 |
Self Insert "People can really believe anything these days!" - Ismism This page is meant to represent HelloThere314's political views. Please do not make any major edits without their permission. |
 |
Work in Progress "I'll be done any day now!" - Still-Being-Drawnism This page is not done yet and may still contain inaccurate information or miss important details. |
Hello, I'm 
HelloThere314, and this is my self insert.
In short I take an anti-foundationalist approach to both philosophy and politics. This leads me philosophically to Stirner's idea of egoism, to base one's cause on nothing, along with an immanent view of phenomenology, existentialism, and post-structuralism (Mostly the theories of Deleuze and Foucault.) These influences lead me to an idiosyncratic notion of subjectivity, from which I base my philosophical analysis and insurrectionary politics. My politics is primarily based on Stirner's notion of ownness in contrast to freedom, Newman's post-anarchist challenge to power at the ontological level, and the contemporary theory of communization (I mostly take from Tropoloin, Tiqqun, and Culp Here). This communization is based on a combined social individuation and insurrection, as my communism is not the establishment of a new system but the abolition of social mediation, wich I view as fundamentally alienating and limiting. This is all a basic overview and is further expanded upon in my writings.
Writings
My stuff can be found on substack. Current articles are listed here:
Stirner's New Critics Part One: Introduction
Stirner's New Critics Part Two: The Marxist Critiques of Stirner- Stirner's New Critics Part Three: The Existentialist Critiques of Stirner
- Stirner's New Critics Part Four: The Post-Structuralist Critiques of Stirner
Post-Anarchist Communism Part One: Introduction
Immanence and Transcendence: Reflections on The Plane of Immanence
Post-Anarchist Communism Part Two: The Post-Anarchist Approach to Power
Post-Anarchist Communism Part Three: The Process of Communization
Beyond Baudrillard Part One: Introduction
Relations
Weedman - Fellow contemporary anarchist, but I have a few disagreements. For one I disagree with the usefulness of the TAZ, primarily because it must fundamentally rely on capital for its own existence and cannot present an "outside". In fact through its existence capital now has a controlled alternative, preventing actual insurrectionary exit. Really while I'd agree that zones and the like will show up at any insurrectionary praxis, and they allow for temporary affirmative assertion, putting them at the basis of praxis is just self defeating. I also disagree with your notion of the matrix, I find it misunderstands concepts like technocapital, spectacle, civilization, etc that you seek to put under a single label. I also of course disagree economically, as "mutual aid markets" really just become a petty bourgeoisie idealism and doesn't escape the cycle of capital. Rather I find that the only real insurrectionary exit comes in the form of communization.
Notes
Comments
HelloThere314 Comment below. I will be deleting old comments