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.


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.


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.

How to Betray your Audience

Betraying your audience doesn’t mean switching sides. It doesn’t mean going from the left to the right, to the right to the left. No. In fact your audience demands respect. Respect comes after challenging their assumptions. This requires a lot of trust and courage. Trust happens after complete disclosure with the words you utter. Because you are the expert, trust must be the bond that will challenge people’s assumptions and maintain full confedence with you. Expert speech is the worst way to betray your audience. Expert speech discloses the matter of the issues despite remaining concealed for their protection. Just because you switch political sides, or agree with the other side, doesn’t mean you’re betraying them. Let language betray. Humans can not unless they deliberately want to.

Space betrays

Space disappears between two people the closer they get. The transferring of costs and debts must happen responsibly between space. In society, we obligate each other by nominal contracts, because we live in a society that interconnect. We disembody as we speak with words and speech. Once we leave the voice box, it is like an arrow that has left it’s bow. It seems people would like to retract their words once it left their voice box. Or they would like to correct their speech. But the message has been sent even before one has spoken. When others realize that we are simply vibrations that gets forcefully pushed out of lungs of air, they begin to play with the space around us. It is space that makes the rules of the omnidirectional vectors of sound waves. The other person then picks up these airwaves as signals. But the space that was offered so that sound waves could travel has been positioned to us. We could be placed under antiposition where the intensity of the message has been diluted or amplyfied depending on the code they territorialized space with.

All conflicts are a betrayal of some sort.

So, if our voice carries ourselves in bits and pieces, where does this trust comes in? If we think about how the space traveled between the ears of two subjects, space connects us virtually. Technology closes the gaps between distances. We place trust in each other because we know we don’t know everything there is to know to survive. The betrayer is the one who holds space hostage. Through language, the betrayer can cause us to “fall into space” that was concealed. What I’m describing is NOT some psychological ensnarement but rather, a failure to disclose competence. Confidence is the ability to be honest about it.


The Despotic Entrepreneur: Vitale broker

How would a person go through the world with his insides exposed. He is that kind of person that would be considered paranoid. It would be better to understand it in terms of Schizophrenia. In the clinical sense, the schizophrenic would be someone that, for example, look out for electrical power lines and feel like they are draining his energy. It could be a spy instrument. The schizophrenic would believe that his is being watched and monitored for his very soul. Yet, we don’t consider the structure set in place that syphons in out vitale as a belief. What does it mean to believe in something the same way a schizophrenic is truly convinced he is being persecuted. How do we feel like our vitale is being drained.

The offer

When we make a transaction to trade value, two transaction happens. 
One in the economic-network realm, the other in the social realm. The currency: human vitale!
What makes a traditional offer different than a social offer?

Alain Beaulieu described a despotic entrepreneur in his book Gilles Deleuze’s Politics. In chapter 14, From Marxism to the Missing People, the job of the despotic entrepreneur is to convert present space into absence. But in a way that contains negative momentum. When a person steps into absent space, the person is the sacrificial object to that space and falls in. He must give voluntarily to such a space and involuntarily at the same time. How? And why would the despotic entrepreneur do that? It is for debt to get encoded, but go unnoticed. We can see that from the limit, things tend to be difficult to decipher. The limit is where centrifugal forces tend to push space, time, and codes so that they remain there motionless, yet, with a momentum entirely not up to them. Thus, objects remain featureless, still, and occasioning. And there, the despotic entrepreneur can offer (sell), causing an oscillation back to the centrifugal center. Selling is a human activity as long is it’s unconceiled. But concealing yourself in space is what makes this so terrifying. Your a ghost and can haunt you.

Draining Sanity

It is at the limit that it is clear that underhanded compliments (that are not intended to offend or harm others) are the key to making an offer. Money, the currency used to trade value for service or product, keeps spaces comparable. Thus, codes can transfer easily. This presents a problem to the social salesmen who’s currency is vitale (life-force). The meraculating-machine works in an affirmative (genealogical manner). We can see how one might apply Lacan signifying chain. The double bind that the receiver suffers is when he is suspended in “thoughtful retaliation.” We can see that in public encounters (Public Freakouts) the freakout is an apporpraite word to describe someone drained of their sanity. There’s an a-symetric reasoning that goes like this:

What use would it serve me to hold my breath, bite my teeth, and wear a mask if the same outrage would serve no difference if I were to let it out!


What makes it worse, it is the social salesmen that operate in this “psychic operation” that pulls the strings. The freakout was sought after but not in the way to get revenge. But precisely because one cannot attain revenge. The Desirous-revenge must be transcribed into the vitale. Vitale (life-force) is just Desirous-revenge displaced at a different location of the space. But Why? Because it could be affirmed at retail value.


The feeling of insulting: how to be left shortchanged

It is generally thought that the person who instigates a confrontation automatically losses the confrontation. We might say that it’s because the instigator has a “vigilantism” to him. We might say that he’s betting on someone to be in the wrong place, at the wrong time, messing with the wrong person. Many would say that the instigator has built up resentment inside of him. He has the potential to do harm…he wants to… but he has to be vigilant for someone to make the first move. But this would be a mistake. Catharsis uses the language-of-production or what Deleuze and Guatarri call it – “Psychic repression.” D+G would like us to approach virtual (potential) and actual field differently. A potential field does not actualize as it passes from virtual to the actual field. But they are in constant communication with each other via partial objects. My book The Modus Operandi: is a theory about cowardliness. It’s about gift-giving and loving-capitalism vs. altruistic capitalism. How do adults repress desire but at the same time reproduce it? What does it mean to grow up to be an adult if both, youth and adult participants in flows-of-growth? Wouldn’t an insult place the insulted in a better place than the insulter if both participate in flows-of-growth?

This parody describes something like the rebellious teenager rebelling against his parents only to become a parent himself. Then, his child rebels against him closing the loop. Now we add “anticipation” to loving-capitalism: “we are tough precisely on those we love,” rather than altruistic-capitalism. Think of the college town who lives off tax dollars and protests for more socialist policies. Now we add permission (or allowance) to loving-capitalism: “it’s just a phase… they’ll grow out of it”. This idea of “letting the phase act itself out” may be precisely the reason why we are in the problem in the first place. Nobody needs to persuade anybody on becoming more conservative later in life. They already know. It always happens this way. Anticipation (not the psychic repression) is the concealed that unconcealed. i.e. “we allow you to rebel so that you will mature faster…” This unchallenged confrontation worries me because events begin to implode on itself. Once this catches hold, it cascades all the way down until we reach a point where time-events overcode themselves. This is why we can not simply leave a petty conversation. We are always left shortchanged. Even in the “negotiation stage” where both parties are meant to compromise. “the best negotiations are where both parties are left unhappy…” This is what Hegel described as “the death of subjectivity” and the rise of spirit. It is in spirit where contradictions are allowed to roam free. The dreaded dialectics.


The Death of Loneliness, how Freakout Culture politicises loneliness.

As of right now, loneliness is depoliticized. Unfortunately, there will be a time when loneliness will not longer be a ‘thing’ that presents ourselves from time to time but a thing to be solved. When this happens, the novelty of the universe will forever leave the human being. Death is very much politicized. Health care systems assure us that we will continue to be standing reserve in the Heideggerian sense up to our last breath. Death is no longer ours but to the hospitals where they will put tubes down our windpipes and wires to monitor our heartbeats. As Heidegger put it, we are no longer “mortals mortals” but immortal mortals where we are not allowed to die. Depression is medicalized and therefore, a solution.

Taking from Heidegger’s concept of Techniks and the thing where thought itself unconcealed (reveals) as it conceals, original thought is always pushed further “out there.” Heidegger talks about a double concealment whereas I talk about representation ‘twice removed.’ We present ourselves to ourselves but through “the Other.” This (taken from Lacan’s concept of “the Other” and his concept of anxiety) where we exist in the mind of the other, must make room for the other to reside “rent free” in our heads is what I mean we exist twice removed. So the Other exist in the first degree representation and we exist in return in the second degree. Lacan’s anxiety comes from us having to match what the Other thinks of us whereas I take it a step further.

Public Freakouts and the Culture of Desirous-revenge

Freakout culture in the internet is where I point to “the death of loneliness” and the start for the politicization of loneliness. I would start with phenomenology where it opposes itself from the metaphysical tradition or the philosophical tradition. Phenomenology (to put it bluntly) refuses to over complicate the world. Whereas metaphysics and philosophy transcends being like in transhumanism. Historically, philosophy has its roots in Socrates and progresses thought to today’s post-structuralism. Phenomenology explores “the nature of being.” In philosophy, philosophers tend to transcend things. The culmination of the history of philosophy culminates with Kant and Hegel; Kant with his transcendental idealism and Hegel with Dialectics. Now (tying this all together), what is the logical attitude taken to this representation of representation? In other words, what is the next thought we have when we exists in the mind of others? If you haven’t been threatened or triggered, you might live under a rock or are not human. “Who cares what others think of us.” This is the attitude taken by almost everyone we talk to. The IDGAF attitude.

Photo by Vera Arsic on Pexels.com

Take the view of the psychoanalytic where we inject our libido into the economy, creating a libidinal economy. Life-force travels through representations of representation, creating an entire language to describe the intensities we feel as a social individual. “The language-of-production” (anger, discharge, catharsis, fulfillment etc.) When I get to the part where I ask you to abandon the “language-of-production” and focus on the polyvocality of capitalism and ask “how many representative are there to match the intensity to get revenge on the “Other?” Are you following? No? The answer is zero. Of course it’s zero. Representations are just representations. What phenomenology allows us to do is step into this “forwardness” of thought. In freakout culture, insults occur in anticipation, in other words, the projection of a non-image.

We can use the still-image to explore insults and freakout culture just as much as explore our fantasies (which we believe will make us happy once we attain or achieve it.) The still-image is what we talk about earlier. We picture our “win” of the insult by projecting an image of ourselves unaffected. This is why humor is used to show one’s easiness with the whole encounter. But humor is the ridiculousness of our image of an image outpacing their image of an image. In other words it’s a fight to exist in the mind of the other. It’s forward not in the images attempting to win out the opponent but because time enters into the picture. If we must think of ourselves thinking of our opponent, thinking of us in return, we best sure incept (like in the movie) ourselves as winning, but also, remain winning. The act of insulting is itself funny because more and more representation adds to the 3rd, 4th, 5th, and to the nth degree. That’s why insults never end once the encounter is over but rather remain. What remains is this desirous-revenge. There’s flows of words bouncing back and forth between the two players arguing but there’s flows of desirous-revenge, each attempting to gift each other with this gift that returns… Which is why insults tend to escalate to a climax.

Capitalism makes things much more complicated but phenomenology refuses to over complicate things. We have the non-image where instead of fighting to exists in the mind of the other, like we’ve seen above, we fight to non exist (making it 10x funnier). This is why there are zero representations in actuality. Insults are the potentiality for the “remaining” part of the encounter. What we take home with us. Laughter is a way to portray this non-image, “I will not think of you because this encounter is trivial.” It’s the IDGAF attitude. Except this time, both fight by defence in an attempt to make the Other vanish. This is why to one who cares the most is the winner but also the loser. Each one tries to get the other to react to a non-existing image. This is the Christian concept of “holier-than-thou” of which is the worst kind of insult. Both lower themselves to lose to win.

If you listen to what people say in insuls, you could make two sets of phrases. One is where your opponent couldn’t control his situation and therefore should feel bad. (“you’re poor, you’re short, you’re ugly etc”). and the other is where your opponent did this to themselves (“you spend your earnings on drugs that’s why you’re poor etc). We are looking at the negative exposure because this is where we work from. Heidegger’s concept of the nothing is like what we mean when we say “eat the donut hole” We don’t eat the not donut hole but rather the dough that was taken out of the original donut hole. It because of language we affirm precedence as the thing. So we eat the not-donut hole. It would’ve been better to call it “donut bits.” So the non-image is to say “I will not think about your insult because I don’t think of the encounter at all, in fact, you are insulting yourself.”

The Connective and Disjunctive Synthesis of Recording.

The connective synthesis of recording explores what codes are left by connecting concepts together like a rhizome. However, the disjunctive synthesis of recording is equally important. As for capitalism, the flows of capital connects existing business, companies, and institutions in a comparative way. We have lenders and borrowers that create capital by indebting the borrower. The borrower receives obligation. We compare ourselves like business compare their products and services in the market. We compare ourselves as to worth and business compare themselves as to existence. Real estate works in this manner by comparing prices in local areas. But what is missing is appropriation through these spaces. Deleuze’s concept of appropriation is one of the best concepts out there for liberation. It says that de-territorialized spaces can compare with each other because flows of production can record on it’s surface. Codes are comparable. Territorialized spaces become appropriated when another space encodes on top of it. I call this space “flows-of-growth.” Deleuze calls it appropriate spaces. Deleuze uses public works and laborers to see what happens when workers and laborers get taught the language of comparative spaces. They are being sold overcodes while spoken to in comparative spaces.

When I talk about the salesman, I say that the job of the salesman is to avoid turning the receiver into a masochist. Once that happens, flows of life-force stop. He hasn’t received the negative-momentum that insults need to bounce back and forth. The salesman job is to offer his life-force in comparative spaces, or in our case, flows-of-growth using the language-of-production. Production appropriates growth as its own meaning that it takes credit for repressing desire and reproducing it at the same time. Both responsible to the adult who participates in flows of growth. So the receiver takes this gift that “gives back”. The seller, now, has earned more that what he gave. He has become a wholesaler. the job of the wholesaler is to sale life-force in wholesale value and affirm it in retail value (or make another offer). It may be confusing to follow the logic but it’s the nature of desire to desire itself (therefore must make a society to repress itself). But what are we desiring? The desire to attain revenge. In fact, it is precisely because we can not attain revenge is why we desire it. We give this “desirous-revenge, to the receiver so that he will also not have this desire to attain revenge. Therefore, the non-image has a life of it’s own. It automatically makes the possessor of desirous-revenge lower himself to return it displaced. If you follow me here, desirous-revenge displaces is life-force. Life-force and desirous-revenge are two sides of the same coin.

For more, subscribe!
If you’re interested in a book I’m writing about these concepts, consider contributing for my eBook that I’ll be releasing soon in the next month or so!

Freakout Culture

Public freakouts occur at “points-of-transactions” in the economy like at the cashiers, drive-throughs, traffic lights, and shopping outlets.

We are witnessing an explosion of freak-outs on social media. Has it always been this way? Has social media, particularly the live-feed apps, reveal to us an unfortunate nature of human beings. Or does it exacerbate it by engaging in feedback loops where the viewer gets ready in so someday, find themselves participating in an encounter, only to be recorded by someone else. I will propose a Pseudo-telekinetic phenomenon where we really do harm each other using our minds. Yes, a form of an ‘imaginary voodoo doll’ that we form of our enemies and enact our vengeance in the imagination. All it needs is an apparatus of capture and a language that can “cover up” or appropriate it. Capitalism is a form of maintenance to keep congruency through time. Without the proper language, it can be difficult to articulate how this apparatus work.  

However, the case can certainty be made that social media does operate with this Modus Operandi. All the moving parts and components are there: the apparatus of capture, flows of desirous-revenge, Comparative spaces, appropriative spaces, growing-adults, flows-of-growth, and flows-of-production. It’s almost intuitive and obvious that this is how it works. but in a loosely, partially connected a-priori way.  Individual compare themselves to find “worthiness” to life. Their “soul” is what individual use to measure themselves. This cardboard cut-out of a thing is orphan-ized, truncated. It never honers the flows-of-growth the individual is participating in. That’s why adults fight over trivial things that could easily be left by being “the bigger man.” Unfortunately, growing-adults are signing up for their own condemnation. In capitalistic spaces, they are short-changed whenever they negotiated. By what? money? A business deal? A relationship? An encounter? Everything must be about “a learning experience.” No longer do we produce for the sake of producing. Every job must lead to a career. Every relationship someone has to “find themselves.” Negotiation is a term of The Language of Production. The language of production always refers back to itself because it’s all about utility. Growing adults however, are engaged in flows of growth. The ‘negotiation’ was never about money at all but life-force. It is ability to affirm life as is. No one can do this while indebted by someone they hate. That’s why is say that the problem of Freakout Culture is a Catholic problem in that it’s fueled by hate. Hate has nothing to do with indebtedness but it must be forgiven in the same way sins are forgiven: one by one in detail. The sinner must pay with guilt. This is the Catholic practice of Penance. The solution imposed on us the Christian in the sense that all sins are forgiven by the blood of Christ. This ‘solution’ is becoming less appropriate because capitalism, or rather the “sprit of capitalism,” engages flows of production to create more capital. This is done by obligation someone with through debt.

Subscribe for more! .gumroad-follow-form-embed { zoom: 1; } .gumroad-follow-form-embed:before, .gumroad-follow-form-embed:after { display: table; line-height: 0; content: “”; } .gumroad-follow-form-embed:after { clear: both; } .gumroad-follow-form-embed * { margin: 0; border: 0; padding: 0; outline: 0; box-sizing: border-box !important; float: left !important; } .gumroad-follow-form-embed input { border-radius: 4px; border-top-right-radius: 0; border-bottom-right-radius: 0; font-family: -apple-system, “.SFNSDisplay-Regular”, “Helvetica Neue”, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 20px; background: #fff; border: 1px solid #ddd; border-right: 0; color: #aaa; padding: 10px; box-shadow: inset 0 1px 0 rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.02); background-position: top right; background-repeat: no-repeat; text-rendering: optimizeLegibility; font-smoothing: antialiased; -webkit-appearance: none; -moz-appearance: caret; width: 65% !important; height: 40px !important; } .gumroad-follow-form-embed button { border-radius: 4px; border-top-left-radius: 0; border-bottom-left-radius: 0; box-shadow: 0 1px 1px rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.12); -webkit-transition: all .05s ease-in-out; transition: all .05s ease-in-out; display: inline-block; padding: 11px 15px 12px; cursor: pointer; color: #fff; font-size: 15px; line-height: 100%; font-family: -apple-system, “.SFNSDisplay-Regular”, “Helvetica Neue”, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; background: #36a9ae; border: 1px solid #31989d; filter: “progid:DXImageTransform.Microsoft.gradient(startColorstr=#5ccfd4, endColorstr=#329ca1, GradientType=0)”; background: -webkit-linear-gradient(#5ccfd4, #329ca1); background: linear-gradient(to bottom, #5ccfd4, #329ca1); height: 40px !important; width: 35% !important; } Follow