[D-G] deleuze and benjamin on violence

lesley gallacher lesley.gallacher at ed.ac.uk
Tue Apr 11 06:11:44 PDT 2006

it is pretty much entirely like this, which explains why i haven't  
posted before.


On 11 Apr 2006, at 13.30, andw at riseup.net wrote:

> i am new to this list, but are the writings here always so personal/ 
> ego
> stylin/esoteric?
> bit hard to tell what the hell is being said or discussed!
> but maybe that is the point? (smoke and mirrors makes an interesting
> labyrinth? at least to the one who is conjuring it up?!)
> -a
>> 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...
>> _______________________________________________
>> List address: deleuze-guattari at driftline.org
>> Info:
>> http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/deleuze-guattari- 
>> driftline.org
>> Archives: www.driftline.org
> _______________________________________________
> List address: deleuze-guattari at driftline.org
> Info: http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/deleuze-guattari- 
> driftline.org
> Archives: www.driftline.org

More information about the Deleuze-Guattari mailing list