×
Create a new article
Write your page title here:
We currently have 2,521 articles on Polcompball Wiki. Type your article name above or click on one of the titles below and start writing!



Polcompball Wiki
Polcompball Wiki
2,521Articles
  Recent changes
in:
Pages with broken file links, Ideologies

Post-Camelism: Difference between revisions

VisualWikitext
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 49: Line 49:
* [[File:Globnat.png]] Michael Hardt
* [[File:Globnat.png]] Michael Hardt
* [[File:Auton.png]] Antonio Negri
* [[File:Auton.png]] Antonio Negri
*[[File:Radfem.png]] Shulamith Firestone
* [[File:Derrida.png]] Jacques Derrida
* [[File:Derrida.png]] Jacques Derrida
* [[File:Cyberfem.png|link=https://polcompball.miraheze.org/wiki/File:Cyberfem.png]] Sadie Plant
* [[File:Cyberfem.png|link=https://polcompball.miraheze.org/wiki/File:Cyberfem.png]] Sadie Plant
Line 79: Line 80:
*[[File:Auton.png]] Occupation Over Striking
*[[File:Auton.png]] Occupation Over Striking
*[[File:Situ.png]] Living Communism [[File:AnCommunization.png]]
*[[File:Situ.png]] Living Communism [[File:AnCommunization.png]]
== Surrealist-Communism: Limit-Experience and the Preconscious ==
The relationship between the concept of surrealism and that of communism has only been analyzed in a purely correlational manner. It has been said that many surrealists were communists, and that is all. It has been noted that the two movements were linked. But what is the source of this linkage? Could it be that both surrealism and communism emulate a sort of primal call, a call for liberation and for unconscious freedom? This is what we will investigate.
It is and always was a mistake to claim that surrealism attempts to emulate dreams. Surrealism, rather, seeks to walk on the border between the waking and sleeping worlds. And it is in this realm that we find the 'limit-experience'. The limit-experience is that event which seems so miraculous that it may as well be(but is not) impossible. Miraculous is a crucial adjective here. The miraculous is quite similar in nature to the limit-experience. It is that which seems impossible. In the delusions and psychoses of the schizophrenic, the trips of the psychedelic junkie, the deranged fantasies of the masochist and the cold embrace of death we witness prime examples of the miraculous, the limit-experience. What is fascinating about the limit-experience is that it dissolves conventional boundaries of emotion. In the face of events like death, birth, hallucination and illusion, the intensity of feeling seems to break down the border between joy and sorrow, mania and depression. As far as anyone is concerned, the limit-experience is surreal in the purest sense, considering it is not wholely real, and yet, there it is!
The limit-experience is, to me, the purest possible case of surrealism. Now, you may ask, where does this figure into communism? From the get-go, surrealism and communism have been linked. The bravado for social change *inherent* in a surrealist conception of reality, that is, a conception of reality that offers a positive appraisal of what is seen by many as useless, impossible or mad, lends itself well to what Derrida might call the *eschatology* of Marxism. Surrealism, is, after all, just as much as any other ultramodernist artistic movement(futurism comes to mind,) eschatological. It studies and calls for the end of the world-as-we-know-it. And so too does Marxism. Now, what is the end that both Marxism and surrealism reach for? We can conceive it as cyclical. It is, in both movements, a return. A return to what? A return to the unconscious and the undifferentiated. What is crucial to both surrealism and Marxism is a fundamental oneness, or a beocming-one. Differentiation can be seen as the opponent of both. The surrealist opposes differentation on the grounds that the differentiation of the self from the outside, of the conscious from the unconscious creates only an oppressive stratification, as opposed to the liberatory oneness of the unconscious(or, perhaps more accurately, the pre-conscious?)
Communism, mediated through the analytical and practical vehicle of Marxism, is also the proliferation of the limit-experience. How? Because it is a return to un(pre)conscious man. It is the dissolution of self-identity, of the subject-as-separate-from-the-world and the radical appropriation and incorporation of all into the self. And this is the most fundamental limit-experience there is. Now, some elaboration, some explanation, is required. How is communism a return to unconscious existence? Simply because, in a liberated communistic society, self-consciousness is no longer necessary. As society comes to resconstruct community, to return to community, the individual is no longer restricted in their action. They are liberated. Self-consciousness is the primary organ of restriction, of stratification, in the human psyche. It is, in essence, a circuit breaker for desire. It controls and checks the flows of will and ultimately stratifies them to no end. And in the primitive, communistic man, we do not find such stratification. We find free action. The individual acts according to their own interests and instincts, according to their desire, and actively actualizes these interests and instincts, this desire. The communist man is entirely responsive to their own desire, and thus is entirely or to some extent devoid of self-consciousness. The communist man is a return, they are a reproduction of what-once-was. It is likely that self-consciousness will not be eliminated in its entirety through the production of communistic social relations, but it is certain that its role will at the very least be diminished. And this dissolution of self-consciousness is, in itself, a limit-experience. It is a radical deconstruction of what it means to experience, and, thus, is miraculous in nature.
== The Four Traumas and Summoning-Communism; Spectres, Phantasms, Ghosts ==
Derrida remarks that we as Humans have faced four traumas. The first he lists is the Freudian, the psychological trauma, that revelation of the unconscious dominance over the conscious. The second is the Darwinian, the biological trauma, that of mankinds' descent from animals. The third is the cosmological, the Copernican, that of the earth's decentering and thus devaluaing. The fourth, of course, is the Marxist. The Marxist, or sociological trauma, is the blow dealt to man by Marxist thought, and it is final. This blow revealed the true weakness of humanist thought: The truth that Man has no control over his own history, but that they are rather determined by real economic forces and their products(class, social relations, culture etc.)
First we must analyze what this trauma is being dealt to. Not man, but Man. The abstracted man. The rational man. The isolated and self-owning man. Humanity, not the individuals that compose it. The *idea* of humanity. The idea of Man. But what is this Man? Why, He is us! He is our father and our son, our very essence, says the Humanist. He is what makes Us different from The Rest. But "He" is not us, for he is an ideal, a projection of our hopes and a rejection of our fears. He is our golden shadow.
This golden shadow has been dealt many blows, and rather than analyze them in the order that Derrida listed them, I would prefer we do so in a roughly chronological order. To begin, we must discuss the Copernican trauma, the cosmological one. The decentering of the universe from earth was a crucial strike against humanism. If the birthplace of Man is not the center of the world, then is Man himself not the center of the world? Is he simply a part of this world, and not its Master? It would seem so. And so, with the Copernican 'revolution', the defence of humanism shifts from cosmological, to scientific, to *biological*. And it is here we meet Darwin. Our old friend. Darwin ripped biology from the hands of humanism; no longer was man a perfect creation of god, no longer was he a uniquely elegant being, but a descendant of other beings. No less, a descendent of *apes*! He was an animal, it would seem.
But animals... animals have minds. Or at least we(humans) do. And us humans, our minds, they, they function differently, they are special! We are in control of ourselves, we are rational like no simple beast is. We are Intelligent! Mindful! Self-Conscious! And then what? Enter Freud. It would seem with the revelations of the psychological trauma of humanism that the ideology would at last perish; no longer was man a rational and isolated being, but a slave to his unconcious desires, to his libidos and death-drives. So then what is left for Man? What can he control? He is not unique cosmologically, nor is he biologically, nor is he psychologically. Then sociologically! Aha! Finally, something that sets us apart, something we can CONTROL! We have economy, we have state, we have hierarchy, we have nation! We are SPECIAL GODDAMNIT! Marx would not have this. He perforated the economy of Man, and displayed its true nature; material forces and needs determined its course, not the will of man. And so what can man control? Not his universe, not his body, not his mind, not even the way he relates to other men. He is adrift. Untethered. Fluid. *Nomadic*. However, the destruction of humanism has been loaded, but not yet fired. Everything lies in place for a dissolution, but it has not yet happened.
Communism. The spectre that haunts the world. Communism is older than humanism, it is a name for something older than time itself. It is the name of dissolution, of freedom, of nature, of baseness and profanity.
(WIP)


= Relations =
= Relations =

Revision as of 15:28, 19 June 2024

Post-Camelism is the ideology of Cholera/E Coli/Chlamydia Camel. It can be conceptualized as a shift from Communization Theory towards a sort of Situationist-Autonomism. Essentially, their view is that the proletariat, while in the process of dismantling itself, must live anarchy and communism for itself, while simultaneously ensuring the suppression of both the liberal bourgeoisie and the reactionary bonapartists. The end goal of Post-Camelism is the dissolution of self-identity, the freeing of desire, and the destruction OF man as we know it. It is ultimately an attempt to recreate the communistic, selfless and attributeless godhood of the primordial soup from which life emerged. Endlessly decadent sex, merging unmerging dismantled machines.

Views ,,,or,,, something

  • Red Terror
  • Vanguardism
  • Surrealism (return to pre-self-conscious existence)
  • Radical Feminism(Abolition of Gender, Family, etc.)
  • Construction of a Communist Mythos
  • Communistic Social Relations Replacing Religious Ones
  • Insurrection Against the Metropolis
  • Occupation Over Striking
  • Living Communism

Relations

  • Postleftanark Communism is not just 'another utopian leftist movement.' It is the movement to abolish the present state of things! It is an eschatological tendency towards the dissolution of capitalistic social relations! Communism is the name for something more than just a leftist ideology. It is the name of freedom, of liberation. Communism is not dead, for it has not yet truly been born. Now, you seem to misunderstand a central point of my position. It is not that I support the conditions of the proletariat, nor do I identify with them. I support the cause of the proletariat because they are the social class which is most acutely aware of the ills of capitalism, and is thus most acutely able to fight against capitalism. Of course the DotP is a limiting concept; it exists to be abolished. The only purpose of the dictatorship of the proletariat is to suppress reaction and destroy resistance to communism. You may very well critique communism, but as far as I am concerned your 'post-leftism' offers no actual vision of a better society and is not applicable on a mass scale. Communism is the abolition of social mediation, the assertion of real social relations between individuals and the abolition of capital and all its' odious organs.
  • MrNoNonsense It seems we're here again. To start, I must state that I strongly admire your shift towards a more revolutionary politic. However, I still have my old gripes, chief among them my criticism of your vile entryist policy. MNN, a bourgeois party is a bourgeois party. A party that has been dominated by bourgeois interests for decades and continues to be dominated by bourgeois interests simply cannot be a vehicle for proletarian action. Why must we reconquest this party or that trade union? Why must we capture organs of bourgeois rule(even once that were once proletarian?) Why can we not simply create our own structures and politics, our own forms of organization and our own forms of resistance, rather than appropriating the old tools? It seems to me that you are in the throes of a simultaneous pessimism and a sentimentality. On the one hand, I speculate that you do not believe an independent proletarian party can garner enough support to create actual change. On the other, you do seem to have quite the attachment to labour, and I suspect this plays a significant role in your continual fixation on this party. Other small criticisms are centered on your pointlessly enthusiastic emphasis on technological augmentation, and perhaps on lingering reformist platitudes.
  • https://pcbwiki.net/images/ImpSoc.png Imperial Socialism Ah, I my as well add you. You are a symptom of a painful diagnosis that has recently infected the socialist movement; that of Bonapartism. Bonapartism is, in essence, that villainous ideological tendency in which authentically revolutionary movements are co-opted by pseudo-proletarian moderates(oftentimes, but not exclusively, military officers) who do nothing but mitigate the authentic progression of communism and plague it with borderline reactionary and conservative attitudes.
  • https://pcbwiki.net/images/DankeismIcon.png Dankeism Absolutely vile. Meek, weak, spineless. Where is your will to FIGHT? To spearhead the communistic offensive against the capitalist beast? The bourgeois death-machine! Reject this bourgeois ROT! Embrace the communistic OVERCOMING of capital! No more poverty! No more patriarchy! No more oppression! Only liberation!
  • https://pcbwiki.net/images/Shellshock.png Shellshocked Communism Simply not radical enough. We need the total abolition of all vestiges of CAPITAL. Rather than proposing some artificial and utopian republic, we communists should reject all of this and instead embrace the organic movement of the proletariat. It is not our mission as communists to prescribe the forms which characterize communism; It is our mission to create the conditions of communism, and from these conditions will spring the characteristic forms.
Retrieved from "https://pcbwiki.net/index.php?title=Post-Camelism&oldid=509729"