listening – so we can hear what’s already on each heart as global detox in order to org around legit needs..
(itch-in-the-soul) curiosity.. over decision making
**thinking we have to struggle .. et al.. takes a lot of work.. et al.. is killing us.. keeping us from us
But some of us burn with an energy that goads us towards something else, something different. In our burning we suffer anguish from every humiliation that the present world imposes on us. We cannot resign, accept our place and content ourselves with just getting by. Moved to decisive action by our passion, against all the odds we come to view life differently — or more precisely, to live differently.
but to me.. not diff is still any form of m\a\p.. ie: us & them ness.. et al
the thing we’ve not yet tried/seen: the unconditional part of left to own devices ness
[‘in an undisturbed ecosystem ..the individual left to its own devices.. serves the whole’ –dana meadows]
there’s a legit use of tech (nonjudgmental exponential labeling) to facil the seeming chaos of a global detox leap/dance.. for (blank)’s sake..
ie: whatever for a year.. a legit sabbatical ish transition
otherwise we’ll keep perpetuating the same song.. the whac-a-mole-ing ness of sea world.. of not-us ness.. of part\ial ness.. perpetuating survival triage.. for (blank)’s sake..
..But it has been proven over and over and over again that hedging one’s bets as surely brings defeat as surrender. Having taken this responsibility for our lives, there is no room for half measures. The point is to live without measure. Longer chains are chains nonetheless.
rather.. without any form of m\a\p.. because none of us are free
legit freedom will only happen if it’s all of us.. and in order to be all of us.. has to be sans any form of measuring, accounting, people telling other people what to do
5
One reads in Nietzsche of amor fati. The very opposite of the fatal resignation demanded by the logic of submission, amor fati is that love of fate *as a worthy adversary that moves one to courageous action. I
*aka: us & them ness.. oi
In society’s eyes, any refusal of its order is a crime, but this immersion into life moves insurgence beyond the level of crime. *At this point, the insurgent has ceased to merely react to the codes, rules and laws of society and has come to determine her actions on his own terms without regard for the social order.
*actually still reacting.. need global detox.. so we all let go of reacting ness.. et al
6
One of the most significant obstacles presently facing us in this area is pity for weakness and neurosis. *There are individuals who know clearly what they desire in each potential loving encounter, people who can act and respond with a projectual clarity that only those who have made their passions and desires their own can have. But when these individuals act on their desires, if another who is less sure of themselves is unnerved or has their feelings hurt, they are expected to change their behavior to accommodate the weakness of this other person. Thus the strong-willed individual who has grasped the substance of free love and begun to live it often finds herself suppressed or ostracized by his own supposed comrades. **If our aims are indeed liberation and the destruction of the logic of submission in all areas of life, then we cannot give in to this. The point is to transform ourselves into strong, daring, self-willed, ***passionate rebels — and, thus, also into strong, daring, self-willed, passionate lovers — and this requires acting without guilt, regret or pity. ****This self-transformation is an essential aspect of the revolutionary transformation of the world , and we cannot let it get side-tracked by a pity that degrades both the one who pities and the one who is pitied.
*yeah.. i don’t think there are any.. again.. because it has to be all of us for the dance to dance.. ie: i can’t fully be free me till everyone is free.. otherwise.. messes with w the sync .. humanity needs a leap.. to get back/to simultaneous spontaneity .. simultaneous fittingness.. everyone in sync.. the dance
**to me.. what we can’t give into is part\ial ness.. to some of us ness.. at least that’s me.. and that’s why warning ness ness et al
****yeah to self transform.. but has to be all.. so again.. need global detox leap.. for (blank)’s sake..
and so again..
legit freedom will only happen if it’s all of us.. and in order to be all of us.. has to be sans any form of measuring, accounting, people telling other people what to do
7
*This is no easy path. It has no place for our weaknesses, no time for neurotic self-pity or meagerness. **For love in its most impassioned and unconstrained forms is as cruel as revolution. How could it be otherwise when its goal is the same: the transformation of every aspect of life and ***the destruction of all that prevents it?
*it is if it’s problem deep enough.. so that every heart already craves/resonates with it.. takes a lot of work ness as red flag we’re doing it/life wrong
**oh my.. the thing about love we keep missing is its unconditional ness.. cruel/revolution ness is part of whalespeak.. keeping us not us
***bad tactic.. because if destructing ness.. already perpetuating ness
Passionate Friendship
We live in a world in which the *majority of encounters and interactions involve work and commodity exchange. In other words, the dominant forms of relating are economic, based on the domination of survival over life. In such a world, it is no surprise that the concept of friendship no longer has much value. Today, neither the daily interactions of one’s “communities” (these strange, disconnected “communities” of family, school, work) nor the chance encounters (at the market, on the bus, at some public event) have much chance of sparking a real and intense interest in another, an impassioned curiosity to discover who they are what we might be able to create with them. **The common thread that runs through these not so varied interactions and encounters is that they originate in the operations of domination and exploitation, in the social order that immiserates our lives an to which most people grudgingly submit.
*rather.. all encounters.. 10-day-care-center\ness.. marsh exchange law ness.. need to try life over survival ness.. et al
**so need hari rat park law et al.. via a sabbatical ish transition
8
If the deep loneliness of massified, commodified society draws us to others, what little our impoverished beings have to offer each other soon leads to resentment. Thus, interactions between friends at this time seem to be mostly dominated by comic mockery and various forms of one-upmanship. While such forms of play may indeed be amusing as part of a strong relationship based on real mutual pleasure, when it becomes the main way of relating, surely something is lacking.
khan filling the gaps law et al.. from missing pieces
9
(under hatred)
Those of us who desire the destruction of power, the end of exploitation and domination, cannot let ourselves succumb to the rationalizations of the progressives, which only serve the interests of the rulers of the present. Having chosen to refuse our exploitation and domination, to take our lives as our own in struggle against the miserable reality that has been imposed on us, we inevitably confront an array of individuals, institutions and structures that stand in our way, actively opposing us — the state, capital, the rulers of this order and their loyal guard dogs, the various systems and institutions of control and exploitation.* These are our enemies and it is only reasonable that we would hate them. It is the hatred of the slave for the master — or, more accurately, the hatred of the escaped slave for the laws, the cops, the “good citizens”, the courts and the institutions that seek to hunt her down and return him to the master. And as with the passions of our loves and friendships, this passionate hatred is also to be cultivated and made our own, **its energy focused and directed into the development of our projects of revolt and destruction… Hatred of the enemy — of the ruling order and all who willfully uphold it — is a tempestuous passion that can provide an energy for this task that we would do well to embrace.. The intelligence of revolt embraces all passions, finding in them not only mighty weapons for the battle against this order, but also the wonder and joy of a life lived to the full.
*if enemy ness.. then us & them ness.. then not for all.. then not for legit freedom..
**cancerous distraction.. no wonder/joy/freedom is still same song of us & them ness
10
In the realm of the virtual, everything is possible for a price. Everything, that is, except a world without prices, a world of actual, self-determined, face-to-face relationships in which one chooses one’s activities for oneself and concretely acts upon reality within the world.
again.. how we gather in a space is huge.. need to try spaces of permission where people have nothing to prove to facil curiosity over decision making.. because the finite set of choices of decision making is unmooring us.. keeping us from us..
ie: imagine if we listen to the itch-in-8b-souls 1st thing everyday & use that data to connect us (tech as it could be.. ai as augmenting interconnectedness)
the thing we’ve not yet tried/seen: the unconditional part of left to own devices ness
11
Although such categorization can indeed be useful for understanding the specifics of how the present social order functions, it usually tends instead to *keep people from observing the whole, allowing the leftist project of developing specializations in specific forms of oppression to move forward, developing ideological methods for explaining these oppressions. This ideological approach separates theory from practise leading to a further breakdown into issues upon which to act: equal wages for women, acceptance of gays into the military or the Boy Scouts, protection of a particular wetlands or patch of forest, on and on goes the endless round of demands. Once things are broken down to this level, where any analysis of this society as a whole has disappeared, one is once again viewing things from a place within the present reality. For the activist realist, also known as the leftist, efficacy is the primary value. Whatever works is good. Thus emphasis is placed on litigation, legislation, petition to the authorities, negotiation with those who rule us, because these get results — at least if the result one wants is merely the amelioration of one particular problem or the assimilation of a particular group or cause into the present order. **But such methods are not effective at all from a revolutionary anarchist perspective, because they are grounded in acceptance of the present reality, in the perspective that this is what is and so we must use it. And that is the perspective of the logic of submission. A reversal of perspective is necessary to free ourselves from this logic.
*hari rat park law et al
**rather.. needs to be sans any form of m\a\p
The logic of submission tells us to be realistic, to limit ourselves to the ever-narrowing possibilities that the present reality offers. But when this reality is, in fact, marching toward death — toward the permanent eclipse of the human spirit and the destruction of the living environment — is it truly realistic to “be realistic”? If one loves life, if one wants to expand and flourish, it is absolutely necessary to free desire from the channels to constrain it, to let it flood our minds and hearts with passion that sparks the wildest dreams. Then one must grasp these dreams and from them hone a weapon with which to attack this reality, a passionate rebellious reason capable of formulating projects aimed at the destruction of that which exists and the realization of our most marvelous desires. For those of us who want to make our lives our own, anything less would be unrealistic.
oh my goodness.. ooof
12
The specialization of radical feminism actually lies in the cataloguing of wrongs suffered by woman at the hands of man. If this catalogue was ever completed, the specialization would no longer be necessary and it would be time to move beyond this listing of wrongs suffered to an actual attempt to analyze the nature of women’s oppression in this society and take real, thought-out action to end it. So the maintenance of this specialization requires that feminists expand this catalogue to infinity, even to the point of explaining the oppressive actions of women in positions of power as expressions of patriarchal power, thus freeing these women from responsibility for their actions. Any serious analysis of the complex relations of domination as it actually exists is laid aside in favor of an ideology in which man dominates and woman is the victim of this domination. But the creation of one’s identity on the basis of one’s oppression, on the victimization one has suffered, does not provide strength or independence. Instead it creates a need for protection and security that eclipses the desire for freedom and self-determination.
identity.. safety addiction.. et al.. as cancerous distraction
13
If our desire is to destroy all domination, then it is necessary that we move beyond everything that holds us back, beyond feminism, yes, and beyond gender, because this is where we find the ability to create our indomitable individuality that rises up against all domination without hesitation. If we wish to destroy the logic of submission, this must be our minimum goal.
aka: any form of m\a\p
Security Culture and Expansive Living
Life today is far too small. Forced into roles and relationships that reproduce the current social order, it focuses on the petty, on that which can be measured, priced, bought and sold. The meager existence of shopkeepers and security guards has been imposed everywhere, and real life, expansive life, life with no limits other than our own capacities exists only in revolt against this society. So those of us who want an expansive existence, life lived to the full, are moved to take action, to attack the institutions that compel us to live such petty lives.
aka: sea world.. need a nother way..
hari rat park law et al
14
The spark of revolt has to be suppressed; the maintenance of the social order requires it.
actually.. revolt ness perpetuates it.. ooof
*The expansion of life cannot occur in hiding — that would simply be a change of cells within the social prison. But because this expansion, this tension toward freedom, moves us to attack this social order, to take action that is outside and frequently against its written and implied laws, we are forced to deal with the question of how to evade the uniformed guard dogs of the ruling class. So we cannot ignore the question of security.
*any form of m\a\p does that
**to me.. this is whalespeak
I have always considered the question of security a simple one, a matter of practical intelligence that anyone should be capable of figuring out. By developing relations of affinity, on decides with whom one can act. There is no need to say a word about an action to anyone who is not involved in it. This is basic and should go without saying for anyone who decides to action against domination. But such practical intelligence has no need to enshroud itself in an atmosphere of suspicion and secretiveness where every word and every thought must be watched, in which even the words of defiance are considered too great a risk. If our practice takes us there, we have already lost.
In the context of illegal activity, security is essential. But even in this context, it is not the top priority.* Our top priority is always the creation of the lives and relationships we desire, the opening of the possibility for the fullness of existence that the system of domination and exploitation cannot allow. **Those of us who truly desire such an expansive existence want to express it in all of our actions.
*but won’t happen if any form of m\a\p
**actually once we get that deep/free.. express ness.. action ness.. will all be irrelevant s
. The caution necessary to avoid arrest does not reflect the sort of life and relationships we want to build. At least I hope not.
When anarchists begin to see security as their top priority — as a “culture” that they must develop — paranoia comes to dominate relationships. Anarchist conferences are set up with levels of bureaucracy and (let’s call things what they are) policing that too closely parallels what we are trying to destroy. Suspicion replaces comradeship and solidarity. ..It has vanished behind the hard armor of militancy, and we have come to be the mirror image of our enemy.
as long as us & them ness
15
The logic of paranoia and fear, the logic of suspicion with its measured words and deeds, is the logic of submission — if not to the present order of domination, then to a morality that diminishes our lives and guarantees that we will not have the courage to face the unknown, to face the world in which we would find ourselves if the present order were destroyed.
16
Consider this analogy. If a person has broken her leg, of course, she must try to set it, get a cast or splint and find a crutch. But if the reason why he is having trouble walking is that someone has put a ball and chain on his leg, then her first priority is to cut off that chain and then to guarantee that it won’t happen again by destroying the source of the chain.
imagine a turtle ness.. hari rat park law.. et al
By accepting the idea (promoted heavily by progressive education and publicity) that the structures of oppression are essentially mindsets inside of ourselves, we become focused on our own presumed weakness, on how crippled we supposedly are. Our time is eaten up by attempts at self-healing that never come to an end, because we have become so focused on ourselves and our inability to walk that we fail to notice the chain on our leg. This endless cycle of self-analysis is not only tedious and self-indulgent; it is also utterly useless in creating a revolutionary project, because it gets in the way of social analysis and it transforms us into less capable individuals.
aka: shell missing ness
17
Freedom belongs to the individual — this is a basic anarchist principle — and as such resides in individual responsibility to oneself and in free association with others. Thus, *there can be no obligations, no debts, only choices of how to act. ..It is the nature of weakness to submit. If we all assume our own weakness, our perpetual internal infection by these various social diseases, then we will continue to nurture a submissive way of interacting with the world, ever ready to admit guilt, to apologize, to back down from what we’ve said or done. **This is the very opposite of responsibility, which acts consciously with the assurance of one’s projectual approach to life, ready to take the consequences of one’s choices — the outlaw worthy of her transgressions.
*same song if still ‘choicing’ ness.. as long as any form of m\a\p
**actually responsibility ness is same song
*In the face of ten thousand years of institutional oppression, ten thousand years in which a ruling class and the structures that support its power have determined the conditions of our existence, **what we need is not therapy, but strong-willed revolt aimed at developing a revolutionary project that can destroy this society and its institutions.
*rather .. since forever
**rather.. we need a means to get out of sea world.. aka: hari rat park law via a sabbatical ish transition.. again.. a problem deep enough et al
Neither Intellectualism Nor Stupidity
In the struggle against domination and exploitation, each individual needs to take up every tool that she can make her own, every weapon that he can use autonomously to attack this society and take back her life.
cancerous distraction
20
*But if freedom is not merely a question of degrees of domination — if bigger cages and longer chains do not mean greater freedom, but merely the appearance of greater mobility within the context of continuing enslavement to the rulers of this order — then all the political programs and ideologies become useless to our project. **Instead it is precisely to ourselves and our desires that we must turn — our desires for a qualitatively different existence. And the point of departure for the transformation we seek becomes our lives and relationships. It is here that we begin to undermine the logic of submission with the aim of destroying all domination. Then, our analyses of the world are aimed at achieving an understanding of how to carry out our own struggle in the world and to ***find points of solidarity (where we see our struggle in that of others) to spread the struggle against domination, not at creating an interpretation of the world in terms of an ideology. And our analyses of our activities are aimed at determining how useful they really are for achieving our aspirations, not at conforming our actions to any program.
*yeah.. it’s huge.. and why we have not yet gotten to legit freedom.. all the part\ial ness et al
**again.. how we gather in a space is huge.. need to try spaces of permission where people have nothing to prove to facil curiosity over decision making.. because the finite set of choices of decision making is unmooring us.. keeping us from us..
ie: imagine if we listen to the itch-in-8b-souls 1st thing everyday & use that data to connect us (tech as it could be.. ai as augmenting interconnectedness)
the thing we’ve not yet tried/seen: the unconditional part of left to own devices ness
***but you even said above.. if ie: solidarity is our struggle.. not deep enough.. to me.. rather.. need solidarity ness to be our itch-in-the-soul ness.. our missing pieces ness
ie: maté basic needs (video) et al
21
If our aim is the transformation of existence, then the development of relations of affinity is not just a tactical maneuver. *It is the attempt to develop relationships of freedom within the context of struggle. **Relationships of freedom develop through a deep and ever increasing knowledge of the other — a knowledge of their ideas, their aspirations, their desires, their capacities, their inclinations. It is a knowledge of similarities, yes, but more significantly, it is a knowledge of differences, because it is at the point of difference that real practical knowledge begins, the knowledge of whether and how one can carry out projects and create life with another. It is for this reason that among ourselves — as in our relationship to that which we are struggling against — ***it is necessary to avoid the practice of compromise and the constant search for common ground. These practices are, after all, the heart and soul of the democratic form of domination that currently rules in the world, and thus are expressions of the logic of submission that we need to eradicate from our relationships. ****False unities are by far a greater detriment to the development of an insurrectional project than *****real conflicts from which individual intelligence and creative imagination may flower brilliant. The compromise from which false unities develop is itself a sign of the submission of the insurrectional project to the political.
*to me.. this is saying .. still in sea world ness.. so .. not deep enough
**yeah.. i see red flags in this.. ie: paul know\love law.. pearson unconditional law.. and why we haven’t tried the unconditional part of left to own devices ness yet.. because.. brown belonging law et al
***to me.. it’s already compromise ness if we think we have to understand each other.. graeber unpredictability/surprise law.. et al
to me.. *****this is a description of that very ****’false ness’.. if ie: relationship based on conflict/intell.. et al
Unities brought about through compromise are, in fact, the very opposite of *affinity since they spring from a suppression of knowledge of oneself and of the other. **This is why they require the creation of formal decision-making processes that hold the seeds of a bureaucratic methodology. Where there is real knowledge of the others with whom one is carrying out a project, formal consensus is not necessary. ***The awareness each has of the others’ individuality creates a basis where decision and action need not be separate. This is a new form of sociality that can be brought into existence here and now in struggle against the order of domination, ****a form of sociality grounded in the full enjoyment of the singularity of each individual, of the marvelous difference that each of us carries within ourselves.
*yeah.. this is key.. to me.. we don’t grok/see/try legit ‘affinity’ ness.. it’s like we can’t until we get global detox.. and for that detox to be legit.. needs to be/happen in sync ness.. everyone in sync law.. et al
**ooooh yes.. this is huge.. any form of democratic admin as cancerous distraction.. public consensus always oppresses someone(s).. et al
***to me.. if still creating basis for decision ness.. not legit free.. not the dance.. again.. to facil curiosity over decision making.. because the finite set of choices of decision making is unmooring us.. keeping us from us..
****yeah this.. but won’t happen/dance via any form of m\a\p
*On the basis of these relationships of affinity, real projects that reflect the desires and aims of the individuals involved, rather than simply a feeling that one must do something, can develop. **Whether the project is a squat, a sharing of free food, an act of sabotage, a pirate radio station, a periodical, a demonstration, or an attack against one of the institutions of domination, it will not be entered into as a political obligation, but as a part of the life one is striving to create, as a flowering of one’s self-determined existence. And it is then and only then that its subversive and insurrectional potential blossoms. If joy and wonder, and a beautiful, indomitable existence are what we want, we need to try to achieve this here and now in ***rebellious defiance against all domination, eradicating the logic of submission from our lives, our relationships and our revolutionary struggle — for the destruction of politics and the creation of life without measure.
*spot on sentence.. yes that..
**sentence filled with cancerous distractions.. ooof.. ie: sabotage, demonstration, attack.. are all a form of us & them ness.. so already a form of ***political obligation ness.. not legit flowering ness.. not legit brown belonging law ness.. so not legit dance ness
***this sentence filled with the whac-a-mole-ing ness of whalespeak.. ie: if rebellious/defiance/against/destruction ness.. then filled with measure ness.. filled with cancerous distraction ness
______
_____
______
____
______
_____
_____
be you. 