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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
Bracing is understood psychological. Revenge positions lack as reasons to attaining it. And when one finally attains it, they don’t desire revenge anymore. Desire immediately dissipates after the brace. The final efforts was all in vain! Although this is perfectly sound, the implication says that there’s an immediate winner and an immediate looser. Here is where things get interesting. Aristotle said that subjects do not win or lose a debate. It is the argument itself ‘wins’ or ‘loses’ the debates for them. There’s a sense of predestination. Or atleast a virtual field that immediately assigns an expense to a previous benefit unpaid. It’s easy to see why we become unfaithful to this deity.
This is one of the most devastating ways live and think. It impedes our ability to be honest. It hinders self-critique. It’s entirely dialectical because it makes hypocrisy the greatest virtue of human achievement. It isn’t useful to look at bracing from within a debate. A debate appropriates the very issue at hand into a metanarrative. Debates are useless unless talking about the debate itself.
The growing-adult braces
Bracing is what a psychological barrier is to what flight-and-fight is. One immediately abandons the altercation. Silence is an example of evacuating. The adult claims to be above it, using the guise of responsibility to abandon the “spirit of the game.” What does it mean to abandon the “spirit of the game?” The social formation produces growing-adults to grow… and negate a negation. What do they negate? Desire itself. Then, they are instructed to place desire as primary.
Desire perpetually leaves the thing or object that desire attaches to. When we force desire to be primary, we have an entire social structure to use it as an injection to the economy. Why would anyone sign up for asceticism? It is the belief is that once is desire negated, it immediately returns but without the sin. In other words, they want revenge but the Christian God is ever-knowing and ever-present. However, desire has already arrived negated to the adult. This already positions the adult into brace under an encounter (the hypocrite). Meaning the intent was to reject (or give away) desirous-revenge. Bracing allows one to anticipate the desirous-revenge return to him but at the level adjusted for sin.
Why is memory so powerful? When we watch an altercation, we often seek out the finishing blow to conclude. We look for the way the conclusion leaves the Other in a state of thoughtful retaliation. It is the moment when we can see the light leave the enemy’s eyes! The moment when the ego has confirmed revenge! The sweet taste of victory served on a dish that gives that extra punch! Adults forbid revenge. But this means that revenge is forbidden for them. One can handle revenge as long as they don’t affirm it. The Christian God is always watching. One’s opponent braces for the Other to brace for the desirous-revenge. Memory serves reminds one that arguments are reciprocal and attached into desiring-production.
Desiring-production follows the psychological realm of utility and Truth. It superficially explains the reasons for revenge as the desire to prove one is right. Why? Because the production-of-the-real leaves one to follow the logic that the role of the species was to survive, build, eat, reproduce. BOOM…the present. Then, the soul takes on from there. In modernity, violence has a symbolic face lift. The soul wears it like a shield. What powers capitalism is consumption. The soul consumes Vital Potentia. Desiring-machines produce the real. Which then gifts desirous-revenge into a fuel. The adult claims ‘win’ with symbolic victory. By disengaging, they betray life to the will-to-nothingness.
The “Last-man” braces life
This is what Nietzsche warned about the complete management of the world. Life-force, or the vital potentia, would be harvested and syphoned-in. The “last-man,” would “suck” and betray life by nihilism. By having bracing being built into capitalism, all we can brace for is bracing itself.
We will describe the main ideas involving the 4 insults that occur.
And workplace reprimands
Public Freakouts are confrontations between two strangers, non-politicized. Here, the miraculating-machine function between disjunctions and thus, the limit lies here – where the schizo lives and it become the greatest stressor. The aggressor must incept the subjected as “loser.” And the insulted must incept his aggressor as “winer.” This means that both parties split each other in two, 1) the physical subject and 2) the imaginary-subject. Here, we can play with Hegel’s reciprocal-recognition in that both subjects overstacks images on each other conducting inceptions within inceptions. We can not see clearly observe the formation of the pseudo-telekentitic apparatus from the limit.
Arguments follow the Aristotelian debates where the arguments themselves win and not subjects.
Alliance insults are encounters between two family members, friends, or accomplices. With freackouts, the nature of them being strangers means that the insult does not end once the encounter is over. In fact, the encounter was the pre-insult phase where the imaginary-battle dramatizes into the psychic operation at home. It is about what return home. With alliances, each are near to each other if not at home. Thus, where we need to add intensity at the top of the production-machine where the separations between players produces residuum that form intensities (anger, resentment, revenge, etc). The intensity is the life-force that must travel all the way down the representations. Because it consumes alongside the production-machine freakouts must occur via anticipation because every valence level up “resets” the meraculating machine. With every image over-stacking upon each other, the intensities provide the “fuel” in order for the final product (life-force) to arrive at the original destination (level 0). That is the winner.
With alliances, we introduce the idea of love as sacrifice. This is why when a fight erupts between two old couples, it is often about petty things. Once the emotions cool down, the feeling of “getting back at each other” is sacrificed with feelings of being shortchanged at first. The production-machine required more intensities but the operation was pre-maturely abandoned. Life-force was exhausted somewhere along the way and never reached the bottom.
Outrage culture represents the politicized operation. Here, we must distill every party (right, left, middle, centrist) into subject and subjected-groups. The purpose of subject groups is to recruit subjected-groups. The subjected-individual must resist from identifying as fantasizing joining the subject-group but nonetheless, ends up joining.
We introduce anticipation (non-expectation). That evolves in 3-phases
Parody. A child rebells against his parents only to become a parent himself. Then, he raises a child who rebels against him and the cycle repeats
Allowance (permission) – the parent anticipates the cycle and allows his child to rebel to “get it out of him.” The parent provides a space for the child to rebel in a safe manner.
Concealment – Here, we observe a gift that is meant to return. The insult is a gift in the form of desirous-revenge. Because the adult can not self-feel desirous-revenge (Christian, desire already arrives negated), he must pass it off as a gift. The gift is an empty package that contains negative momentum or, in other words, the insulted suffers a double-bind. He must return it voluntarily in productive-codes and, at the same time, return it involuntarily in growth-codes. This is what being “triggered” feels like
The work place represents the center of the meraculating-machine where centrifugal forces oscillates back and forth. An insult in the workplace is a non-personal operational meant to assign libidnal forces into the
The social salesmen lies at the heart of the entire pseudo-telekentitic operation. During the paranoid era (the 2000’s) the way the salesmen self-deprecated himself, the more rejections he suffers, the more hours he works, the less job security he endured, marked the success at the end of his journey.
The 2010’s made the switch from the paranoid salesmen to the schizo salesmen. The harder one worked, the more he’s doing it wrong. We observe that the sales funnel or a click funnel made it to the English vernacular. Everybody know that money is just a piece of paper. Absurdities are more visible than ever. A salesmen who is selling a course on how to sell perfectly describes Deleuze and Gutarri’s notion of a product being consumed as soon as it is produced. A business that runs in a way that it builds other businesses is called a consulting business. Meraculating machines changes by the process that is inscribes on. This means that the limit sits under shifting ground. An eBook that reads “how to make and sell ebooks online” online. A podcast dedicated to create podcasts.
The Social salesmen
Success itself is the prof-of-concept that business plans are written on. The social salesmen is everybody. Everybody is a business. When we insult, the social salesmen makes an offer. It simply returns. But how does it? The code (intensity) must be transferable. This means that comparative spaces (keeping up with the Joneses) are where business can compete with each other. Capitalism frees up codes so that they become even more comparable. Productive-codes represents the resistance to keeping the codes non-comparable. This is appropriative spaces that is flows-of-growth. The social salesmen makes an offer on flows-of-growth but uses the language-of-production to overcode them. Of what use is the insult someone if they “learn their lesson?” Insulting someone in simply means that the insulted is left in a better place to grow
The wholesaler then, must be creative to escape the forces of capitalism. The rise of passive-aggressive insults or condescending comments is visible among workplaces because of the accelerating rate of capitalistic-spaces. The package returns then, to the salesmen in productive-codes, meaning that he was conceived in productive spaces the whole time. The salesmen successfully wholesaled life-force and can now enjoy it in retail value (or make another offer).
The broker can outsource the wholesaling process that he can disappear in presence. He builds a psychological structure to where life-force is syphoned in a hierarchical manner.
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.
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.
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!
We all fantasize about novel things. Yes we get those occasional lustful fantasies from both man and women, For men, they are those passionate sex scene with that girl we’ve been thinking about (if your not gay). For the most part, we fantasize about our immortalization in the symbolic realm. What distinguishes fantasy from desire? Well fantasy for the most part, is not real. Fantasy is generated hallucination. When we want to become apart of a group, that group is thinking about us thinking thinking about becoming apart of it within their minds. Why wouldn’t we want to become apart of a group of people with similar interests? Life becomes easier with friends because joining forces against the realities of life makes enduring worth it. The external field that influence wants and desires have initially set up parameters to make them desirous. Or rather capable of being enticing.
The subject group is already connecting individuals through the Body without Organs and fluctuating intensities emanate from them. Their fantasies tend to align with each other. Because we live in the 21st century, groups need not be actually present in real time. We can group-up cybernetically to create an extended conscious. The individual then fantasises about being apart of this group for the benefit of him.
But Oedipus is two sided or in Deleuze’s term: “double binded.” Because the group has to get the individual to want to become apart of the group, the subject group has to cast an allure of desire. That is to solve the individual’s existential angst. Death is the soul’s greatest frustration, therefore a calling to live for greater principles or to give up the life of pleasure becomes so appealing to the subjected individual. This is Nietzsche’s ascetic principle which states that the nihilistic individual will further deny life by giving up pleasure to cleanse his soul. This ascetic principle is the salvation to his wretched life. But the other side of Oedipus, that “double bind,” is that the subjected individual will also depart from the group as he is becoming apart of it. It establishes a tension that keep them connected. The individual resist the subject group from thinking that he is desiring to become apart of the group. Why? because that is the subject group’s main goal. The subject group resists the individual from thinking about revolution or overturning of the group. Both the subjected individual and the subject group have eachother or each other’s mind. A psychic economy is born.
We all praise scientists. History says science progresses human society the longer we keep doing it. Scientists attribute the qualitative aspect of forces to its own identity and label it quantitative force. How? By measuring the world, piecing it and partialize it. Yes it is necessary to measure, scrutinize, and experiment. I would say it is necessary to measure the world to do anything. But it is how we proceed. Do we nihilistically strip the world down to it’s numeric essentials? Digital age is doing this by making everything binary, a one or a zero. Or do we flip to affirm human quality?