The Fascism of Everyday life

An insult was needed because the receiver was lacking life-force. The offer is a form of deterritorialized space that mitigates the flows of life-force.

Life is inherently suffering. Existentialists would claim that a life well lived is a life worthy of living. In other words, an affirmed life. This gives life the paradoxical property of being absolutely terrible at times. Are those that mastered life the ones who can shut themselves away from life. They affirm a denial of life rather than deny life altogether. This is the general experience of discipline. Discipline is a property many adults like to claim that they’ve gained from becoming stoic and bougeouse. There’s a rhetoric that says that those at the top deserve to be commanding those who can not discipline themselves. And those who can not discipline themselves are repressed by their own lack of will. From the perspective of the undisciplined individuals operating in lower rungs, deterritorialized space given to the undisciplined to reside. Could this “space” be a region where they are rewarded for being undisciplined? This is not how we’d want to understand repression. Because if those reject this “gift” would hurt those at the top. The act of rejecting a gift would be considered rebellion. And so the operation would account for this rejection with an already rejecting desiring-machine. Desire in itself, already comes negated right when it arrives to the individual. When an individual claims he desires to be oppressed, it is because desire is precisely the inability to desiring the object-of-desire. And so rejecting this rejection (desire) would be what?

It’s no longer practical to say that practicality comes at the top to maintain subordination. A trickle down economics. Seniority should then governs the life-experience as proper experience. This is the where “the offer” can not be negated if one decides to turn it down. The idea is to become the “hater,” the stingy, the life-denier, the solar-anus. But life-force siphons up to the miser as long as he sees the lives of his subordinates become better and better. By the time the adult becomes an adutl, he has experienced the ups and downs, the highs and lows. He can now make that ultimate offer. The offer is made where one can reject the offer.

It would seem that inducing suffering is a great service to the youth. Maybe to the point where suffering could be controlled and monitored. Why wouldn’t a parent build a second life for his child, one where they can “learn their lesson” to the world to come. This preparatory phase builds a home, a school, a colleges, a university, an internship, an apprenticeship, a marriage counseling session, and a tax bracketing to those not yet ready to experience the entirety of life. What comes after paradox is allowance. It would seem that the entire ordeal of life, the suffering of it, is dependent on a permission. It is the parents that gives the child permission to live life on their terms. The taxpayers gives college students permission to live a full life. Just not, yet. That privilege hasn’t yet been granted.

The fascism of everyday life

The best of life merely reflects the worst in life. In other words, what is experience? When one is miserable, it is because one hasn’t lived life to his fullest. When one is insulted, it is really a gift. One should really be grateful for being insulted. For it isn’t the assailant that gives a flow of words saving the victim from victimizing himself?

“Where would the miserable individual, a pathetic individual, filled with ressentiment, be without his insulter? The victim would come out better after being insulted. What the victim should be after is to be insulted.” When the victim finds himself in is a simulation that hasn’t yet been granted permission to suffer. Thus he can not be insulted but rather suspended in voluntary and involuntary reactions of the will. The nobel response would be to walk away and not address the insult. But this would interrupt the flow of the assailant’s message. The assailant is the carrier that carries the deterritorialized space that unconceils the simulation. Here the assailant also traps himself in a paradox. Because the objective of the assailant is to make the receiver offended not by his message, but the victim hurting (insulting) himself. The victim is a receiver that is placed under a double-bind. He is the displaced represented that falls victim to social repression only to come around as psychic repression. The assailant is also placed under the same flows-of-growth that the victim is also participating under. The carrier/ assailant is looking for his gift to return. If the victim comes out better for suffering because of the insult, then the assailant has not received the gift “overcoded”. Instead, allowance would encourage fascistic behaviors and insult away. Sadly, this doesn’t happen. It becomes worse.

The suffering of the victim is meant to pay for the gift that was given. This is the gift that returns to the assailant’s eye. His gazing eye looks for a blush in the cheeks, a mug of the eye, a chatter of the teeth, an intonation of the voice… any reaction would suffice. Sadly, this does not occur because the code arrives in different spaces. The deterritorialized space that was sent by the assailant is meant to return purged instincts. Rage, growling anger, uncontrollable pangs of despair. Sadly, for the liberated sovereign individual, the victim does not return those codes to pay for the gift that was given. This was the paradox of the imperial formation as it re territorialized nomadism by force, that is, involuntary.

Flinching (voluntary or involuntary) responses

We have to be in the wrong in order to be in the right. An insult is essentially an offer to “right the wrong.” A civilized, non-response, that is, a victim that becomes a masochist, throws a wrench to the entire operation. Life-force grinds to a halt and the gears stop turning. The assailant turns into a masochist and the victim comes out better at the other end. But a voluntary response, would require codes to return from an immanent surface. This is because the victim is given a choice to react voluntary (which is not a reaction in the first place) or involuntary. An involuntary reaction is what we described earlier. It is a response from the imperial formation forcing the savage to comply to the conquering. The capitalist formation grants the savage the gift of “learning a lesson”, thus, the sovereign would be rewarded with a payment. The savage must pay his debts for living a life worth living in a developed world. The sovereign built a world entirely for the purpose of granting permission – allowance because granting individual allowance based on utilitarian principles was the major belief that “progress” was made by liberating the individual from the chains of history. The claim that capitalism brings out the instinctive drives to compete with one another only holds true in the productive, homogeneous surface, not in the developed surface. The sovereign must compete with capital itself

Deleuze and Bataille tackle this problem in completely different ways. For one to gain acceptance to the full glories of life, one must be what is the receiver receiving? It is the full range of life. The insult doesn’t offend anyone, it is the victim who places himself under a particular space where he can “purge” out emotion. He offends himself. This is social repression that carrying overcoded developed codes to reintroduce back to p repression, the same repression that made the victim a victim in the first place.

We can say that the negator of life is the one who does not want to experience the bad parts in life. He rejects life because suffering is not worth experiencing. This is the person who despises those who suffers and remains affirmative. The negators reject life and build up resentment This is the repressive representative who needs a carrier to send him life-force in a form of decoded code. This code is what life-force travels in almost like a jumper cable that connects two car batteries. But he must pay. The attacker is also a carrier because the aggressor carries a gift with him that will be sent in the form of a voice. The vocal outlines the sharpness of a blade that will pierce the victim deep in his soul. What the attacker has done is given him life by displacing the repression so that the victim will purge voluntary emotion into such space and will be returned. The insult is a present, meant to give teh victim the full range of emotion. This is anger, ressenimant. The victim will trash and shout, negate, and moan to the point of despite. But will ultimately surrender and the thoughts in this brain will distort not by involuntary action, but voluntary. This is against his will

What use is an insult if it goes over his head. If a victim is too incompetent that he’s being insulted, the insult would not work. It’s one thing to be overly insulting. This would automatically disqualify the carrier, not because the —, but because capital reclaimed developed codes back to their original productive ones.

Remember that both carrier and receiver participate in flows of growth. The despot that forms the imperial formation must force the primitive to comply and obey. The previous economy that ran on involuntary (savage) instinct must be overwritten with graphism. This can happen by forcing codes into non-comparative spaces. The space of the despot is comparative – codes must use the matching principle in order for currency to lose ambiguity. As currency finds equilibrium, a general economy forms. But the territory that it operates is under involuntary instincts. (The despot enslaves the primitive to their will) likewise, comparative codes are forced to suse the matching principle with commerce and mercantilism. The despot moves codes into non-comparative spaces and codes no longer behave with involuntary reactions bur rather, voluntary ones. aq

From confidence to hubris

The libedo injects into the general economy using drives that depends on matching principle. The matching principle works by connecting product with value. This matching principle tends towards an equilibrium whereby currency losses it’s ambiguous status. The connections distributes (externalizes) the molecular forces to the molar aggregate of the socius. Subjects are now matched as quantities with worthiness (to live). The molecular forces that started out as surplus (from the attractive and repulsive forces in the paranoiac machine) leaps out from the homogenous general economy into heterogeneous, more emotional society,

A code permits flows of inscripted commodities on one side with value on the other side of a transaction. What Freudo-marxism gave to the economy were the internal drives that forces individuals to compete with one another. This places our drive as secondary to a primary principle of “competitive drives.” Capitalism is primary to the drives according to the libidal investments made into the economy. The goal of the sovereign individual is to progress the capital incentive worldwide to territorialize the libedo as a work-around to society’s sacrifices and demands. The sexual progressive movement that is pushed into society today is that the libedo sublimates into the utility of the general economy, the same general economy that threatens the free or liberated individual.

Sex as natural connector

It is said that having sex increases social bonds and trust with that person. Sex is not only a reproduction tool, but as a pair-bonding activity to ensure social bonds are established before offspring is reared through that society. From a strategic perspective, sex is totally natural and in order to fulfill its goal, it must reduce all obstacle that blocks copulation. The striving towards sex is entirely done to overcome the challenges of mating. It is the underlying natural drive in all humans. The filliative lines rely on the vessels that carry these genes out from the gonads into society. But these families must extend their germinal flow to the alliances that conquers the Earth. For a man, it is the libedo that works in all direction aimlessly looking to copulate. The purposeless direction is given an aim by the society’s restraint on his libedo. The reward come next which is sex. The construct is a structural maintenance of libidinal investment. To Freud, this sublimation repurposes the libedo into plutonic relations. This would make sense because the survival of genetic legacy must carry the genes over to the next generation who would rely on a world full of social connections and bods. At the same time, the strong urge to copulate is blocked by societies that provide outlets with codes that permit flows of women to some men and restrict it as well. The contribution to the homogenous economy should reward the human with sex not because the libidinal flow channels through a gatekeeper, but because “it’s natural.” The human legacy must continue. What does it mean for those who struggle to find mates? Is their time up? Are they meant to go instinct?

From what I gathered living in the 21st century, the homogenous surface can not get rid of sex. Sex is part of the old, boring, and predictable productive codes that make up day-to-day living.

Why men struggle with sex and finding suitable partners

When we observe how people mate, it is very predictable. An individual finds a potential mate through their social circle, in work, during lesure, through friends and family. All the ordinary encounters might find him or herself a partner. To increase one’s chances one must increase in social status or sexual market value. This can happen in either 1 of 2 ways. Increases in social class, or refining one’s character i.e. game, personality, and extroversion. We could go the 3rd way and do both at the same time. It goes to show that confidence is required. One can increase in social standing from within the homogeneous economy. This is what we might refer to as circumstantial confidence. Confidence is a predictable especially since we’ve established that sex is and should be natural to everybody. (One must be skilled in their profession, one must be useful, one must look good etc.

Confidence vs. Hubris

But to increase your character for for sexual marketplace requires something more than confidence. Confidence is almost re-introduced from the back end of the general economy. Overconfidence is what we’re looking for. But overconfidence is just confidence because that’s what it means to be confident. What people mean when they say “overconfidence” is hubris.

Hubris is uncircumstantial confidence. It is when confidence has no place that one begins to be hubris. When women are attracted to the confidence of a man, it was circumstance that placed that women to his space. It is when not belonging to any alliance group that hubris shows up in men. No amount of confidence will brighten a strange, dark world. It might be said that women are the gender that have a natural hubris to them but this is pure speculation.

How to be insulted – Deleuze and Bataille series

How do you craft the perfect insult? What we are really asking is how can we make someone hurt themselves? It’s self-defeating to insist that someone caused another to feel insulted. The best insult merely exists as a way to be present when one’s enemy stand underneath their will. Their will-to-power or will-to-truth crushes them. Better yet, it’s to have him or her “trip up” using his own words. It’s is a question concerning space.

Extracting the insult

One must first remove all political motivations behind an insult. One must also remove the productive elements that exists in the general economy. Those productive codes that are maintained through labor. One must also remove the relational components of an insult. The familial or alliance drama are external extensions that stretches out into the social field. These 3 categories do not exist in isolated nor are they hierarchies of each other. They do have tremendous influence on how we all live collectively as a social species. But to craft a perfect insult, one must depart from the superficial motivations behind them.

Insults are the purest form of offer

To understand the making of a perfect insult, one must take it out of context for a moment. It’s the jouissance or that joy of witnessing someone in pure mental pain. This mental torture has its genealogies rooted to the festivals done in medieval times where a creditor would torture his debtor into a torturing device. Nietzsche can remind us of his 3 polemics in his Genealogy of Morals, ressentiment, bad-consciousness, and the ascetic ideal. Souls are indebted to weakness and their will-to-power. Slaves were held not against their masters, but by their own weaknesses. There wasn’t any revenge, retributive justice, nor resentment present in the Master race. It is the slaves that welcomes his own torture. Indebtedness weighs too much on their consciousness and want forgiveness. Ressentiment then, is precisely the inability to attain revenge. From a spiritual level, evil isn’t created through will, but it is created through weakness. A weakness that would rather will to nothingness than to will at all. For the slaves, working in the dark, crafted the ultimate revenge, not a psyciall revenge, but a spiritual one.

These keen watchers developed an analytical eye. This eye holds its gaze onto signs – a reaction. ‘A tremble of the lips, a clench of the fist, a squint of the eye, a blush in the cheeks, a chatter of the teeth, a mean mug’… anything that would confirm a transaction which has seeped through the cracks behind the façade of a good man.

The Modus Operandi

Contrary to popular belief, the weak man is the most creative. The weak man creates intelegencia for his enemies. For what would an insult be if it merely flys over the heads of the imbecile. The social field that maintains all productive elements and elevates them above their peers is a gold-standard that keeps keeps everyone socially literate. The social games played on this level has real consequences on “the soul” (or as Earnest Becker would put it – the inner symbolic self), but only if one measure their worthiness against the extensions that souls cohabitates along with commodities. This horizontal plane is the productive homogenous axis where productive codes maintains it’s extension through comparison and, to a certain extent, competition. “Flows-of growth,” in other words, are enjoyed by the same people we offer and insult. To their enemies by the grace of god.

The death of Public Freakouts

To begin with the public freakout is adequate because it represents the simple yet, distasteful realities of living side by side with strangers. These conflicted individuals are left to rely on their day-to-day expectations and their tired mind. These limitations are what gives the public freakouts their warmth and ironically their compassion.

The year 2020 marks the end of the classic public freakout. This is extremely worrying. When we think about a stranger-to-stranger confrontation, we think about the altercations that many service workers experience when deal with their and the customer. What makes a public freakout legitimate is that the thing they are arguing about has to be a trivial matter. This situation gives us the greatest insight into our existential despair and answers to any life’s mysteries than any religion could offer. Political insults dwarf at this simple yet powerful common occurrence. Family feuds or gossip can’t even do justice to these kinds of situation. Workplace conflicts are interesting, but when compared side-by-side with a public freakout, the productive elements that maintain developed codes comes back around as it normalizes the world through work and labor. Work is the only place were we can enjoy a brutal yet faithful analysis of our character. And as citizens, we might feel a welcoming and appreciative to these kinds of insights. But the offering of a learning opportunity can happen in a very specific kind of space. The election of Trump began a faithful transition to a new kind or work. This work is not the same work that history likes to paint it as progressively utopian. The Trump era placed every single soul to work while bodies are traversing through comparative and non-comparative spaces. Work is becoming less and less of a requirement and more of an attitude of manners. How is this possible? How can work mean anything other than being physically present at a location? How is work anything but doing something that one is least inclined to do? We will see how an anti-hierarchy (anti-dialectical form of class-consciousness is disguised to be subordination, not the power-grab that Foucault would say, but a brokerage created so as to pull the external chains of signifiers. Soon, the participants of “flows-of-growth would no longer need to be present to insult. As long as subjects never to find the master signifier of these chains is the key to the extrapolation of productive codes onto the developed surface.

Paradox

We often receive insults that will help us develop a thicker skin. This is what we mean when we participate in “flows-of-growth.” Which is why it’s important to remove the productive, horizontal social field where we attach our desiring-machines with production. With desiring-machines, we mean the desire to attain revenge imposed upon us… almost… not quite What is revenge if not the inability to attain it. Using Deleuze and Guattari, we can give revenge the same treatment of desire. Desire is attained by not having object-of-desire in the first place, making it precisely the desire to obtain it. Without the desire to obtain the object, we can not desire something that isn’t there. At least for Plato, he had the luxury of the Forms where the perfect idea of an object exists. So what is the ideal form of revenge? Or the desire to commit revenge? Desire defines itself and opposes itself at the same instance. When we extrapolate the productive field, we can look at the parodies that comes with insulting someone. For example, the classic scenario of the public freakout. It will just make the service worker develop a deeper skin. The question we must ask is what comes after the insult? Once we answer it it becomes obvious why thinkers like Deleuze became anti-Hegelian, anti-dialectic. Dialectic proceeds only after we negate (or use labour) to negate the situation. But if the situation already contained it’s own opposition, of what use was using “the labour of the negative” to proceed? What comes after the dialectic model is justifying insulting someone for the sake of “a learning experience.” “I will teach you a lesson,” is a very common phrase we hear of something that intends to insult or dismiss someone’s rhetoric. In fact, this very same justification to insult become the precise reason to primarily insult. This is the downfall of a decent public freakout that has gone bad. “I don’t want to insult you, but I will do it anyway. In fact, I will insult you and not enjoy it for the sake of making the insult BURN.” Or worse yet “I’ll be the bigger man.” George Bataille is credited for discovering the solar anus, but he has not seen a sun-crossed solar anus. Two anuses that attempt to show to the world that they have one and it works.

The justification to insult by participating on the same social field that will grant both assailant and victim has the opportunity to obtain the same productive codes that will invariably detach and force the quarrel to be degrees away from the issue at hand. The worst kind of insult is the one where both “don’t give a fuck” to put it nicely. First, we have the main (trivial) issue degrees away from the situation at hand. This is because the assailant is the carrier of the message. The message is intended to arrive to the receiver, of which must agree to it being arrive. But agree to what precisely. From what I understand, Deleuze rejects Hegelian dialectics because of reciprocal recognition. It gives no chance for partial objects to detach but rather extrapolate into detachable, complete objects. Meaning object can never immanate into miraculation but they transcend out externally. Transcending is an illegitimate form of the disjunctive synthesis of recording. Think about one’s enemy attempting to get his subject to think about him. Now think about one’s enemy attempting to get his subject to think about him as the winner of an argument. Now think about one attempting to get his enemy to do the same thing (get him to think about him as the winner instead). What makes it worse is that these images begin to stack upon images like mirrors reflecting off of eachother. The winner must agree that he will think of his loser think of him in return and vice versa. It goes on and on. Now we see how the situation begins to move degrees away from the issue at hand. The fetishization of success is less about money as a complete object but the activity of purchasing. Purchasing power ripples throughout the extensions of the economy as a partial object. Transcending life then, is the fetishization of success through money. Money loses its ambiguous status as it leans towards equilibrium. How many times do we hear that success is the best revenge? It’s all about the jouissance of it or the moment of the limited experience. The only vice acceptable in the productive, homogenous economy is revenge. This presents another paradox and a serious problem to insulters (all of us). How do we make sure that the image remains imprinted onto the mind of the stranger. This is precisely the reason why the requirement of a public freakout to be stranger-to-stranger is because it mirrors the force that distributes codes fromt the horizontal connective synthesis onto the vertical emotional one.

Hell is other people looking at you, looking at them

How do we remain certain that the stranger we just had a quarrel with will create his own hell by reliving (remembering) the situation? This is why Nietzsche hinted to a Great Health – the ability to forget. When one loses their ability to forget, one can be imprinted with a thought or a doubt. Insults almost never end once the encounter is over. Heads cool, emotions die off, and memories begin to record onto the disjunctive synthesis.

The Consoomer

We’ve talked about is the upward movement into the developed, vertical position up to this point. The “drop” is the insult that takes place internally. What we mean by internal is the internal chains within the disjunctive synthesis. Productive codes matches commodities on one side to currency on the other side. In the middle sits the cashier register. The transfer is made because comparative spaces allow these codes to flow frictionless and effortlessly. Having these codes traverse through history, they get imbedded into the heterogeneous surface as inscriptions. But the same forces that matches these codes are not the same that disperses them. As with money, transcending partial objects will only represent them and not become. Another surface gets created instantaneously that runs parallel alongside the cashier register. It is at first horizontal as the transfer of money exchanges hands over-the-counter. But when the customer received his or her service subpar; this means that the service wasn’t up to his or her expectations. Living in a developed nation gets even trickier because the price that amounts to the product-service (starbucks Coffe) more than likely originated in developing countries. Developing countries exist in comparative spaces where most factories and assembling lines can create a frictionless surface by which raw material are put into the machine. What comes out is a final product without its fetished value added. The product that reaches the final consumer can only be priced as service-product where added value is purely fetishized. When the customer expects his or her coffee, the expect it in developed codes at the hands of a consumer who stands in productive spaces but enjoys it in developed spaces. If the coffee is given in less-than-expeted service, the codes immediately fall back to (se rebatte sur) productive codes. Which means that the customer must now accept the product-service in overcoded productive codes.

Deleuze and Guatarri

The question remains that of when bad customer service occurs, does the final product gets coded in overcoded productive codes or decoded developed codes? The answer is both. We can now move into “the drop” or the “double-bind” of an insult. A double-bind best work with the will entangled between voluntary and involuntary reactions. The fact that the service worker can not insult a customer despite the customer deserving one is an improperly defined usage of the connective, disjunctive and conjunctive synthesis. This is because the external chains must seek its master signifier for which there are none because commodities were extrapolated to transcend. Instead, the insult has internal chains with a despotic signifier.

The goal of the insult is to suspend the opponent in voluntary and involuntary reactions of the will. The customer didn’t only send an insult because of bad customer service, but he or she gave a gift. This gift is deterritorialized space. The opponent becomes conductive to it but the assailant must act quickly before capitalistic space reterritorailzes it for its own use. The attack is now against capitalism itself because the flows-of-growth exists in non-comparative spaces. In the highs of the heterogenous, vertical axis are emotions that have worth. It’s a means to purge. Rage, anger, and retributive justice can encode (then decode) in deterritorilaized space (that was given by the assailant). If the insulted becomes better off for being insulted (learning a lesson), then the assailant lost the gift. Capitalism doesn’t means that it’s subjects directs their drives to compete with one another. Capitalism is a kind of axiomatic that forces sovereign individuals to force productive codes into non-comparative spaces. Ironically, non-comparative spaces forces codes to compare with each other instead of matching the flows off of which these codes quantify. This means that involuntary reactions of the service worker would be beneficial to the assailant only if he or she enjoyed it in despotic deterritorialized spaces. The siphoning- in of life-force can happen because of an axiomatic crated by capitalism itself. What if the service worker acted in voluntary rage. This means that the service worker had pre-meditation and deliberately used will. Let me ask you… would you feel more offended or less offended if you know that the laughter was genuine of fake?

Shyness

What has happened to introversion? Has it become a commodity? A social commodity? A way for people to retrate back to their holes when they are tired of the constant demands of society? Notice how everyone from ambiverts to extroverts say things like, “I love to be around people when I get to know them… but I’m an introvert.” They are not introverts. They are soft spoken people. What is introversion without the scientific context of research? Without the very field out of which it came to be known as introversion. But introversion existed before the scientific context formed into Introversion. It was called shyness.

Shy from life

Shyness is a such an interesting cousin to introversion. What does it mean to shy away from an essential component of life? It puts that ‘component’ into light. Because that which was essential to life is now put into question. There it lies in front of the shy person. Shyness gives some ground to the components of life, and the elements around it. Sure, it doesn’t amount to much but it does give it a foundation to present itself.

It is now read to be sacrificed in the homogenous plane of space. The shy person rejects participation to it or experiences coyness. It is an inconvenience to the productive elements set up by participators to have other resist the homogenous productive elements. The solution was to get thinkers like Carl Junt to “cure” or at least give it a category in the scientific investigation of personality. Introversion can be managed and controlled. It can be improved upon and turned on and off like a light switch. Many might fall in the trap of a utilitarian explanation of “what wrong with that?” And yes, there’s something wrong if we decided the setting of where we put our productive elements to exist. We have chosen it to be the homogenous, horizontal axis that allows for transaction to smoothly glide through the procedural steps. My friends, we grow on a heterogenous plane. And this plane ascends towards a vertical axis… an asymptote. So why wouldn’t we shy away from a slippery, opaque, and demanding area of life that assimilates into the very forces of nature.

Confidence vs. hubris

When we confuse confidence/ competence with hubris, we are actually confusing the space in we desire to reside. When we ask the question, “how do I become confident,” we are actually asking a different question. This question can not be spoken because we participate (or want to participate) in a space that requires either confedence or hubris. If we desire to reside in homogeneous space, we want to be confident. When we want to become hubris, we must shy away from the homogeneous elements that keep us paired with flows of production/ money/ status. That’s why overconfidence is a misnomer. You can not be overly confident. You can only be hubris.

Here we come to the crushing pressure of introverts to be extraverts. Were you even surprised? Shyness is just a symptom, a mere gesture in our world. It’s okay to be shy, just be shy on the right things. The only weapon we have is becoming hubris. Confidence is the easy route, whether it to be to follow one’s dreams, to achieve a great feats, to be more than what you are… This is the mid-way point. Of course do those things. Everyone can be confident, but not everyone can be hubris. More confidence is still confidence. Hubris is more than overly confident. It requires an escape, a line-of-flight.

Similarities between Bataille and Deleuze’s heterogenous elements.

There are curious similarities between Bataille’s formation of the General Economy and Deleuze’s territorial representation that comes from the historical movement of the Barbaric to the imperial. This “progressive” movement requires an overcoding in the heterogenous direction. For Deleuze and Guatarri, Capitalism presents a downward direction back towards the Barbaric. The “upward” movement is a leap from to the voice from graphism.” The “leap” upward is the impiralist formation overimposing a “system of writing” (p.202) to the antiquated graphism – hieroglyphics. For D&G, this movement isn’t necessary liberating. Writing doesn’t become more complicated neither. The upward movement is repressive and transcending. It is repressive towards the affective use of the senses.

For Bataille, the homogeneous elements are the productive, day to day operation needed for the heterogenous to develop. What I see is D&G’s disjunctive synthesis as ‘already there.’ They play with the understanding of “developed” as in finished, achieved, or “now I can really work on myself.” The imperial formation is headed towards a developed status but only with the homogenous formation in place. And what better way to maintain the productive economy but with the previous barbaric formation. Imposed onto it, is another coded intensity that is directed away from the mouth and into the eye.

The reason why it’s repressive is because one requires the use of “extrapolation.” The disjunctive synthesis has to inscript or record the excluded and representational with some form of connective synthesis. This is essentially distribution. Yes, what pairs value to object (i.e. money with product), is not the same that distributes them. Here, we must use the paralogisms presented us by Deleuze and Guattari. The paralogisms (of fallacy) of the connective synthesis is whether we use complete, detachable objects or partial, detached objects. One of them requires extrapolation, transcendence and attend to the Oedipal concerns imposed by social repression. The other is immanent, non-representational, and attend to our desires.

Does money lose it’s ambiguous status or does it win unambiguous. THis is the question that D&G poses as a question and Bataille sort of answers it. The Productive economy, being horizontal, can jump to another horizontal chain by extrapolation. This is what Deleuze and Guratrri would call illegitimate use of the connective synthesis because now the subject which was built out of the same productive chains. The “developed” chain is what would be refer to as the heterogenous movement of the upward direction but whereas Bataille would see it as vertical, it could start our horizontal. It isn’t until growth become depended on the productive elements on the homogenous chian that it starts to compound on itself. This is how subjects end up taking credit for productive codes and attributing them for themselves.

What Deleuze and Guatarri differ is the formation of the sovereign. The sovereign for D&G forces codes into a new kind of space when they extrapolate. The notion of capitalism that it brings out the competitive drives is somewhat true. This is before capitalism reterritorializes developed codes back to their productive ones. It is capitalism itself that subjects must compete with. This was brought about by the sovereign forcing productive codes into a competitive space. Bataille has a similar view of the Sorcerer’s Apprentice where quotes see’s Marx. Subjects compete with themselves as a kind of “measuring-up” as described by Nietzsche. This is because codes (productive codes) can compare values, that is, objects come to a partial and detached with each codes they are assigned. Money looses ambiguous statues. But the sovereign invented a new kind of spaces that forces productive codes to non-comparable spaces. This is when codes must now compete with themselves instead of assigning equal and comparative value.

All that I’ve described is the upward movement. This is the productive surface cross-pollinating with the developed, disjunctive surface that transcends itself as a complete object.

The Species of Excess

The discharged ex-NAVY SEAL and a gambling addict Dan Bilzerian became the role model to every young boy with a social media account. Dan claims that he made his fortune by two lucky poker bets but his critics point out to the inherited wealth given to him by his parents. The main talking points for Dan are no different than any celebrity millionaire who spends his time and money consuming luxury and indulging in excess. Dan represents a different generational shift towards being a “responsible” consumer and “living your best authentic life.” The difference is that he lives in a 56 million dollar mansion with his yachts, an open gym visible on his roof along with infinity pools, fountains, ATVs, guns, weed, money, and tons of women. In the LondonReal interview with Brian Rose, Dan explains how being the 1% of the 1% of men who sleeps with the most beautiful models is not at all that great. Brian asks Dan how he keeps all those women happy. ‘That is actually the most difficult piece of this,” says Dan says nonchalantly. “You got to sleep with all these girls and if you don’t, they get upset. There’s definitely a big sexual obligation to that.”

It would probably be an Incel who would mock at the sheer absurdity of Dan’s lifestyle… Oh! What a burden it is to have all these beautiful models wanting sex from you all the time. How hard you’re life must be to *** constantly. Oh, the burden! Dan states somewhere that he has sex at least twice a day. That’s 14 times a week, 56 times a month, 672 a year. At least!

Success gurus and PUA grifters would say that Dan’s strategy for attracting women is simply set up. Dan doesn’t use “game,” that is, he doesn’t exert his character in any way to attract women. He doesn’t bother to inconvenience himself for the sake of getting laid. Instead, he tells his followers to simply be the only choice that women have left. In the PUA culture, this is known as “logistical game.” Of course, one cannot overlook his $56 million dollar mansion that brings in celebrities, athletes, and influencers from all over the world.

When we think of expenditure we must think about expenditure without reserve (Bataille, The Accursed Share, 21). The element that gives human life comes the energy of the sun that produces excess heat. Sexual reproduction consists of taking that energy from the sun, converting it in bodily fluids in the form of bile, and extracting it with a mixture of little swimmers injected from the male testis. The average count of sperm coming out of the seminiferous tubules is about 500 million per ejaculation.

The Second Culling of the Species

What is being said more and more is that boys are falling off the exponential curve of available females. Many in the Manosphere worry that competition is becoming monopolized by the 1% of alpha males. More men under 30 are resorting to a scarcity strategy for attracting females. We may very well be entering into a second culling of the species. Hypergamy is essentially sexual selection on steroids. It’s the primary contributor to the relatively quick success that the species had compared to our primate cousins.

Sigmund Freud in his Civilisation and its Discontents postulated that it was “raising himself off the ground.. of an upright gait” that contributed to the loss of the sense of smell (Freud, 54). Because the nose was elevated higher from the ground, the parasympathetic energy reserved for the olfactory nerves went instead to the eye.

The menstrual process produced an effect on the male… was taken over by visual excitations which, in contrast to the intermittent olfactory stimuli, were able to maintain a permanent effect.

Sigmund Freud

Females went through a phase in their evolution that allowed them to conceal their estrus. The concealed estrus was used as a paternal confusion machine. This meant that more and more pre-human females could strategize their ovulatory cycle to get impregnated by the male they wanted to but still get the provision from a provider male (Fürtbauer et al. 2011). It just made it that much easier to keep the process away from the conscious male. It was self-consciousness of the male triggered by their genetic information vanishing from the evolutionary gene pool (retroactively). His ancestral “ghosts” live within both males and families but it’s the animus male that carries the for-warning from the non-existing male genes that mistook their consciousness as no big deal. The eye that looks ahead symbolize the blessing of foresight but also the burden self-consciousness. The eye is also curse. It symbolizes one doing the watching, but also one being watched as well.

Many speculate that “race” was in fact the consequence of women needing their offspring to look like their tribe. The tribe’s homogeneity kept the offspring of a non-pair-bonding male similar enough so the pair-bonding male couldn’t tell the difference. But at the same time, the species also need to carry enough genetic diversity in the genetic stock for evolution to keep the human the apex predator. An intriguing theory could be made that sexual arousal for women is not whether to cheat or not. But it’s a kind of scrutiny that women possess; should she give up the pressures to keep up with the homogeneity of the tribe or to indulge in the genetic variation of the species. Their pair-bonding partner can always threaten to withhold provisions and protections if he ever doubts his child is not his. Primatologists like Jane Goodall observed that wars between Chimpanzee tribes were the result of scarce fertile females. Even though the non-pair-bonding partner is the seed provider (alpha male), beta males are still an apex predator. A disowned female (and her child) could still be at risk if the pair-bonded male discovered his infant looked a little more like us, and less like him.

Today, we have the hindsight of millions of years of evolution that tells us more than half of all males that existed never passed on their genetic code. This means that the species was made possible by “cuckolded” males but never contributed to the genetic stock. A vast sacrifice of pair-bonding males essentially protected, provisioned, and rationed their resources to offspring of non-pair-bonding males which lead to more promiscuity, (which lead to more sacrifice – which then leads to hyper promiscuity/ hypergamy). The sacrifices of pair-bonded males essentially exist external of the genetic stock as they were left out of the genetic stock. It is no coincidence the “cuck” meme is prevalent in the Second Great Culling of the Species. At a meta-level, we are self-conscious of our self-consciousness.

The typical office job is the memetic equivalent of a primate male being careless of leaving his dwelling for a potential alpha male to come in an make a genetic exchange with someone’s wife. It dawned on me that installing “smart” home security cameras indoors may not be intended for intruders looking to break into someone’s home from the outside. Self-consciousness may probably be the success the species needed to look ahead, and strategies one’s success one genetic passing at a time.

Expenditure as a zero-sum game

As for expenditure without reserve, masturbating seems like an asymmetrical paradox. On one side of the gender spectrum, men waste billions of sperm through their lifetimes through self-pleasure. Whereas women could enjoy orgasm without waste. The central thought revolves around enjoyment and how to maximize it. Many religions found it useful to affirm life without resorting to enjoyment. Enjoyment can not happen without the expense and sacrifice of the other. Which is why sacrifice is needed in order to enjoy life. If the symmetry was perfect, we would have an economic system like the system we today. Everybody contributes a few hours of their day to so that someone else in their after-hours could enjoy life out of theirs. This happens until they trade places and reciprocal exchange could be made. What seems odd to me is that the white-collar worker go to work at the same hour of each day, they go to lunch at around the same hour of every day as well. Much of the “work” is being done to people who are also working. The B2B industry is done to contribute as much empowerment to businesses that could leverage their final product to B2C companies that offer service to people who are in their “after-hours.” The ideal retirement is a pension where all leverages of industry flow to the retirees.

Stimulating the economy

There’s essentially a self-stimulation of two industries that are comparably male and female, B2B and B2C of which produce the infrastructure needed to take care of the next generation. If we build houses, highways, and rockets to Mars at all is because parents who are finished procreating are left to pander meaning and ideology to the next generation that ensures the survival of the species. Which is why expenditure-without-reserve causes so many adult anxieties. Influences like Dan Bilzerian throws an existential light into the anal reality in that we are simply a “glorified anus.” The anus is what grounds us and puts us into the process. The invention of fire wasn’t revolutionary at all. The invention of fire simply allowed us to extrapolate our guts out to the external world. Our limited reserved energy for digesting were freed up to build tall skyscrapers and elevate highways.

The fly-wheel is the business of business. Cooked meat started a fly-wheel the will never stop. Reserved energy needed to digest uncooked meat could now be re-allocated elsewhere like in the brain. More brainpower stimulated multiple fly-wheels. One fly-wheel is a bigger brain which leads to infants getting stuck in the birthing canal, this leads to infants being born prematurely at around 9 months, this leads to more parental investment to care for an extremely delicate child, which leads to higher social intelligence which leads to an even bigger brain. A continuation of the fly-wheel is done digitally carried by our legacy. We are mother nature selecting which ads to watch on Facebook or which males get selected to pass on to our genetic legacy.

The new threats to humanity

The artificial womb will suffer the same treatment as the sex doll industry. The new threat is not sexier women, but artificial ones. As soon as an artificial womb is sold commercially, it will be either banned or regulated. Western countries like the United States lead the ingenuity and innovation of sex dolls into robots. The legislature passed that limited which sex dolls could be sold and the banning of sex doll brothels. Soon, Japanese companies overtook the industry making realistic robots that moved and talk. What seems to happen is that the culling is accelerating. More and more males are going to prefer to marry anime waifus while the top 20% of males are left with even more women than they could ever keep track of. It seems like the states is becoming more and more hostel towards men not because they are evil but because that’s how it’s always been. Evolution is ruthless and doesn’t care about creates more absurdities. This is how the species thrive.

Bataille, Georges. The Accursed Share, An Essay on General Economy. Urzone Inc, Zone Books 1998 New York Vol. 1

Freud, Sigmund. Civilization and its Discontents. Translated by James Strachey. W.W. Norton & Co. New York, 1961.

Fürtbauer, I; Heistermann, M; Schülke, O; Ostner, J. 2011. Concealed Fertility and Extended Female Sexuality in Non-human Primates. 7/11/2020.
<https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3154278/>

Featured

Essay 3. The Public Freakout

This is the classic public freak-out scenario of the customer-worker confrontation. The immediate intuition of a public freakout is that it’s a socially acceptable way to purge frustrations out into an open, public space. What isn’t so obvious are the ways psychic repression reinvests itself back into the social fabric caused by conditioning global figures i.e. bosses, fathers, presidents, and even us. In the freakout scene, the cashier register mediates the flows of money coming in and flows of product coming out. To obtain a product, it must have an assigned price to exchange it with an equal amount of cash value. The same commercial transaction follows the pattern that psychic repression conditions lack for the product to be desired for and then purchased. For example, once the transaction is aggreged upon, there’s an obligation to exchange the product for money. This means that a customer makes an offer from their end, but from the service worker’s end, the dynamic becomes forceful because now the worker must match the value of the money with the desired-object. At the same time, another surface develops that exchange words with affects called the developed surface. In developed economies, final products can inflate their value by jumping that productive – developed chasm. A relationship between both surfaces permits someone to use a forceful push-or-pull by comparing codes between surfaces instead of on their surfaces. The difference is that the productive surface can exchange words (insults) even though their codes are meant to compare and exchange value with product, and the developed surface can exchange product as well (like we’ve seen in the example of the hyperinflated product) even though their codes are meant to exchange words with affects. The key to understanding this is that developed codes can only compare codes with their productive ones because the developed surface formed in non-comparative spaces. This allows the developed surface to from codes continuously by compounding onto its surface its own formation (since the labor of workers maintains productive codes to create developed nations in the first place). Incredibly developed codes can never be reached at the productive level unless codes are forced into non-comparative spaces (spoiler alert, it is done immanently). Since all encodings in comparative spaces will evenly exhaust themselves, a surplus is necessary to carry out an immanent layer that will appropriate this first layer, but it must take all the credit for the codes…. Even the labor force, for itself. All this means is that service will always fail to measure up to the inflated price of the product-service. This is the feeling of being shortchanged from a service that falls short from expectations. Why can’t we simply say that emotions got out of hand? Why can’t we say that the customer was in a hurry and the coffee took 1 minute later than expected.? Why we have to over-analyze this situation. These explanations are totally fine. The central question is: in what order do we place psychic repression and social repression? Does social repression come first and then psychic repression? If it does, then any condition from bipolar, unstable emotions or autism must always pass through a social structure for him to be oppressed and erupt emotions from it.

ShortSelling

When a customer insults a service worker, it is seen as a complaint because the service was substandard. When a service worker insults a customer, it’s a retaliation for the negative affects that the insulted is attempting to hold on to for dear life. The entire overall value that is waged conflict over is called the product-service value. And this is used to make up for the difference  of being shortchanged on behalf of the customer. If you’ve been paying attention, the value must be paid in overcoded productive codes. That is why affects must not only be purged, but purged in negative terms (triggered, resentful, rage, vengeance). An insult is an attempt for service workers to purge additional affects in order to match developed codes which will never be reached. But a successful insult can only occur if the worker voluntarily purges additional investments to hyper inflate the product-service that fell short. in developed economies, individuals are given the freedom to grow or develop and so the worker must voluntarily give up his posture or his composure by experiencing an involuntary lapse of the will. So, the desire to attain revenge on behalf of the shortchanged customer was precisely the inability to attain revenge from a sovereign individual. Likewise, service workers are prohibited to lash out even if insulted for a minor inconvenience. The difference is that the forceful productive retaliation must happen involuntarily for it to return by an offer only which is why one quickly learns that the one who instigates a fight by force is typically the loser. Developed surfaces must become reterritorialized and encoded with new codes but in order to bring them back to the original aggressor the overcodes must remain in productive surfaces paradoxically bellow the sovereign individual. Because both the aggressor and worker participate in flows of growth the sovereign must be suspended in a double bind. The longer they stay there, the more overpriced the product-serve will return. The aggressor can not affirm it in retail value just like how the final products are sold to in retail value. This is essentially shortselling life-force and the psychic consequences is that paranoid individuals experiences breakdown in public from losing life-force (autonomy) by the same momentum that allows them be grow to be sovereign in society.

Fascistic insults: To be in the right, one must be in the wrong

For the insult to work, the aggressor must place the individual into a limbo of voluntary and involuntary purging of the paranoiac instincts (investments). An insult is the purest form of offer. The offer is deterritorialized space for the victims to purge their investments. The problem is that both customers and workers participate in inflows of growth. The purging must happen voluntarily in developed surfaces but also involuntarily in the deterritorialzed surface that was given. The feeling of enjoyment one gets from watching the victim suffer a loss is when the victim suffers a lapse of judgment and retaliates at his aggressor. It’s as if the victim was given a space where they become winners at first but space acts like a collector that demands its debt to be paid by force. So, the aggressor co-ops the operation by almost removing his agency to force a retaliation and using the immanant space to his advantage by ensnaring the purging individual. An argument is not two people pulling to ropes. It’s four ropes with 2 surfaces and 2 subjects pushing and pulling distances and displacements.ts.

Societies of control and mental exhaustion

In a forensic investigation, interrogators use mental exhaustion to get suspects to confess. Lying takes a considerable amount of effort and it can only be sustained for a while. Interrogators use this strategy to get the suspects to surrender their front. In order to deal with lying, interrogators would place a suspect in a position where they allow him or her to relax. Then, they would speak as if they were friends in order to build rapport in a non-threatening way. Causal conversation induces mirror neurons to fire, thus, build a sense of security around them. But all of a sudden, interrogators would switch up to induce mental fatigue and apply pressure to the suspect’s sense of security.
Once a threat is detected, the suspect’s awareness goes off like an alarm. This on and off repeats until the suspect lets his guard down completely.

Societies of Control

We live in ways in which we are constantly exposed to mental fatigue. Societies of control offer rest from all this mental exhaustion. However, humans are skeptical about letting their guard down. So, societies of control make the relaxation worth any resistance to surrender. But they must also convince people to accept their own oppression. It would seem that society primes individuals to the “requirements” needed to undertake. It seems that the same ticket that offers the anxieties and neurosis is also the cure.

The human body has a limit to the trauma it can take. But the mental world gets stretched and pulled beyond its limits. Most people think of the unconscious or couscous world is an infinite, world without boundaries. That’s because the mental, infinite world is invisible.

Enjoyment as a case against life

There’s a type of individual that must account for all the expenses that incur around his surroundings. He is capable of storing up the expenses that others spend as enjoyment. And this individual places himself in between the flow of codes that inscribes when every transaction takes place. And so, he must account for all transactions by remembering levels of enjoyment. This takes a toll on his mental strength and will begin to feel resentful from observing others enjoying life. He is the accountant type where he accounts for all the costs in life. If life seems a bit wrong, it because he hasn’t undertaken the right sacrifices in life. This accountant walks barefoot with shards of glass everywhere. He must walk carefully or else he could slip. If he slips, he could slice his foot with a shard of glass. If blood gushes out from his wound, then individuals will collect his blood and infuse his blood as life-force.

The poetic side of Deleuze gives us a picture of a world that is fragmented and partialized. The disjunctive world is partialized with partial objects. Every time the accountant must walk through time, he must walk through fragmented partial objects “forced to communicated with non-communicative vessels.” Every drop of blood gets siphoned-in by others who desire to enjoy life. No one will give up their life-force and societies of control are developed to be libertarian. This means individuals are given the freedom to choose whether or not they want to donate life-force. This means that cruelty is creative more than ever. Language can get a victim trapped in limbo. So people walk around without a “feeling” subject. They are only seeing, hearing, or smelling subjects.

The double-bind

The application to mental exhaustion is a little different in a society of control. Many thinkers come to the conclusion that the comforts of life are arranged into the circuit as a way to make people desire them. But Deleuze convinces us that there’s a little more nuance than that. Desiring-machines aren’t placed within us because of malicious intent. They are taken before the formation of the “real.” Within the circuit, desiring-production works by desiring-machines constantly breaking down. This breaking down places us in a suspension of voluntary and involuntary purging of instincts: anger, rage, vengeance, competitive drives that capitalism brings out of paranoid individuals. Desiring produces weather or not people places the “real” out of the immanent realm of production. The “impossible real” is non-representable, which means that the real is constantly produced by desiring-production. But the social formation can globalize people to condition us to produce desires that are superimposed.

Why Public Freakouts occur in service jobs

Insults occur everywhere but non has the distasteful tone of a freakout than in service level jobs. An insult happens when the victim is placed in a double bind. There is a curious fascism that is counter produced after instructing the victim to be grateful. For what. Grateful for having his feelings hurt because it placing the victim at a better position than before. The victim becomes hyper aware of getting insulted. He notices that it is not by force, but by his own choice. An insult is an offer. And The victim is offered deterritorialized space in order to purge his paranoiac investments (that is outburst outrage or freak-outs that is commonly observed after the victim experiences a momentary lapse of the will). He may have lost composure of himself or his emotions got the better of him after solidifying his reality that he has accepted the gift by his own will. The victim is split into two subjects. But this is because space is split into two surfaces… one of which is the productive surface and the other is the developed surface. At the productive surface, he is given this gift that must forcefully return. But at another surface, the victim is not a victim but is given empowerment to walk away. The double-bind then, is to have the victim suspended in voluntary and involuntary indecisiveness of the will. At the same time. How? Appropriation.

It is the value of emotional labor can be set arbitrarily to match with the value of service. At one end emotional labor encodes into the finished product and the other end a customer demands the product in developed codes. The difference is measured up displaced by money.

Money is used to maintain productive codes to produce social repression that is the culprit of psychic repression. Anything that doesn't produces social realities gets a treatment paid for by money.

We live in developed nations where intermediary processes are outsourced to developing nations. The products are produced in developing nations where comparative spaces creates a frictionless and smooth flow of productive codes. Capitalism continuously deterritorializes codes and reterritorializes them making it difficult to place someone in a double bind. A forceful attempt can make someone seem as an instigator or a perpetrator of a conflict.

The retail value pays for the costs of productive codes to remain in place. The customer demands the same frictionless transaction in their social transactions. The employee is placed in territorialized surfaces to be intermediary of the flows of production and the flows of consumption. Therefore the employee is paid for his service in emotional labor.

How does the gift return? Why even accept the gift if it will only return to the detriment of the recipient? It will only hurt the victim if the intensity returns overcoded. This is why insults do occur to get revenge on the other person, they happen because space itself places someone antipositional to it. People want to live in non-comparative spaces that developed economies demand intensities to be resolved in the social realm. And in order for the subject to exists in society, they must pay its debts in developed codes. Productive codes extinguishes itself into its own surface, that’s why nomadic cultures moved to another location after the codes transferred into developed codes. Which means that nomads never reached “developed” because they purged their paranoiac instincts from within the psychic realm.

Service economies dominate developed nations. The customer at their end demand developed codes to be injected into the final product while the product's value comes from productive codes. If the difference falls short, the customer must ensnare a service worker in a double-bind where the worker returns to comparative spaces, thus developed codes can appropriate productive codes and thus, the difference is paid for by affirming the negative affects of the worker experiences.

For developed countries to keep up with social reality, they must produce service economies that develop codes by placing social repression primary and psychic repression secondary. And this maintains the current structure of developed economies. The production of psychic reality is elevated to the realm of transcendence and thus removing it from the immanent sphere of production. This doesn’t mean that the “impossible real” stops producing. On the contrary, it is contentedly producing new realities, but developed codes must appropriate itself in productive codes in order for capitalism to miraculate

Featured

Condescending vs. Patronizing tones in Capitalistic Spaces: Insults are Under Attack

On occasion people will speak to somebody in a distasteful tone that insinuates conflict. One such tone is achieved by speaking condescending. The condescending speaker speaks as if he’s coming from a higher place. The listener refuses to accept his position as lower, thus brewing up conflict. Speaking in a patronizing manner is another example. A patronizing tone puts the listener above the speaker for the purpose of ensnaring them as soon as it is convenient. As soon as space collects its debts, the patronizing speaker betrays his listener to space. His subject is left feeling shortchanged.

We owe our existence to space. Space demands to be given what is worth. Enjoyment incurs benefits but it also incurs debts. These expenses incur in the virtual field, but they are immediately accrued as soon as enjoyment is affirmed. This means that a “winner” and a “loser” is automatically chosen in the actual field. The winner enjoys life, and the loser pays for it. It also makes enjoyment a case against life. It makes the one who witnesses somebody else enjoying life to take it away for himself. In order for the exchange to happen, a gift of space is given as a form of ensnarement. Speech can betray subjects by ensnaring them to space. Then the subject can pay for the enjoyment of the other. This can happen in two ways

  • with an offer
  • with force

What is an offer? An offer is a gift where the receiver has the option to accept it or not. When the gift is accepted, it registers onto a surface fromed by its own intensity. It is an immanent surface that forms in order to in-script all those exchanges. The layer (or surface) homogenizes these exchanges as comparative codes. Transactions flows smoothly because they are comparative with one another. When codes move fast, effortless, and frictionless, it is productive. The nomadic movement describes the first productive codes coming out from paranoiac investments from within the nomadic subject.

Nomadism first laid out developing territories from productive codes. A successful territory means that intensities within the nomad found closure by exhausting it. This means that development in nomadism never went past beyond closure. Developments ended as soon as the exchanged inscribed itself as a surface. This was the entire operation, to build a territory and then to abandon it for another. This is what it means for codes to be productive; value is exchanged with an equal and matched intensity found along the surface. Then, they move towards its own end because it exhausts itself into its own surface. This is how nomads territorialized one society after another before migrating to another. The surface (space) demands all costs because it was accrued for in the virtual field

The intensities from the natural, raw Earth must to return back to the Earth eventually. Nomads used productive codes to territorialize their land from raw resources. They knew that one day, the Earth will come and claim its debts. Death was imminent. When tyrannical forces conquered nomadic tribes, they forced their productive codes into developed codes. This is called growth. Growth takes on the movement by appropriation. Productive codes no longer wish to vanish into its own surface which means that the despotic machine must create a new surface that falls back to the original one and it must perpetually grow off of paranoiac investment.

Tyrannical forces conquered nomadic tribes by force. The despot forced productive codes into developed codes because they wanted to purge paranoiac investments out into the social field rather than have them exhausted back into the original body of the Earth. So, once in the social field, these investments continued to grow. Once developed, growth codes grew off of their own growth. Whenever someone insults somebody else, the intensity first travels in the nomadic kind. Then, is returns in the despotic kind. For someone to enjoy life, they must first take it from someone else. But capitalism forces codes to return to their original state. They must pay for enjoying life off of their expense. The offender must do this before capitalistic forces reterritorializes developed codes back into productive codes. Otherwise there won’t be an offence. He will come off too forceful, brutish, and cranky “old Mr. Stingy.”

The despotic machine forces comparative (homogenous) spaces into non-comparative (heterogeneous) spaces. This causes developed codes to all back to their original productive codes. Ironically, non-comparative spaces make codes compare with one another. But the developed surface is a quasi-cause because when developed codes fall back to their original surface, they appropriated productive ones. In other words, the despot takes the comparative codes and forces them to be non-comparative so that his victims can exists in both surfaces. The operation can now proceed as an insult by forcing paranoiac investments to be willed out from the victim by his own voluntary will. In capitalistic spaces, the despot can lose the operation if he undershoots his attack. Capitalism reterritorializes all codes back to productive codes. Before this happens, the investor must set up his pre-insult as a gift that travels in one surface and returns at another. All while standing in at the same surface as the victim but speaking to him as above him or below him. This is the tone that comes out as condescendingly or patronizing. The patronizing tone is the investor offering deterritorialized space while the condescending is receiving the gift back. He receives it back because the developed codes are already over-coded. It is often the case that the person who insults first or brutally over attacks his victim is the loser. This happens because capitalistic spaces muted the reterritorializing attempted from the offender to by getting there first.

The paradox is observed when a one receives the gift of knowledge. The learner is better off than before because he can now grow in a developed economy. Afterall, one must be in the wrong before being in the right. The goal is to shortchange the victim before capitalism returns developed codes back to productive ones thereby effectuating a Sadomasochistic relationship. When the insulter turns his victim into a masochist, the flow stops because the insulter now becomes a sadist. Both purges paranoiac investments into each other. To form human currency, it happens by placing the victim into a double bind. The gift of knowledge i not free. A common phrase uttered in altercations is “I want to teach you a lesson.” Once returned, the gift contains overcoded intensities that can be purged by watching his victim in misery. Thus, an insult has occurred

What does it mean when a county has a developed economy? Do developing economies fall under the appropriate mark? Developed nations often spend more than they can earn. It faces a paradox. It is the social formation that paranoiac forces must represent as the case against life. But it is enjoyment itself that is the case against life. And people fight to attain enjoyment even if it’s from other. All trauma, all dissatisfactions, all depression is conditioned under the eye of developed nations. This is why insults are the purest form of offers. It allows one to stand with the victim in growing or developed codes, all while speaking in productive language. This forces everyone to be a salesman by selling deterritorialized space in order to purge paranoiac investments into he social field. Failure to do so will involve the social formation as the reason to complain about life. The terror of capitalistic space befalls on the subject who failed to wholesale deterritorialized space before capitalism deterritorialized non-comparative codes back to their productive codes. If individual within capitalistic spaces refuses to be in the business of wholesaling life-force, the individual must will himself out of a will-to-will. He keeps falling behind productive spaces. The vary own social formation becomes the reason to blame the individual for his own lack of success. Because every code must be intermediated by the social formation, all psychic repression becomes secondary. This means that oppression only exists within himself.

The double-bind works because the capitalistic space demands the victim has a choice. The problem comes when the despotic machine gives no choice but forces the gift to return. The solution is the have the gift return by productive codes. So he places the individual above him through condescending language. He gifts the gift through those measures, the individual is forced to give it back involuntarily because he was placed anti-positioned to space thorugh condescending language. But the victim also has choice in developed codes. The measure of one’s adultness by maintaining compose. It is giving oneself to emotion that the composure is lost. This is how the victim becomes trapped in the double-bind. If the victim gives into this emotional and “snap” back at his aggressor, he voluntarily returns the gift. But it would’ve return though the despotic machine nonetheless. But the still has the option to not return; This would make to difference.