Moron bites (#26)

Target-rich environment.

I particularly liked this:

He advocates for racial separation under the belief that “elites” will enhance their IQs by associating only with each other.

If anyone can make sense of that sentence, I’ll send them a signed Bio-Surrealism T-shirt.

Guest fisking here.

June 19, 2017admin 47 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Neoreaction

TAGGED WITH : , , ,

47 Responses to this entry

  • Chris P. Michaels Says:

    Race is a social construct, therefore “elite” can be a race and any effort for them to exclude others is racist. Does the t-shirt exist?

    [Reply]

    Posted on June 19th, 2017 at 5:57 pm Reply | Quote
  • vnord Says:

    >His Dark Enlightenment manifesto, published online in 2012, is florid, contradictory, and opaque.

    This kind of self-declared lack of both intelligence and education is both baffling and entertaining.

    [Reply]

    Xoth Reply:

    It’s like postmodernism never happened.

    [Reply]

    kushnerbomb Reply:

    My favorite part of the piece is the implication that floridity, contradiction, and opaqueness is the opposite of “typical academic” writing.

    [Reply]

    Posted on June 19th, 2017 at 6:06 pm Reply | Quote
  • vnord Says:

    >If anyone can make sense of that sentence, I’ll send them a signed Bio-Surrealism T-shirt.

    The “elites” (quotes signalling doubt and a belief in exclusively socially constructed hierarchies) are according to their conception of your conception dragged down by the Stoddardian morass of genetic inferiority. As a certain genetic strain of WASPs and Ashkenzis belong to the highest stratum of selected and deterministic genetic potential, the only way for them to fulfill their demonic destiny would be through neoreactionary Exit and consequently cognitive acceleration. This being the unitarian nightmare. Where can I send you my address?

    [Reply]

    boo Reply:

    i read that as her virtue signaling that she needs a higher status man to rail her?

    [Reply]

    Posted on June 19th, 2017 at 6:17 pm Reply | Quote
  • neovictorian23 Says:

    Fascinating–the whole piece reads as if she did some googling, grabbed bits of various pieces about DE/NRx from the last couple of years (many of which already cribbed from the earlier articles), strung them together at random and inserted quotes from a professor and a critic or two.

    Sad!

    Since I really, really want the T-shirt, I’ll take a shot[s]:

    He advocates for racial separation under the belief that “elites” will enhance their IQs by associating only with each other.

    This means

    1. IQ is a substance, like dust perhaps, and it rubs off like the luck Dick van Dyke sings of in Mary Poppins;

    2. IQ is 50% or more based on heredity; people can only procreate with those they “associate” with; thus, “their” IQs meant to refer to elite offspring, and it’s just that she wrote it in an incredibly sloppy, incomprehensible manner;

    3. Hydrocephalus;

    4. Completely made up bullshit line after too many hits on the bong;

    5. Secretly believes she’s high-IQ elite herself and signaling to find elite man to impregnate her.

    I realize these are not truly exhaustive. I did check her Twitter feed, wherein she writes “Why am I still surprised that the world is so awful?” so there’s that data point.

    [Reply]

    Posted on June 19th, 2017 at 6:20 pm Reply | Quote
  • Wagner Says:

    ““The crack-up is obvious to everyone,” Land writes. “(That’s why you’re doing this story.)””

    It must be obvious to this journalist if she included this. Contra your twitter chorus, I see this article as a good sign. If providence doesn’t take you away biologically there is a lot of historical trolling on the horizon for you, doc, if not direct statesmanship.

    [Reply]

    neovictorian23 Reply:

    The beautiful thing about the Universe is that something can be a terribly written piece of crap and a “good sign” at the same time. Maybe it really is the Best of All Possible Worlds?

    [Reply]

    Wagner Reply:

    We’d be moving a few MPH faster toward fall of the Berlin wall level collective prog egodeath if Jim Donald were better known as Moldbug’s “other heir”. I haven’t been keeping up with Jim much but there are plenty, plenty of statements in his archive that even the most self-duplicitous leftist “cannot unsee”. I feel giddy as an elf at the thought of their selves dissolving! Pure glee, pure glee.

    [Reply]

    G. Eiríksson Reply:

    Speed it up! Wagnie! Speed the message.

    Put on stickers with a link to XS

    Post ads in the newsp.

    Glee, glee, gee!

    [Reply]

    collen ryan Reply:

    Youre triggering Nick, he cant be associated with Jim except on the listserve.

    [Reply]

    Posted on June 19th, 2017 at 6:35 pm Reply | Quote
  • Brett Stevens Says:

    The media has become dominated by clickbait. As long as the title and first few lines sound interesting, people read it, but under the surface basically every article is the same: people power = good, competence = bad/evil.

    [Reply]

    G. Eiríksson Reply:

    People power ≈ heterogeneity, spontaneity, spunk

    Spue ov the devil himself

    Nigroet

    [Reply]

    Posted on June 19th, 2017 at 7:38 pm Reply | Quote
  • Orthodox Says:

    have to assume when race and IQ come into it the leftist mind immediately goes to Hitler

    “elites” = whites
    whites breed more with each other and become more white and more elite
    This is bad because Hitler

    [Reply]

    Posted on June 19th, 2017 at 8:49 pm Reply | Quote
  • Zardoz Says:

    Pretty uniformed article. Time for a PR spokesman or lobbying firm to shore up the misconceptions about NRx? If you don’t define the narrative, someone else will. And blogs and academic books won’t do it. Surely Thiel could get a marketing campaign together?

    Or is the confusion a good tactic? Maybe that’s why Thiel funds Trump.

    [Reply]

    Posted on June 19th, 2017 at 9:24 pm Reply | Quote
  • Artxell Knaphni Says:

    Neoreaction is looking more and more like a desperate self-esteem camp for intellectually challenged white males. I guess all these African mathematical prodigies sprouting up everywhere, has got them in a panic, lol.

    [Reply]

    Malcer Reply:

    > I guess all these African mathematical prodigies sprouting up everywhere, has got them in a panic, lol

    We Wuz Maths N Shieet.

    [Reply]

    collen ryan Reply:

    Was thinking of you the other day

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/ancient-india-really-was-invaded-by-aryans/?highlight=india

    [Reply]

    G. Eiríksson Reply:

    So much hath I said.

    [Reply]

    Artxell Knaphni Reply:

    @collen ryan

    As IVC, we were trading goods and genes with Mesopotamia and Egypt. Persian and Greek conquests introduced more genetic material. All of that, could conceivably have acted as a vector of Caspian DNA, especially if there were East European mercenaries and slaves working in the armies and entourages of the aforementioned.
    As for any ‘Aryan Invasion’, that would be hypothetical, They used to date it around 1400 BC, a 100 years after the disappearance of the IVC. Now, they’re dating it to around 2000 BC, right in the midst of a thriving IVC. That doesn’t really make sense, as an alleged ‘invasion’. There is no evidence of that. Do the Vegas say anything about it, G. Eiríksson?

    [Reply]

    Malcer Reply:

    You’re on the same level as Afrocentrics and Creationists.

    Artxell Knaphni Reply:

    @Malcer

    That statement merely shows lack of discernment and conflation, which seems to be yours self-elected level. That’s to be expected, I guess, on a blog like this.
    Creationism is more of a Eurocentric thing, if it’s anything at all. In a way, it’s just another form of All-Trite and Neoreactionary nostalgia. Like ‘flat earth’ theory; like dogmatic scientism. One-dimensional ideologies, tracked by fundamentalist Occidental android flatheads, in linear time, lol

    Malcer Reply:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkaX6tyq9pI

    Your position isn’t the accepted one academically.

    >Like ‘flat earth’ theory

    Hardly exclusive to Europe. The earliest speculations of a round Earth were performed by Greeks.

    >like dogmatic scientism.

    The classic Lefty hostility to actual science and affinity mud theology shows itself.

    Wagner Reply:

    Artxell Knaphni: can’t help but laugh with him and at him.

    Artxell Knaphni Reply:

    [Malcer] “https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkaX6tyq9pI

    Your position isn’t the accepted one academically.
    >Like ‘flat earth’ theory
    Hardly exclusive to Europe. The earliest speculations of a round Earth were performed by Greeks.
    >like dogmatic scientism.
    The classic Lefty hostility to actual science and affinity mud theology shows itself.”

    {AK}: Creationism, as an -ism, is more of a contemporary, Eurocentric thing. So is ‘flat earth’ theory. Not talking about the actual ideas, talking about their contemporary forms as regressionary nostalgia and dogmatism.
    It might help, if you knew something about the history of science, before talking about “classic Lefty hostility to actual science”. Traditionally, many scientists and thinkers were actually on the Left, politically. The linking, common belief, was Rationalism. Referring to “actual science”, as if you know what you’re talking about, doesn’t really say much, except declare evidence of lazy, dogmatic, one-dimensional thinking. Science is not some stupid, inert block.
    You’re hallucinating, as well. I didn’t actually state any ‘position’ on the issue.

    Wagner Reply:

    It’s traditional, scientific, and Rational to open your borders to mud, take note, white man!

    G. Eiríksson Reply:

    Do the Ve[d]as say anything about it, G. Eiríksson?

    Apparently they describe astronomy matching that of above the North Pole.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Arctic_Home_in_the_Vedas

    We have 24 hour light in Iceland during summer, i.e. now, so I’m not far away.

    Posted on June 19th, 2017 at 9:47 pm Reply | Quote
  • collen ryan Says:

    The sentence is easy to parse, from their perspective because white privilege, systemic racism, yada yada all “elites” are white elites, and white elites will increase their IQs by only mating with other white elites.

    I actually thought you may have said such a thing,though I thought you might have meant something equally naive but different. You seem to say multicultural elites should separate, which seems like what we have.

    So maybe since you are now pretty much routinely cited as the intellectual father of the fourth reich you might do us all a favor and stop being so coy, There’s nothing to lose now (except either your family or your position as the Fuhrer). Seriously nick has the Dark Enlightenment abandoned its core or not. Are all cog elites created equal? Have we concluded intelligence is the only trait that matters? Do Black elites have children up there on Elysium that don go around vikin while sippin Driz?, Have you stabilized mean reversion? Are the Elysium jews assimilated and the east Asian Elysians really so unlike east asians here? Are you a minority on Elysium, are their enough white elites to sustain or do you guys plan some Anthony Burgess like mud colored new race, can it be Elysium will be post racial? Enquiring minds want to know what you think Nick, aAen’t you tired of being so misunderstood. Just for once drop the deconstruct speak for us little people and say it plain.While youre at it why dont you tell us whose heretical and whose canonical going back to say 2000. Jayman? Radish? AlFin? Secular Blood? Lagriffe? those who can see? it seems a lot of reactions gone down the memory hole Nick did you back it up master?

    [Reply]

    John Hannon Reply:

    From the article –

    “‘Land sees himself as above all that, as a Philosopher King of a movement that’s too populist and grubby for his liking,’ says Noys. ‘He’s part of this continuum, that’s pretty clear. But he’s fighting to distinguish himself from the more populist end of things.'”

    “Couldn’t this journalist person just read Outside In instead of having people say this?” asks Sandoval.
    Good place to start might be June 17 last year and the discussion here concerning the murder of Jo “far more in common than things that divide us” Cox.
    Nick at his least “coy.”

    [Reply]

    collen ryan Reply:

    well the jo cox thing is pretty standard reactionary rejection of right revolution being an oxymoron and next to impossible without state consent, and alleged to be politics writ large, while I dont think moldbug really made the case (war swims right) or tried very hard, pretty much shrugging it off as jewish trigger,Lands been pretty hard to pin down on HBD both racial and gender.If it were simply not his wheelhouse I would understand but he seems to purposely oscillate. At first it seems to be a tactic to both make a distinction between altright of the wn variety and NRX , and to concentrate on the rest. But if you watch closely you realize its far more than that hes really uncomfortable with the horror of it unless he can wrap it in a more general misanthropic nihilism about humans generally. Te problem is like it or not HBD is the core of reaction, any of the rest of it can go and I suspect will go to some extent, HBD is forever. To try to make democracy the core is to mistake the symptom for the illness.The illness is we have genetically outgrown our instincts and are having a devil of a time organizing ourselves in sophisticated ways with monkey instincts.THIS IS HBD. Its a vast problem but facing race and gender differences vastly simplifies the conundrum.He knows this its why he moved to china where high IQ men run everything,despite being ostensibly communist as demotic as possible it works, he would like to kid himself its the authoritarian element but we all know the east asians are just civilized they will be just as civilized under whatever state they live as long as they dont import niggers and give women authority.

    [Reply]

    Posted on June 19th, 2017 at 10:57 pm Reply | Quote
  • collen ryan Says:

    does the Tshirt have the tentacle face guy thats part white, part jewish, part black, part asian, and a complete asshole?

    [Reply]

    Posted on June 19th, 2017 at 11:04 pm Reply | Quote
  • Suburban Schizophrenia Says:

    It’s as if they don’t recognise that the “elites” of the Cathedral only enhance the degradation of IQ. The crudeness of that sentence highlights a nice current: as the Cathedral butchers itself, taking plebeian IQ with it, outer elites (designated in the article as SV (they didn’t even think to mention the Pacific Rim?)) will increasingly exit, taking with them the only hopes for intelligence. I hope this poor article is at least right on that point. I also hope this pushes the plebs to be horrified by DE/NRx ‘fascism’/’racism’, to pursue the melting-pot cesspit of genetic devolution. These articles always help accelerate DE “elitism”, managing to make the plebs wallow in horror and supplying a great laugh for the outer darkness.

    [Reply]

    Posted on June 19th, 2017 at 11:57 pm Reply | Quote
  • Alrenous Says:

    Looks like a chimera.

    1. “Miscegenation is good, but he implied it was bad. Badthinker! Get behind me Satan!”
    2. Sufficiently rigorous assortive mating would create a racial split, like eloi and morlocks. (But not too much like it.)
    3. “Animal husbandry doesn’t work on humans. It’s called ‘animal’ husbandry, duh.”

    I think there’s a little bit of school bussing in there too. If the elites live in a bubble their ideas will decay due to echo chamber, and they’ll get out of touch with The Common People, and that’s bad, you know?

    Propaganda is the one thing proggies put work into, and it gets, in JBP’s words, unbelievably sophisticated.

    [Reply]

    Posted on June 20th, 2017 at 4:03 am Reply | Quote
  • Hegemonizing Swarm Says:

    An outrage trigger word soup. It mentions race! It mentions IQ! It mentions elites! It mentions people choosing their own associations!
    RAGE!

    [Reply]

    Posted on June 20th, 2017 at 6:17 am Reply | Quote
  • Grimscribe's Muppet Says:

    I am tempted to say how this might’ve been one sneaky and clever attempt to try and peddle Graham Harman and the rest of Zero Books stuff to right leaning crowd, but that might be giving way too much credit to all involved parties.

    [Reply]

    Posted on June 20th, 2017 at 9:00 am Reply | Quote
  • pete Says:

    I’m reminded of a quip from the Simpsons spoof of Huckleberry Finn:

    Nelson: Man, those Derringer bullets are WEAK.

    Bart: POWERFUL weak.

    [Reply]

    Posted on June 21st, 2017 at 2:19 pm Reply | Quote
  • SVErshov Says:

    “Microwave and dishwasher safe. Lotsa space for your liquids.”

    When I’m getting my T shirt

    [Reply]

    Hegemonizing Swarm Reply:

    The T-shirt is a lie.
    But have no fear, we’ll be aiming to bring full Zerg-esque Bio-Surrealist xenomorph pandemonium to your doorstep soon. You will get your face tentacles and massive armored blobs of flesh.

    [Reply]

    Posted on June 21st, 2017 at 3:11 pm Reply | Quote
  • Claire Colebrook Says:

    Rothsteinberg here

    the ONLY REASON why Arabs-Muslims, Africans, South Asians, and dark-skinned people have poor countries, is BECAUSE Whites are evil oppressors who during all the last centuries destroyed their advanced civilizations

    Listen to Susan Sontag: “The white race is the cancer of human history”

    The only way Whites can atone for their past is by embracing materialism, Judeo-Christianity, urbanization, race mixing, mass immigration, Americanization, socialism, globalization, et cetera

    If you see something racist, anti-semitic, or Islamophobic, say something. Report it to the SPLC

    [Reply]

    Wagner Reply:

    “For two millennia an attempt was made to render [Jews] contemptible by treating them with contempt, and by barring to them the way to all honours and all that was honourable, and in exchange thrusting them all the deeper into the dirtier trades – and it is true that they did not grow cleaner in the process.” – NTZSCH

    [Reply]

    Wagner Reply:

    Rothsteinberg,

    Some Jews are capable of great feats of transvaluation, like in the cases of Jesus, Spinoza, and Weininger. Jewishness can be turned against itself, as seen in the low form of Woody Allen and the high form of Maimonides. One is nothing more than a crusty antisemite to not admit that their money-grubbing ‘paid off’, intentionally or not, in some ways conducive to the flourishing of high civilization. As De Sade has shown in his depiction of aristocratic fantasies, superabundance of wealth is squandered to cathartic and erotic effect. Aristotle noted that leisure is required for education, that the masses do not have leisure and therefore are not educated, and thus that democracy means the rule of the uneducated. Jews, being cross-generationally high economic status tend to squander their wealth into their children, among other things; their money-grubbing supports otium for those children, otium can lead to education, and education can lead to prowess beyond narrow money-grubbery. Can, and has, if one examines the case of the right-wing Jew of lightning intellect Leo Strauss. To put a sparkle on this “Jewpill” I quote below Strauss on Weber’s protestant hypothesis. Methinks if one peers through its jargon one can translate Strauss’s criticism of Weber into a criticism of Moldbug’s puritan hypothesis. TLDR; Strauss thinks Puritanism is Machiavellianism/Hobbesianism/Baconianism for the mob, i.e. that what we take to be a theological underpinning behind progressivism is a secular, philosophical one:

    “One can hardly say that the problem stated by Weber in his study on the spirit of capitalism has been solved. To prepare a solution, one would have to free Weber’s formulation of the problem from the particular limitation which was due to his “Kantianism.” He may be said to have rightly identified the spirit of capitalism with the view that limitless accumulation of capital and profitable investment of capital is a moral duty, and perhaps the highest moral duty, and to have rightly contended that this spirit is characteristic of the modern Western world. But he also said that the spirit of capitalism consists in regarding the limitless accumulation of capital as an end in itself. He could not prove the latter contention except by referring to dubious or ambiguous impressions. He was forced to make that contention because he assumed that “moral duty” and “end in itself” are identical. His “Kantianism” also forced him to sever every connection between “moral duty” and “the common good.” He was forced to introduce into his analysis of earlier moral thought a distinction, not warranted by the texts, between the “ethical” justification of the unlimited accumulation of capital and its “utilitarian” justification. As a consequence of his peculiar notion of “ethics,” every reference to the common good in earlier literature tended to appear to him as a lapse into low utilitarianism. One may venture to say that no writer outside mental institutions ever justified the duty, or the moral right, to unlimited acquisition on any other ground than that of service to the common good. The problem of the genesis of the capitalist spirit is then identical with the problem of the emergence of the minor premise, “but the unlimited accumulation of capital is most conducive to the common good.” For the major premise, “it is our duty to devote ourselves to the common good or to the love of our neighbors,” was not affected by the emergence of the capitalist spirit. That major premise was accepted by both the philosophic and the theological tradition. [HERE’S WHERE IT GETS GOOD] The question, then, is which transformation of the philosophic or of the theological tradition or of both caused the emergence of the minor premise mentioned. Weber took it for granted that the cause must be sought in the transformation of the theological tradition, i.e., in the Reformation. But he did not succeed in tracing the capitalist spirit to the Reformation or, in particular, to Calvinism except by the use of “historical dialectics” or by means of questionable psychological constructions. The utmost one could say is that he traced the capitalist spirit to the corruption of Calvinism. [This same fallacy can be attributed to MM’s Puritan hypothesis.] Tawney rightly pointed out that the capitalist Puritanism studied by Weber was late Puritanism or that it was the Puritanism that had already made its peace with “the world.” This means that the Puritanism in question had made its peace with the capitalist world already in existence: the Puritanism in question was then not the cause of the capitalist world or of the capitalist spirit. If it is impossible to trace the capitalist spirit to the Reformation, one is forced to wonder whether the minor premise under consideration did not emerge through the transformation of the philosophic tradition, as distinguished from the transformation of the theological tradition. Weber considered the possibility that the origin of the capitalist spirit might have to be sought in the Renaissance, but, as he rightly observed, the Renaissance as such was an attempt to restore the spirit of classical antiquity, i.e., a spirit wholly different from the capitalist spirit. What he failed to consider was that in the course of the sixteenth century there was a conscious break with the whole philosophic tradition, a break that took place on the plane of purely philosophic or rational or secular thought. This break was originated by Machiavelli, and it led to the moral teachings of Bacon and Hobbes: thinkers whose writings preceded by decades those writings of their Puritan countrymen on which Weber’s thesis is based. One can hardly say more than that Puritanism, having broken more radically with the “pagan” philosophic tradition (i.e., chiefly with Aristotelianism) than Roman Catholicism and Lutheranism had done, was more open to the new philosophy than were the latter. Puritanism thus could become a very important, and perhaps the most important, “carrier” of the new philosophy both natural and moral— of a philosophy which had been created by men of an entirely non-Puritan stamp. In brief, Weber overestimated the importance of the revolution that had taken place on the plane of theology, and he underestimated the importance of the revolution that had taken place on the plane of rational thought. By paying more careful attention than he did to the purely secular development, one would also be able to restore the connection, arbitrarily severed by him, between the emergence of the capitalist spirit and the emergence of the science of economics (cf. also Ernst Troeltsch, The Social Teaching of the Christian Churches [1949], pp. 624 and 894).”

    [Reply]

    Claire Colebrook Reply:

    Wagner,

    Excellent comment, I’m printing it to re-read.

    Running behind on work I have to finish, so I won’t try to respond, other than agree with the first sentence, “Some Jews are capable of great feats of transvaluation, like in the cases of Jesus, Spinoza…”

    Spinoza is without a doubt the philosopher most praised and referred to by Deleuze, often with words that are rarely a part of philosophical writing. For example:

    “Spinoza is, for me, the ‘prince’ of philosophers”

    Deleuze sees in Spinoza the rejection of the sad passions, which is closely related to Nietzsche’s critique of ressentiment and slave morality.

    Sad passions are for Spinoza all those forces which disparage life. For Deleuze, Spinoza…

    ….”denounces all the falsifications of life, all the values in the name of which we disparage life. We do not live, we only lead a semblance of life; we can only think of how to keep from dying, and our whole life is a death worship” (SPP 26)

    Spinoza argues that we are not the cause of our thoughts and actions, but only assume that we are based on their affects upon us. This leads to dualisms of substance (such as Descartes’ mind/body split).

    Deleuze insists on this point because he sees Spinoza bypassing an important illusion of subjectivity: we suppose that we are causes and not effects.

    The illusion of consciousness, for Spinoza a result of inadequate knowledge and sad affects, allows us to posit a transcendental consciousness supposedly free from the interventions of the world (as in Descartes).

    This is in fact a blind-spot which precludes us from knowing ourselves as caused, the practical meaning of which is that we deny our own ‘sociality’, as one mode amongst others, and the significance of the relations that we enter into, which determine our power to act, or our ability to experience joy.

    Deleuze’s reading of Spinoza has clear and profound relations with all that he wrote after 1968, especially the two volumes of Capitalism and Schizophrenia.

    Wagner Reply:

    Is it out of the realm of possibility that Rothsteinberg is a Jew accelerating antisemitism?

    Posted on June 25th, 2017 at 12:00 pm Reply | Quote
  • Claire Colebrook Says:

    Rothsteinberg here

    There’s nothing unclean about peddling more than $40 billion in securities backed by at least 200,000 risky home mortgages (Goldman Sachs) but never telling the buyers that you’re secretly betting on a sharp drop in U.S. housing prices that would send the value of those securities plummeting.

    Also nothing unclean about buying and converting into high-yield bonds tens of thousands of mortgages from subprime lenders after misleading borrowers into exaggerating the applicants’ incomes in order to justify making hefty loans.

    Or receiving billions in federal bailout funds despite being the ONLY major Wall Street player to extricate itself from the subprime securities market BEFORE the housing bubble burst.

    Is anything unclean about Robert Rubin (Citigroup’s Board of Directors) and Clinton’s treasury secretary, pushing to overturn regulations prohibiting finance-bank hybrids such as…..Citigroup?

    Nope, this was legal

    Robert Rubin QUOTE: Wishes he could have reined in Citi but “I don’t know what I could have done” as just a board member.

    HIS HAUL, 1999-2009: $124 million

    It’s called capitalism, stupid goyim, and that’s just how we roll!

    [Reply]

    Posted on June 25th, 2017 at 5:20 pm Reply | Quote
  • Claire Colebrook Says:

    Rothsteinberg here

    Consider the oft cited exchange between the spain’s chief rabbi Chemor, facing the edict of expulsion in 1492 and the Grand Sanhedrin in Seljuk occupied Constantinople….

    In 1492, Chemor, chief Rabbi of Spain, wrote to the Grand Sanhedrin, which had its seat in Constantinople, for advice, when a Spanish law threatened expulsion. This was the reply:

    ” Beloved brethren in Moses, we have received your letter in which you tell us of the anxieties and misfortunes which you are enduring. We are pierced by as great pain to hear it as yourselves.

    The advice of the Grand Satraps and Rabbis is the following:

    1. As for what you say that the King of Spain obliges you to become Christians: do it, since you cannot do otherwise.

    2. As for what you say about the command to despoil you of your property: make your sons merchants that they may despoil, little by little, the Christians of theirs.

    3. As for what you say about making attempts on your lives: make your sons doctors and apothecaries, that they may take away Christians’ lives.

    4. As for what you say of their destroying your synagogues: make your sons canons and clerics in order that they may destroy their churches.

    5. As for the many other vexations you complain of: arrange that your sons become advocates and lawyers, and see that they always mix in affairs of State, that by putting Christians under your yoke you may dominate the world and be avenged on them.

    6. Do not swerve from this order that we give you, because you will find by experience that, humiliated as you are, you will reach the actuality of power.

    http://www.catholicapologetics.info/apologetics/judaism/part_2.htm

    [Reply]

    Posted on June 27th, 2017 at 4:15 am Reply | Quote
  • Claire Colebrook Says:

    Don’t fall into Rothsteinberg’s trap

    He’s an actor in a scripted Reality Studio

    Listen to Baudrillard instead.

    We’ve entered an Integral Reality that precludes the pathos of distance:

    “Videos, interactive screens, multimedia, the Internet, Virtual Reality: interactivity threatens us on all sides. What was once separated is everywhere merged. Distance is everywhere abolished: between the sexes, between opposite poles, between the stage and the auditorium, between the protagonists of the action, between the subject and object, between the real and its double

    Debord’s Society of the Spectacle is over and done.

    We’ve ALL become actors in a scripted Reality Studio

    One is no longer an independent being, one is coded and decoded by a transactional program of homogenized datafeeds and looped interactions in which one is the terminal.

    One’s relations are based solely on this closed-circuit system of images, this immersive realm without distance.

    We are the prosthesis of machine programs and algorithms that capture our desires and control our destinies.

    We’ve become copies of copies, mirroring nothing more than the nullity of the mirror, the emptiness of the virtual world that we can no longer distance ourselves from nor even imagine a time when there was another world, another reality.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_dA4jMfjaI

    [Reply]

    Posted on June 27th, 2017 at 11:23 am Reply | Quote

Leave a comment