Preface, or what has tortured my mind

Annual honoring

What in lie comes from an annual honoring of one’s self? Other than the self-gravitas and the rekindling of the ego which enamors resistance from being loose-lipped, what comes from such? Empty expressions that one gloats to oneself? A defiance of self-criticism lodged at oneself? A propensity to relive narcissus without having to feel guilt? All these questions, though staking the right ground, stake the wrong section.

For sometimes the problem comes not from an actual problem but the perception of such object. And in cases of trying to auto-analyze oneself, one comes to the same conclusion Freud pronounced boldly: it is impossible. How can one be self-conscious of oneself without an Other? In fact, there is no answer we can conceive of without coming to a hall of other, but self-destructive, answers. For one can see and record one’s wishes, but one cannot perceive their desires. It’s like seeing oneself and expecting the mirror to answer you something you hadn’t said.

So in lies the problem: a self-honouring, regardless of the interval of time and the content, is the delusional act to think oneself as an individual and never seeing everybody as their own I. An I so ignorant of the other Is that it attempts to differentiate itself but becomes consumed in the sea of undifferentiable Is, resulting in a mocking tune ‘til it is silenced or changed. So I dare not hail the time when I, whoever I may be in the sea of other Is, made a post a day, for others do the same; I shall dare not hail all the communities I joined when I could’ve way earlier; and I shall dare not hail a past out of my control now. For all are acts that could so be writhed by me if my unconsciousness is changed by new material conditions or forced by the Social Order of society.

A plague it may seem, but a leech it truly is. The only tool set that can remove such is self-criticism. For only then the rewards a self-honouring would’ve brought comes, and one feels relieved. Yet a mumble comes out in dissonance towards a self-critical spirit.

Self-criticism

What speaks of self-criticism then? Does it deserve the unabashed negative perception? Does it deserve to be called out for? Yet for the anti-Skeptical “skeptic” and their friends, these appear to be righteous questions. How dare the author question a questioner!

The dare comes from pure cathartic spite, that much shouldn’t be ignored. But the passions stir not of the argument but the crowd who bring it up, for they wish to gain something without the expelling of something. To squeeze the new in with the old, and to pretend that these contradictions shan't appear nor result in a struggle where something shall come on top. Which the self-honouring spirit tries to attempt, to forgive their olden self’s mistakes with their recent advancements. No sooner are they to be “normal” beforehand than they are to descend to a “non-normal” state ‘til they appear “cured” later on, but looking a whole different as the new excess from the new sum of the parts has dictated this new image.

As which the self-critical spirit accepts and critiques their past self and moves on rectifying their sins while building on the new. For change occurs when we worry less of the past and build towards the new, even if it means something of the past must be killed without a self-justification - as the guilty only tremble. There were points where I had slipped up, made my errors and done awkward acts even by internet standards. But in my march, my later posts corrected and improved my reputation, I took to the plunge whenever I could help fix any errors committed and I stuck with one image as I had realized long ago that having multiple images shall only be false presentations that one will have to live by forever.

Abstract my utterances shall be, but concrete they shall be as I utter some more. For one can never analyze a thing in isolation and must realize the Other is always present, even as an innocent second party. The more interconnections are realized, the more detailed the web is and the more easily my desires are spelt out that one can sense but never be truly sure. Even if my desire is for some sort of reconciliation I demand but always shall be in front of me waiting for its name to invoked.

Span of attention

An oddity I write not straightforward and precisely choose to annoy the reader forward by long-stepping things ‘til I am certain the bush has something to torch. Why must attention span not be dignified, for the Capitalist Social Order thrives from one ad to another and coerced the collective unconsciousness into such corner? True, one must learn to play ball with such. But, in conjunction with that, one must be able to speak and think on a subject forever equally. To speak aphorisms is to be trivial, to be long-winded is to know nothing as the Public nae understands you, whom you live in the Private deciding how to represent your spirit to the Public.

And I have played ball and still shall, as I establish a schedual which plays into differing spans of attention to defy the atemporal and limitless beast of NeoLiberalism. I, for which I know certainly I share this I with other Is, can not even conceive how unproductive and inactive I was with all this down time - to labour has the perks to drown out the emptiness that is the NeoLiberal Social Order, no matter how clever it thinks it may be to shove a lot in one time-space and let us be exhausted to soak up its remedies.

Yet equally in action I pursue labour of some kind, in thought I continued my journey.

How so for the self-critical spirit I flatter myself as, but know only to be an uttering? For I laboured to study and practice not only against what I perceive negatively but also towards a new worth fighting for. In a hopeless world, only can courage arise truly and hope squashed as now one doesn’t believe for change to happen - one demands it and knows it to be the only way. Yet only has the post begun.

Philosophy, or the Universal action before particularization

Dialectical

As much as one should be able to explain to the Public what one is, one shouldn’t conceal their views as nothing had gotten done by worrying about everybody’s minute concern. A point well understood by the Dialecticians, from the philosophers and activists that benefit from Dialectics. For, as the Stoics go saying, to hassle on things outta our control is to forever ache oneself in pain. As what hurts us more than a throbbing physical pain can be our subjectivized view of such - which accrues no real loss but an unrestrained chaos in one’s Symbolic Order.

Yet it seems hypocritical to stand against the current, but fancy this. The whole is more than the sum of its parts. A repeated statement yes, but a statement worth repeating in its conscious form. Fellow reader, what one cannot control can be overcome with the many - yet it isn’t just individual Is teaming up but a we mastering and superseding a threat. This we contains also the play-offs of each individual limb, reinforces the individuality of each I and animates them as such to be of One Arm, One heart and of One Spirit.

To beat the dead horse, the Stoics lay correct on the individual but the we is equally individual even as the composition and excess of the individuals. So this we is out of control other than the three choices that forms thanks to the excess: enactment, anchoring and dejection. Enactment as-is be that: agreeing. Anchoring is the ambigious field the mind gets perturbed in ‘til a resolve is made and the perception anointed. Dejection as-such be that: disagreeing. For as simple as they wish to present themselves, the complexities lies in the others following suit and amplifying a single choice made. Regardless of such, justice is a duty for the Stoics to enforce and one isn’t Stoic without a sense of justice coursing through the veins - yet one must be smart about such enforcement with its complexities.

Yet let us return to the three choices. For a patriarch alone cannot enforce a Hetero-normative Patriarchal society, but a multitude in the ruling classes dictating to continue enacting it while enforcing such can. The enforcers of such system always come from a Base, the Base for our NeoLiberal society is simply Capitalism and Capitalism continues to enforce such as such continues to protect and squash any opposition to Capitalism. Truly the Superstructure is the imaginary to the Base acting as the Symbolic Order to the Social Order all around us. For Capitalism at a whim can abolish NeoLiberalism for Social Democracy or Conservative Rulership - yet NeoLiberalism is the most progressive advancement in the enforcement of Capitalism and the most reactionary to the overdue and efficient changes in the World.

The Social Order of Efficiency

Yet if we wish to change the World, then we must be ready for the World to change us. For the educators were once educated, the lawyers once taught of the jurisprudence and governors once governed. But it starts with the critical examination of what has been plaguing contemporary society, and, even more-so, what has lead up to such conditions and how to supersede them. If we care at all to supersede NeoLiberalism, then we must know the Superstructure that it has imposed on the World, learn how to combat the inhibitions it placed upon us and eventually relearn what we thought we used to know. And for us, we mustn't present a moral banner, for NeoLiberalism shall in ten-fold. We must do more than mere moralistic rages or prescriptions to an irrational World - we must March amongst History once more. We must do everything that progresses History forward, take every efficiency and overclock it and annihilate every inefficiency that drags us back to the depths we escaped from.

Yet what inefficiencies do I speak off? Why the inefficiencies that harbors the project of making the New and protects the Old. The inefficiency of a Hetero-Normative Patriarchal society hinders the creative flow and freedoms, or the recognition of necessities, of non-hetero, non-normal and non-patriarchal Subjects. This inefficiency denies these Subjects the recognition they need for their self-consciousness - yet in hypocrisy upon NeoLiberalism itself, it creates contradiction and alienation that force the development of diasporas, underground communities and resistance organizations of which the community is self-reflexive and has recognized itself but shall deny the recognition for the majority of society. For which the resistor and the NeoLiberal state shall be malnourished in this deadlock, yet NeoLiberalism shall eventually win for it has won many battles of attrition before and can do so if tensions cease to produce progress for the resistor.

For which even more, that lesson was learnt but horribly applied even before the days of NeoLiberalism - the '68 revolutions showed us a many communities rising but never achieving a united front. And having no rallying call for a new Social Order of a new efficiency, '68 had became no more than an ode to Catharsis that didn't lead to change. It has, in fact, collapsed and Capitalism had learnt to never step those boundaries for the time being - 'til NeoLiberalism came about and decided to finish the job Economic Liberalism had nearly reached, but bastardizing its name in the process. Going back now, only the Black Panthers had inched very close to achieving these prospects, but the COINTELPRO had made their blunders and let the Party do the rest of the needed death blows unto themself. if the '68 spirit is to be honoured, then these attempts have to not only be made but more has to be done now. One cannot rebel against a symptom, one must rebel against the Base-Superstructure that produces it and secure towards building the New one that shall root out the Old.

If we are serious about change, then we must be ready to be changed. If we wish to see no more of a Hetero-Normative Patriarchal society, then we must change not only our platitudes but face our Subjects to change as well. For that shall be out of our control if we get changed or not, but we control if we will see that change or not. The philosopher, as tasked by Marx of those years back, today must not only theorize but change the World, the activist learning from the philosopher and help with the steering of material flow and the layperson being the one we convince to join our project and let them help us out in the rooting of the Old so the Old will struggle to come back if we fail.

Just being this

And to be a Marxist today isn't enough - one must learn of Patriarchal organization as a Proletarian Feminist, one must know how the Superstructure interacts with Social Being that forms Class Consciousness as both a Sociologist and a Psychoanalytic and one must know of what really is in our control, not so much in our and what we can struggle towards so we can start controlling it. Also just knowing what causes exploitation and the Base isn't enough: one must know how societies like the USSR and the PRC did to overcome a Capitalist Base and mode of production to make a Socialist Base and mode of production, one must know what and how things must change for Socialism to come about and start its holy transformation in one's country and one must be active in resisting Capitalist powers in the meanwhile of making revolution. To be simply that and not be ready to update one's theory is showing Orthodox revisionism, to fall unto past mistakes because it might work again is to be Farcical revisionist, to deny Dialectics is to be a Metaphysical revisionist in a Marxist sheath and to do something without a Scientific basis for such is to be Revisionist to the core.

Yet why must I say all these? I say this as to remind the Internet Marxist Community, the infamous "Online Left," that they must be self-critical and be practical-critical as well. Isn't what I said a type of shaming? No it is not, for shaming is much like blaming - to make a claim with nothing to back it up and without the guarantee of backing it up later, yet still pressing forward with the claim 'til one's rep is damaged. Why must a Marxist engage in all these communities? Much like the self-reflexive spirit we can be and, ignoring the uncritical and self-honouring spirits out there, we must recognize the other fields, how they came about, who they really serve and where we can improve our analysis so we can struggle towards an efficient future. Should we all know them in earnest? If one has the means, one has no excuse; if one hasn't the means, then we shouldn’t care if they made the mistake but should care to fix it if it so happens to come - for the privileged side of this we shall always alienate the unprivileged or slightly less privileged if we're critical of their efforts without doing anything to alleviate their suffering on our side. How can we be really we if we aren't equal? This is the topic of universalities and particularities - just like how there are Marxists everywhere, but a Marxist in the Global South faces wholly different problems from a Global North Marxist.

What lies the true motivation of such remarks? To simply burn down the "Concert of the Online Left" as I call it. What is this "Concert of the Online Left" - a joke? A historical joke referring to the Concert of Europe that occurred after Napoleonic France's fall from grace when Conservatives made many efforts to prevent revolutions. Why "Concert" and not just the "Online Left" then? Because the "Online Left" has forgotten why they've became Leftists and have pathologized this anti-memory, so they make up for it by playing these games and factionalizing themselves purposefully into many splinter groups - which the "Right" has loved and helped nurture so much, and makes the "Online Right" its stand-in as to ensure this Concert. Left Unity?... A thing the "Online Left" wishes for but the desire really is to create one homogeneous faction with many token factions that don't alienate the Mother Faction, and shall be impoverished as a result, even more so as the self-consciousness is limited to an online space. Yet for the "Actual Left" ... it certainly is a possibility 'til the hour strikes when principles are concerned and the race to beat them to the punch begins - if the remaining factions hadn't offed the other, 'tis because they've found and agreed upon where they can collaborate and weren't wholly different to begin with.

So how can the "Online Left" be cured? It cannot, and to think a cure can come about is to suggest a normalcy that never existed nor should exist - in fact its worse talking about being a Leftist and not believing in one's principle before allying other factions of this illusory "Left" in general. Why is it that the "Left" not be true? Because it retroactively presupposes we have connections to the "Right" - for which our end goals and our methods doesn't, but in daily life we might as well be known as "Rightists that knows whats wrong with Capitalism" if we continue to honour this tradition of "Left-Right spectrum" and never do anything against Capitalism. What should the rallying banner be for the "Actual Left" then? Actually Existing Socialism - they're the comrades we got and its outta our control for how they came about, but it's in our control that we can better them to our cause. Can the online space be revolutionary? End the "Concert of the Online Left," end the petty factionalism that has been nurtured on that space and start the agitation, education and organization on those spaces - else don't be worried of the continual positive supersessions of this counterrevolutionary mass.

Concrete, or termination of analysis

A defined scheduling

As the utterances of my fancies screw about in the air, I return to this account and what to make of it. I beckon to what JMP (MLM Mayhem) had said on his blogger, ultimately to continue on but with my own wishes dealt with first. Then I beckoned to the criticisms I have made of the "Online Left" and thinking of Fred Hampton - never stop the process of Demystification and continue educating. Then I beckoned to my self-consciousness and found a hole of which I cannot fill, not a real hole or feeling empty, but an indescribable place that I probably would want a psychoanalytic to dance around.

So, I must declare a define schedule I shall attempt but never guarantee to follow. Saturdays and Sundays shall be the weird limbo days when I post for sure an independent story and maybe a philosophy post or #finishthestory post. Mondays and Tuesdays will be that but the push over days: where I might post philosophy if not preoccupied by #100words or #electric dreams, equally Monday or Tuesday can be a day of rest - for sure I shalln't post anything Monday tomorrow. Wednesdays shall be an audio-reading and Thursdays a video from my Gaming channel, while Fridays are my #fiftywords and Mizu No Oto posts. And now we come full circle here.

There might be some changes like having a weekly art post on Mondays/Tuesday, but that might not even stay for a quarter of year lest I continue to draw after my intro to art class is done and over. And other times Sundays can be the day of rest so I can prepare for school on Mondays, but no guarantees but a definite course of action to be taken. Even as I continue to type, not even the attempt for temporality can be fixed when one has lived in an atemporal for so long.

Withal, these are just mere quibbling.

Communities

The most active community, on Steemit, I partake in is the writing community, the amount of tags implicate me without further need of investigation. I just lack the care for writer's block if I had any, for I hadn't a care to mull over the existing details and just moved to other details to combat such if I had any - like those word on the tip of tongue you can't say lest you change subjects. Writing more often may have hypocritically made me more creative but also refine my English for all walks of life (which was not my household language and a speech impediment I had to overcome at an early age, but technically my first language regardless). I shall not go on about what sub-communities I work with, that task would be not enough in this sub-§.

The actual active community I live by is evidently the Marxist and philosophical community - my grasp on theory continues to grow and there's been maturing on my part. Of course, to even go by the ancient philosophers, we never stop learning and the fool is the one that knows it all. I had from a year ago began making a holy syncretic union between Marxism, Feminism and Lacanian Psychoanalysis while holding sympathies with Pyrrhonian Skepticism and Stoicism - the journey has and shall still be fascinating to watch on my end. Otherwise, I began to start ultimately rejecting the Online space and began actually moving to "real-life" activism and helping out few organizations I rather leave unsaid.

A community I am playing around with is actually the Gaming Community I had left for quite a while now and just now have been communicating with them. To say the least after the whole GamerGate incident, only the OPGaming people are a safe haven to most other gamer hold outs. Their friendly and open nature to actually building a community is most welcoming and I shall be seeing how they develop as the months go by. Lastly, I had actually written a member rant post for them and I am awaiting feedback on such - hopefully I make it in like I did with the prompt for the #finishthestory contest.

The last community I actually have involvement with is actually a select few Marxist YTers I comment on their post and gauge with their audience. While I haven't a need for it now, it is nice to see people from other parts of the World and no longer try to brand myself outwards since I had given up on making Video content other than audio-readings. I may come back with philosophical explanations, but that shall be weekly as I did in the past and it shall be core concepts instead of § by § analysis as I had with the first few books I analysed. There maybe I can pick apart actually the people for each § of the book and explicate why the author choose to talk about them and clarify their issues with the person as they relate to the entirety of the §. But we shall see about that.

Life

The remaining shall be a few words. Firstly, a need to focus on winning colleges over - for that shall determine how I shall carry out the next few years of my life.

Secondly, to grow my steemit account and help the CI project grow.

Thirdly, to re-read previous theory in free time and spend less and less on YT - reducing to the bare essentials for true boredom.

Lastly, growing my contacts on everything except the "Online Left" - to recoup what I should've done a long time ago and now realize my mistake.