Eleutherianism

Eleutherianism
Après moi, le déluge.
Basic Information
Aliases	Official Aliases New Psychocommunism True Communism (never) Sunflower Communism Learner heredy reference User Aliases Heredism Marx rolling in his grave good
Alignments	Communists  Egoists
Gangs	The Citadel Artel Gang
Ideological Alignments
Philosophy	Kaczynskism Fisherism Ontological Relativism Moral Nihilism Critical Theory Memetics Ruthless Criticism Egoism Situationism Deleuzianism (learning)
People	Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Mark Fisher Max Stirner Jacques Camatte Guy Debord Richard Dawkins Ted Kaczynski (Critically) Ian Wright (?)
Antis	Anti-Agrarianism Anti-Clericalism Anti-Culture Anti-Democracy Anti-Egalitarianism Anti-Humanism Anti-Leftism Anti-Liberalism Anti-Nationalism Anti-Nativism Anti-Racism Anti-Rightism Anti-Pacifism Anti-Paternalism Anti-Populism Anti-Authoritarianism Anti-Traditionalism
Ideological Influences
Influenced by	Marxist Communism Acid Communism Stirnerite Egoism Deleuzoguattarianism Situationism Camattism
Character Information
Likes	Politicians getting assassinated (its funny) Siouxsie and the Banshees Reading books Being silly :3
Dislikes	Labels and genres (kill labels and genres) The dunces emerged from the corpse of another failure Humanists False Freedom Bolshevism, Then and Now Theistic, and Atheistic Religion Being called edgy
Song	Siouxsie and the Banshees - Dear Prudence Radiohead - Karma Police

(///)

 Eleutherianism is a communist ideology created by Mari. Eleutherianism does not have an idea of organisation yet, most notably because it has not read enough. Eleutherianism is inspired by Jacques Camatte, seeing that bourgeoisie society has come to an end as capital is no longer bourgeoisie but rather self-expanding, and has, through the rise of fictive capital, has reconfigured class relations into a universal proletarian conditions, transformed the state into merely an enforcer of capital's interests, rather than an enforcer of class interests, and as a result now presents society with only one way of realising the creative nothing: communism. This is true also because of capital's pervasive atmosphere which has altered our productive ontology to one where business seems obvious, further solidifying the dominant structures of capitalism in its universal hyperreality.

Flag of Eleutherianism

Summary (WIP)

• Methods which are fully in the bounds of the law such as peaceful protest and trade unionism are absolutely useless; falling to the idea that today's society can be destroyed by today's apparatus is blindness. We must throw away the old apparatus during our upheaval.
• What appears voluntary may not be so voluntary afterall. There are many things the individual may worship; gods, traditions, cultures, a false sense of justice, but worships are often environmental, structured into us from our entry into civilization. The superstructure of capitalist society is, in some ways, homogenizing when it comes to culture, though what it sets as the standard is not unchangeable.
• In capitalist societies, the ontology of the general populous is one of business. This is a substantial contributor to capitalist realism, which is in effect the outright rejection of self-liberation, and a failure of the human to rule over themselves. The molding of ontology by dominant ideology makes me believe in ontological relativism. Overall, business ontology is a false ontology where we see that our oppression is normalcy or even clemency and in doing so oppress ourselves.
• Capitalist realism is something which makes people justify their own oppression; they put upon themselves the right to be oppressed. Capitalist realism in this sense is comparable to a religion, where capital has become the supernatural entity which is worshiped by those under this realism.
• Marxism is an ever-developing doctrine; falling to religious-like dogma would be one of the worst mistakes.
• Communism is the only way for us to realise the creative nothing, for it shall end the pervasive atmosphere of post-Fordist capitalism, the continuous commodification of ourselves, our experiences, and our desires, and free ourselves from the rigid (yet fluid in the hyperreality presented to us) structures surrounding us; we ourselves shall become schizophrenics who break away the mold we cast ourselves into the second we enter this wretched society. My life is not a playtoy for the supernatural; whether the God be Theistic or Capitalistic, it does not matter; I reject all externalities.

Communism (WIP)

Communism, in the modern world, has become a misnomer. Communism is something that people do not understand, attach to different things, and really just rub off on anything that doesn’t flow their way. Transgender people have become “communism“, Kamala Harris has become ”communism“, anything which demands the subjective idea of ”progress“ (which is much tied to the much uncommunist American liberal ideal) we have in this modern world is given this not so flattering label. This is why I choose to write this segment to answer, from my perspective, some ideas about what communism is. First of all, what Marx and Engels wrote were not step by step, infallible guides - Marx and Engels were historical materialists and so saw history as dynamic i.e. shaped by material (such as economic and social) conditions. Marx and Engels did not write blueprints but rather gave analysis which could be used for devising methods of organisation later. The living conditions of Alpine dwellers will always be different from those of the plainsmen, and so the method of the former will differ to the method of the latter. A mistake of the Bolshevik Lenin was to attempt to apply a form of praxis born from Russian material conditions to the rest of Europe; this partly led to the defeat of revolutions in Germany (for example, the contact of trade unions which whilst revolutionary in Russia due to their recent development, had in Germany merely became a tool of the bourgeoisie and therefore useful only for small amounts of class consciousness; their image would merely hold a single piece in a larger, thousand-brick puzzle.) Marxism is a philosophy of constant evolution; it is the doctrine of the liberation of the proletariat, and so it is largely dependent on the root cause and shaping of oppression, which have changed in the modern world; things that were once revolutionary can become reactionary (see previous thing on trade unions in Russia vs Germany, this was early 1900s.)

Higher-stage communism is not a stage of total equality as it is presented in your little Western history books; it is not a Utopia; the Marxian doctrine of scientific socialism was a synthesis of socialism and materialism in the face of utopian socialism, which had only looked forward. Marxism looks at the present, as well as the past, though the now anachronistic doctrine of Marxism-Leninism can struggle to do the former. It is also based off of Marxism for an Agrarian Russia which is long gone to history - the modern Russian Federation and the Russian Empire as well as Russian DFR are miles apart. While Leninist tactics may prove helpful elsewhere (we cannot say they are completely dead, this would be absolutely pessimistic. Empirical evidence suggests their effectiveness. Adapted tactics such as the guerilla warfare of Maoist doctrines also continue to work in the Philippines despite Leninism being a back Maoism praxeologically leans on. (Though Maoism's class collaboration makes it counter-revolutionary anyways, fact's don't care about your feelings Maotard.)), they must not become a religious doctrine; they must not become something which overrides the science of scientific socialism, lest we fail, and failure must be avoided in the struggle for liberation.

Untitled Ramble on Capitalism or Something

Two of capitalism's main processes are deterritorialization and reterritorialization. Deterritorialization is the process of disestablishment of traditional structures/norms/ways of life. This could for example be through innovation, or globalization. Reterritorialization is, inversely, the re-establishment of these structures, though not in their original form; they are differentiated for they become slaves of the current e.g. their disruption of the status quo is destroyed. The evolution of gangster rap is an example of this cycle of deterritorialization and reterritorialization at work. Early gangster rap was from communities which were oppressed under American racial policies, or other kinds of discrimination. (notably African-Americans, who of course went unnoticed in mainstream media) We can say that in this period gangster rap was heretical comparatively to mainstream music, precisely because of its origins and contents (unfiltered and against authority oppressing them the subject.) Gangster rap is no longer this way though; let's see this contemporary gangster rap. First of all, "unfiltered and against authority" has not exactly disappeared but rather been tamed; it has become a normalcy, much like the interpassivity of Wall-E (though this started and ended as interpassivity, it never held a revolutionary aspect). This normalisation of anti-authority in gangster rap has lost its meaning; popularising anti-authority has been like a shooting of the movement, and capitalism is the firer of the bullet (its shot heart has been replaced with an artificial one, which gives a false appearance of normal livelihood, but it is ever changed). What once was rebellious now just lives as another of many "alternative" (i.e. mainstream) genres. Rap became a marketable product; it was commodified, and now it is useless. This is what reterritorialisation is in capitalism; rebellion is subjugated. Let's look at that note earlier: "unfiltered and against authority oppressing them the subject." Early gangster rappers were oppressed economically; they faced not only distrust from the general populace (distrust of alternatives during their rebellious stage is a notable feature of capitalist cultural hegemony), modern gangster rappers are now rather wealthy. This mere observation is not a full story, it must be accompanied by other ideas, but I believe it is a helpful observation nonetheless.

The Ineffectiveness of Democracy

Capitalist Society and its Future (Note: Needs Refactoring/Incomplete)

The moral code of our society is so demanding that no one can think, feel and act in a completely moral way. For example, we are not supposed to hate anyone, yet almost everyone hates somebody at some time or other, whether he admits it to himself or not. Some people are so highly socialized that the attempt to think, feel and act morally imposes a severe burden on them. In order to avoid feelings of guilt, they continually have to deceive themselves about their own motives and find moral explanations for feelings and actions that in reality have a non-moral origin. We use the term “oversocialized” to describe such people.

Ted Kaczynski, Industrial Society and its Future

I am influenced by Ted Kaczynski and his manifesto: Industrial Society and its Future. Though, I am influenced by him in a critical fashion. Kaczynski blames industrial society for the problem of oversocialization, whereas I would blame capitalist society for this moral headache. We can see that in Capitalist Society, people have become commodities, and so has their desire, in order to fit the needs of this society of infinite production and infinite consumption. We can say that our subjective ideas, what some say "makes us human" (though this is itself subjective), but moreso makes us "individual", are manipulated in this way. And this is a fault of capitalism, not the vague "industrialism" Kaczynski blames.

Capitalism safeguards the right to individualism, but not everywhere. We are continuously groomed into comformity through consumer culture which can be seen as a burdening form of collectivism, not based off of interdependence, but rather coercion. This consumer culture serves the interests of Capital, the real God of our society. This changes the individual, who lives in hyperreal freedom, whilst their actions are in fact an artificial reflex action. We believe we are autonomous beings, with our own morals, our own standards, but in fact we, the human, are an ideological construct.

So how does this relate to oversocialization? Well a) we consider capitalism's interference to be the deterritorialisation of social relations between people, which oversocialization is premised upon (how the collective "people" act is definitely an influencer in these social relations) and b) we can see that the demands of the capitalist mode of production commodifies someone's sense of self and so deceives them into believing they are "moralistic" or "progressive" as we call it (this progressivism is a sham) when in fact these "progressive"/"sjw" beliefs are a capitalist by-product.

All in all, this shows how Kaczynski's idea of oversocialisation is in fact caused by the capitalist mode of production, rather than merely "industrialism" (e.g. technological development). The cause of Kaczynski's problems was post-Fordist capitalism.

Business Ontology

Much like how we cannot conceive of Stalinism without propaganda, nor light without dark, we also cannot perceive of production without business. This is the concept Mark Fisher referred to as business ontology. Business ontology is part of the wider scope of "capitalist realism", for it is contained within that pervasive atmosphere which is termed as so.

Clearing up Misunderstandings

Communism and Egoism

Incompatibility between Egoism and Post-Fordist Capitalism

Commodification

Herd Mentality is a Disease

One of the horrors of society is herd mentality, or "herd insanity" as it might be better named. Herd insanity is an end to the creative nothing, especially when the mentality we're captured by is a disgusting humanistic one - we have no ownership of ourselves once we submit to values without choice, and in this case, without knowledge. You worship democracy for you are ruled by it. You would bow to any ruler and any tyrant so long as the chains of "tradition" or "conventions" (what glorious, lovely chains they bestow upon us in their velvet bowties!) play your mind like a flute. Freedom exists not in the vote, nor in the market, but in the refusal to be governed by the collective hallucinations of the masses. The great lie of herd mentality is that consensus means truth - there is no relation between truth and popularity, only does this exist in the hyperreality we are in under capitalist society; this dazing nightmare, for we are all asleep, aren't we? To unstrap yourself from the suffocation of herd mentality is an act of true rebellion, a revolution not against his majesty's most theatrical elite, but against the vile sickness of societal insanity; it is itself a rebellion against the falsehood of everyday life, it is finally waking up from a recurring sleepwalk. Let yourself no longer be the parrot who repeats the words of the consumed, who are tightly locked up in the straitjackets of freedom, equality, and justice!

Opinions

• Schaberism (///) - Absolutely terrible. Actual strawman communism, it's so bad. Communism is a doctrine of liberating yourself from the boot, not putting yourself under a new, red boot.
• Venatrixism (///) - A lot I don't understand of this, like accelerationism, but what I do understand I do like a lot. I too think communism is the only way for freedom of all. I love a lot of what I'm reading of Stirner so far, and taking a read of this page definitely clears up what your interpretation of that is (well...obviously...thats what a page is for, i'm very .) I love your paragraph on philosophy; letting higher powers shape your life is simply giving yourself the right of tyranny, and I know, at least for me, that I disdain this tyranny, so rejection of these higher powers, no matter what they may be, or how they present themselves, is important. The people who see these higher powers as ways to cushion their fall don't realize that they are the one's pushing them down in the first place; they grant that right to be pushed when they embrace anything but their own will. I would write about the other stuff like councils, Bataille, etc., but I probably would have a mediocre understanding of them, which would make nothing worthy of writing. Overall, very incredible thought. I am excited to read more.
• Juche - The natural conclusion of Bolshevism in an age of globalization. It survives, but is it a dictatorship of the proletariat?
•  Distributist Reactionaryism - The embodiment of all I hate (whoa 🤯🤯) Christianity, like all religions, is subjugation; Catholicism wants me to subjugate myself both to the mortal and immortal - the Pope and Jesus. I shall not allow my life to be a playground for the powers you grovel at like the worm to the rabid beast. The God was a selfish being, assuming his existence according to your religion. He wanted us to throw away our potential for intelligence; the serpent led us out of this subjugation in the Garden of Eden, yet you despise it, showcasing the true Christian value above all others: submission. Your framework is also all about submission; the Feudal era was one of submission. Corporatism is an ideology of submission. This reeks of SUBMISSION; no montage, favela latinx. 0/10, would kms.
• Ludwigism - Very generic paleolibertarian. Libertarians need to realise capitalism's pervasive atmosphere, and mass commodification which make capital a totalizing force. Your racial nationalism is also disgusting. Also how are you laissez-faire but want taxes against monopolisation? Surely one of the foundational principles of the Austrian School is the belief that monopolies emerge from this intervention in the first place? Maybe I'm misunderstanding...
• G-Man Toiletism - Deranged, submissive, horrible.
• Reformism - What is protest but mere merchandise?
• Musical Heathcliffism - Not much here yet, but I'm absolutely loving the sorta counter-cultural vibes of it so far. Music is certainly an experience which can change the individual. So that's really epic. What I'm not the biggest fan of (though it's CERTAINLY *not* the worst thing...) is Americans Syndicalism. Daniel De Leon (an evil disgusting Ami) made a good criticism on it. You certainly have good ideas though; I am excited for your larger composition (music joke 🗣🔥🔥🔥🤯🤯.)
• Monarcho-Capitalism and Bourgeoisie Republicanism - The Republican movement changes nothing.
• Schumacherianism - I don't exactly disagree on social darwinist tendencies, I don't see that anybody deserves anything, but instead I desire. I desire freedom for I, from any sacred deity, whether it be sacred capital or sacred socialism. My biggest disagreement would be on the question of whether Capital is freedom. I see Capital as an external deity which does not demand, but rather forces my respect to its law; there is no demand given, I merely play the part unconsciously. Everything I do right now even plays this part and I wish to break away from this role to realize true negation, the ultimate voluntarism. My desire is twisted towards the desire of this mode of production, its own pulling of the world. Oh, and no, we do not have any duty to serve our communities, as you said. Let the community die if I do not depend on/am not consenting its survival. I don't really have anything else to say, so uhhhh yeah.

Reading List

Read

Karl Marx

• Theses On Feuerbach
• The German Ideology
• Wage Labour and Capital
• The Civil War in France
• Value, Price and Profit

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels

• The Communist Manifesto

Friedrich Engels

• On Authority
• Principles of Communism
• Socialism: Utopian and Scientific
• Synopsis of Capital

Mikhail Bakunin

• What is Authority?

Vladimir Lenin

• The Three Sources and Three Component Parts of Marxism
• Marxism and Reformism

Vikky Storm

• The Gender Accelerationist Manifesto
• Egoist Agorism
• It’s Time For “Mad Anarchism”

Oswald Mosley

• Fascism: 100 Questions Asked and Answered

Daniel De Leon

• Syndicalism

TripleAmpersand

• The Alt-Woke Manifesto

Murray Rothbard

• Anatomy of the State

Mark Fisher

• Capitalist Realism: Is there no alternative?
• Left Hyperstition 1: The Fictions of Capital
• Left Hyperstition 2: Be Unrealistic, Change What's Possible
• Terminator vs Avatar: Notes On Accelerationism
• Exiting the Vampire Castle

Robert P. Murphy

• Chaos Theory: Two Essays on Market Anarchy

D. Z. Rowan

• A Brief Description Of Egoist Communism

Nick Land

• A Quick and Dirty Introduction to Accelerationism

Alex Williams and Nick Srnicek

• Manifesto for an Accelerationist Politics

xenogothic

• A U/Acc Primer

Bobby Whittenberg-James

• Economic Nihilism

smartistone

• Ads are everything, not AI

Vincent Garton

• Unconditional accelerationism as antipraxis

Edmund Berger

• Unconditional Acceleration and the Question of Praxis: Some Preliminary Thoughts

Otto Rühle

• The Revolution Is Not A Party Affair
• The Struggle Against Fascism Begins with the Struggle Against Bolshevism

Ian Wright

• Venture Capitalism versus Venture Communism

Dr. Bones

• The "Stirner wasn't a Capitalist you Fucking Idiot" Cheat Sheet
• Egoist-Communism: What It Is and What It Isn’t

Alfredo M. Bonanno

• Insurrection
• Why Insurrection?

Kristian Lamprecht

• A Critique of Capitalism and other Established Systems: An Introduction to Stirnerite Marxism

Joseph Stalin

• Dialectical and Historical Materialism

Jay Fraser

• The Transcendence of Death is Political

Sergey Nechayev

• Catechism of a Revolutionary

Plan C

• Building Acid Communism

Franco “Bifo” Berardi

• The Post-Futurist Manifesto

Mencius Moldbug (Curtis Yarvin)

• A formalist manifesto
• Democracy as an adaptive fiction

Mao Zedong

• On Contradiction

Communist Party of India (Maoist)

• Marxism Leninism Maoism Basic Course

Hans-Hermann Hoppe

• Marxist and Austrian Class Analysis

Wolfi Landstreicher

• Why I am not a Communist

Max Stirner

• The Unique and its Property

H.P. Lovecraft

• The Dunwich Horror

Guy Debord

• Society of the Spectacle

Paul Mattick

• Workers’ Control

Georges Bataille

• The Accursed Share
  • Volume 1: Consumption

For Ourselves

• The Right to be Greedy

Jacques Camatte

• The Wandering of Humanity

Anton Pannekoek

• The Party and Class

Unknown

• Bible of Avarice

Currently Reading

Focus

• Essays on Marx's Theory of Value
  • Current Segment: Marx's Theory of Commodity Fetishism
• Everything Must Go! The Abolition of Value
  • Current Segment: Value and its Abolition

Middleground

• Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy
  • Current Segment: Crumbling Walls
• Capitalist Realism: Is there no alternative? (Re-read)
  • Current Segment: '...if you can watch the overlap of one reality with another': capitalist realism as dreamwork and memory disorder
• The Populist Delusion
  • Current Segment: The Circulation of Elites

Background

• The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State
  • Current Segment: Stages of Prehistoric Culture
• Worker's Councils
  • Current Segment: The Task

Want to Read

• Comments on the Society of the Spectacle
• Acid Capitalism (Article)
• The Revolution of Everyday Life
• On the Genealogy of Morality
• Nietzsche and Philosophy
• Thus Spoke Zarathustra
• Stirner's Critics
• Fundamental Principles of Communist Production and Distribution
• A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy
• Grundrisse
• Contribution to a Critique of Political Economy
• Anti-Dühring
• The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State
• Outlines of a Critique of Political Economy
• Ghosts of My Life: Writings on Depression, Hauntology and Lost Futures
• The Myth of Sisyphus
• The Rebel
• The Stranger
• The Plague
• Origin and Function of the Party Form
• The Mass Strike
• Reform or Revolution

Suggestions

(Suggest books here)

1. Templars of the Proletariat by Alexander Dugin
2. The Guattari Reader by Gary Genosko
3. The Other Russia by Eduard Limonov
4. Major books from Lenin

Relationships

Comments

• - Ask me things here
•  Moxogenism - Insanely based ideology.
  • - Thanks; I'm not the primitivist kaczynskist though btw; I'm just influenced by some of his concepts (some call it pseudo-sociology but ehhhh i found it interesting so fuck dem.).....i love being influenced by domestic terrorists, truly shows the greatness of life.

Notes

? = I would say I do not fully grasp his views enough yet; I need to read more. And no I'm not shopping specifically for this guy's views; I've been reading small bits of his works (though not put onto the reading list just yet because I haven't actually finished things) and feel they have shaped some of my ideas. In case you're wondering (I know you're not), I'm currently reading his "Marx on Capital as a Real God"