[D-G] Imerialism & Capitalism - our own efforts here in bringing something to the ideas already exposed here by other members

Lucy LeGentilSinge lucy100millionyearsold at yahoo.co.uk
Wed Feb 9 19:24:53 PST 2005

I seem to remember that, in ATP, D&G said something
along the lines of
>'capitalism has many faces to the east and to the
west, each one worse
>than the last'.  If anyone remembers where, that'd be

Dear Sir

As regards to your here mentioned querry, we in the
Ontological Institute have discussed this imperative
matter and have concluded that we cannot ashieve any
kind of deliberated statment on the mentioned issue.
Yet we can tell you at this present moment that we
think that late capitalism is a subject to constant
evolution and thus that it is TOTALLY unpreidctable.
It is thus probably something quite potentially
destructive for people who are de facto innocent. We
thus beleive that there are no signs which gives us
the right to imagine that we are either 1) in a
mixture of signs circle, and sign lines, 2) in any of
the in-between or rather in this kind of case,
"out-between", and that this very notion of shift
between in-betweeness and out-betweeness, goes along
in a kind (again notice the word which repeats itself
itself here the word k i n d), of spectacular
coincidence that roots the parametrus of visageity
(ie.faciality) with the general idea which we can be
proud to say we are sure matter quite a bit for
Deleuze and Guattari, that is to say, definitaly, the
retaking of the surface of perception by the , well,
in second thought, let's not talk about variagtion, or
variety or variable, because well, not, let's not!

But let's rather, i invite you again kindly, to
reconsider this interesting if you want to consider
it, just here, the factor, that out-betweenness, and
in-betweeness, are potentially interesting ideas, no?

why not indeed to posite variation as the main
characteristic predominant in the concept of
syntamatical constant reevaluation of philosophy.
the problem, so much as Deleuze and Guattari said that
language was not innocent, variation, in the accurate
extension of the requisite for non Universality,
would, and if we infer to what both of you Chris,
Sylvie, Glen, and you, have notified the list, that
and taking the measure of the extension implied
potentially for us also, in what you, that is to say
OF COURSE that we can be affected by what you say, in
a way, that we would, being affected, thus understand
in a KIND (KIND-KIND-KIND) of way, we would thus
confirm totally and non conditionally, to what other
people would have advanced here, least had we
certified what they had done and said, in way that
would posit our own way of relating to the truth to
which we certify to be very obliged because we
perceived, and hope to carry on perceiving in what you
all have, variagating to recapture the word, in a
certain extend, so, all of you variagating truth, and
that is what is of deep concern to us, and by deep we
think that the unknown reality of extension to which
variagation has been affecting our relationship in
this important topic of the day, testifies to the
interest to which point -- and line if 
you want to elaborate with the exact and
non-approximative concepts, well, it wants to say that
we are interested in the fabric of ideas, and that we
wish to join along with others to confirm the
possibilities of this list and also to reinforce it by
ALL means available to our intelligence, as it can
develop here we think.

Lucy STAWNHASSLER coordinator at the 
Budapest, Ontological Institute of Cross-
Contemporaneous coordinative Sciences of the City of
              9th february 2005

ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

More information about the Deleuze-Guattari mailing list