[D-G] deleuze and benjamin on violence

[NZ]

getting directly to the code is sometimes crucial for survival,
without itLife would be tragic (re: Comedy/narrative as forms") I know
I'm supposed to have a code for my
ideas/action/(praxis=blogging=putrification) but recognition of code
is sometimes difficult after major cerebral infection(couldn't you
tell?). Unlike my warped cranial mesh, I think the code is fairly
complete and in any regards not even necessary at this point, as the
code has already become semi-conscious of itself and  on its own
accord and fled these harse environments. all this even before I was
able to identify what it was I was looking for.... near starvation...
days had gone by, a week really, but in the anallogs I can remind
myself of what the primordial ooze must of felt like:

"Now the critical function of philosophy/ is to move away from fixed ideas,
making one not to see possibilities of living which are actual there.

The positive function is to look
at sources which are not used until now."
--
how long of a "now", 10days ago?, give or take a year? 350 years, the
social contract? Its a source and reference and model. It has
everything to do with positivism and positive law and positively
violence. (remember natural law was not a discussion yet (re:
wbenj.textt), and I would perfer it if it werent a formal
"disccussion" at all, but I do enjoy imagining scenarios erupting in
civil society where questions of natural law could come up.... like
what are the ethical reprocussions of when a young man throws an egg
at a police car?...s.i.f.l virutals. sifl...later)


rousseau's contract was not so concerned with ending the oppression of
men in chains - but answers the q:

 "how can it be made legitimate", made reasonalbe and Just. <--- THAT there
moreover,
"force cannot be used to control the will of the people, only consent* can
the total alienation of each associat of himself and all his rights to
the whole community
since the aliation is unconditional no associate has anyother rights to claim"
"""
blab, blab, logos, locke really wrestled rouseau about this and this
fun -de-mentally infected greater amereiche. but locke was merely
being a bastard and sidelining the real issue which is just "consent"
and really how "money equivocates consent." Capitalism married to
Imperialism needed free-markets and Locke ruled in 1770s, (America,
Australia, Perry in Japan) and as a contract it was full of loopholes
that can be equivocated in courts, just like they are today on the
front page of the newspaper. Rousseau faired better in Europe as a
techique for civilianizing the population(re: poland france).  This is
a positivism that rouseau was responding to and acknowledging but not
yet denying... justifying really. The idea is that, the better
informed the passive state is, then the less likely its spartan
soviergn twin will act out aggressively, unintentional aggression.
Since the state's initial relationship with religeous institutions
prevented it from utilizing Scientific techniques for informaton
gathering there needed to be discovered  methods for massive social
control at the pschological level. This involved canonizing
mathematica works and eating pharoh's circumcised cartush  such
re-territorializing of tragic spinoza on sunday morning.  Most of the
real violence, are the orchestrated wars of the soveregin economy,
ww1ww2ww3(now, its happening today!) are outside of the s.c., meaning
that such things are not allowed in the contract(and furthermore... as
a contract it is pretty weak if nobody has signed it yet, I'm still
searching for the name of someone who has actually signed it, google?
- sotherwise it is just dogma, otherwize its just dogma, and is that
good?)

what I am interested in is finding the clues in r's social contract
that told napoleon to steal the mona lisa?


the pointy-point that pricks me is the :
using the sources is like writing the code
(do I want to share my code?)

here is another interpretation of  the issue:
the purpose of p-h-i-l-o-s-o-p-h-y = enlarge/explain life =  thereby
[giving newXopportunities to (think + act)]

where:
(p.h.i.l.)o.(s.o.p.h.y)

p.eople
h.ave
i.nteresting
l.ogos
o.nly       <------CENTER OF THE SPHINX ( very important fact!!!)
s.ome
o.wn (their own)
p.hilosopy (and that)
.h.appens to b e
y.ou!



... anyway I think

compare rousseau(age37) sitting under a tree in the middle of
philosophic revelation to rousseau(of NewJersey circa1998) would he
have the same revelation again and again?

""""
" """"
" " " " " " "" " " " " "
Detentional arts vs
the purpose of a-r-t = enlarge/explain life =  thereby [giving
newXopportunities to (think + act)]

""""
" """"

I do think there is abc...