ivory: studies on alienation

contradiction

𓍯1 contemporary society is characterized primarily by machinically induced double-layered social contradiction. essentially, all forms of appearance are translated to opposing forms of recognition simultaneously, whilst also being subsumed by regulating bodies that make no use of them. the present subject is both involved and invoked by the social configuration, forced to abide by its eternalizing and universal principles such as inhibition of social taboo, expected regulations inherent to the game, expectations that outward critique will automatically switch to inward-facing interpretations, and mostly importantly, that contradictions themselves become associated only as movements in the natural order of social oscillations rather than ethical totalities. oscillations serve to facilitate a psychological segmenting where synkarian or b-chulian avatars have to constantly choose between repression and awareness of violent regulatory frameworks in the dominant economy of affects that regularly seperates micro and macroworld.

𓍯2 public and private spheres themselves cease to appear naturally when the segmentation of spaces reaches that critical point where avatars are carriers of social convention through enforced oscillation rather than carriers of fundamental notions. contradiction isnt just sustained but entirely re-performed depending on the enviornment by the most average of civilians, almost regardless of role. however, its seemingly impossible to deliver substantial critique, as contradictions themselves become flattened out by a type of conceptual swamping that society overrides identities and archetypes through, memeifying and constantly switching between reciprocating and inventing social hierarchies. this type of constructive flux that almost all philosophical priests today in the continental tradition glorify is not a testament of anthropic deleuzian virtuality or power, but rather a total degradation of the agent who is reduced to a post-reified state as only an assortment of collective traits that are oscillating, contextually nullified, and entirely re-adjustable by any social schema that chooses to re-evaluate libidinal intensities.

𓍯3 an even worse thing that memes do is de-ontologize conflict, by genericizing lived experience and hystericizing all of its by products, and relevantizing their shared understanding, they dont actually transform nor evolve social perception but rather drown its lived weight, collapse it and empty it of significance by re-positing it as a ghost, and in that sense, the semiotic weight itself becomes a modulated rather than expressed significance, meta-cognitivity is weaponized as a shared brain that the masses use to transpose their own granted possibility on top of their virtual or total possibility, and as such they subsume all difference under a pre-selected affective organizational social scheme, de-selecting away from mediatory complexes. as such, there is no way to actually posit social movement as a possible category, stagnation is actually a feature of oscillation rather than entropy in this instance, and thats what allows for a not a stratification but a demarcation, an archetypal cleansing of categorical weight, where categories themselves turn to re-emerging flux, whereas complex repetitions turn into stratified social walls of sorts, preventing transformative generation.

𓍯4 most contemporary theory treats contradiction as either an unresolved antagonism (zizek’s parallax gap) or a structural byproduct of capitalist realism (fisher), however contradiction itself is subsumed by the reified subject, contradiction is a part of the performative infrastructure that fuels reificatory currents, that where in contemporary society, agency itself becomes a regulatory affect under influence from reificatory regimes, where liberation isnt about agents actually self-liberating by ending reification, but auto-reifying agents waging the conditions of their own estrangement by positing self-expounding alienating models that they can they speculate and roleplay on the conditions for, and as such not actually engaging in some butlerian social performance but more cruically, allowing for contradiction itself to be subsumed by its own evil double.

han’s psychopolitics or berardi’s cognitariat simply dont actually pose an accurate model for contemporary reification because the subject itself is a semiotic protocol that reinstates its reification rather than a ground for the fight against subsumption. contradiction isnt a macro event nor a micro event but a line of flight that crosses past social infrastructure and creates conditions for the very movement of social fields themselves, contradiction is primarily about orientation, which is why oscillation is used as a naturalistic force that grounds behaviors not into fixed prototypes but into fully delvable prototypes, human furniture, interdisciplinarity taken to an ontic degree, encompassing entire virtual fields of lived existence, total holisitc modulation that preserves contradiction as a secondary degree of subsumptive force rather than as a primary degree or driver of social transformative change.

𓍯5 trivial social contradictions are regularly assesed by fisher's grey vampires and synkarian simulars as apparent contradictions of intent, however, they are statistical and demographically expected regulatory frameworks that don't cross over into ideology precisely because there is a fundamental passive layer inserted inbetween these systems by a constant and overwhelming status quo majority that self-imposes regulatory frameworks as an ontological wall against politics as a theoretical totality of potential. zizek speaks about this plenty of times, but his most important contribution is to the semiotics of ideological entrapment, specifically where social environments precisely serve as roleplay and spectacle from the inside rather than the outside, whereas they serve as "alternate but secondary and politically irrelevant" realities from the outside-looking-in, and where semantically and communciatively they provoke a hyper-realist response if they attempt to insert ontological primacy, which hints at a deeper ideologicall wall underneath the onto-political semiotic constallation.

the average leftist activist is a key function in the exocapitalist order, who is primarily involved as a passive agent in various affairs, from beurocratic offices that suddenly serve functional purposes rather than reflect the tendencies of neoliberal society, to supermarket spending in the form of at best still a stingy consumer, to medical institutions as a very willing and organized subject that suddenly values social democracy if it means they get to save their body, passing by traffic as a pedestrian who almost certainly isnt actively involved in pipe bombing at that very moment, passing by educational institutions as a so-called student, having possibly hurt an ex-partner, killed a larger animal, maybe possibly being a streamer with a large mansion, or in a polycule whilst also coming from a bourgeoise family that owns a metal mining company, or having studied in a private university and so on. these contradictions feel trivial precisely because they are functionally segmented as ideologically compatible and characteristically auto-sterilized enviornments that accept social metabolism as a base accompaniement, essentially self-forming into dead and politically trivial enviornments, which is why political critique and empirical practices both struggle to actually attach a proper conceptual problem to them other than triviality and structural antagonism.

abstraction

𓍯6 on the level of abstractive potential, the assertion of bankers as an abstraction being equivalent to an antagonistic social class already is subsumed into performing the same operational level of hostility with the equation of this construct being assumed as relegated to the political reality of the bankers themselves. if its anecdotally verifiable that a large majority of these bankers are jewish then the label is no longer just an abstraction but a constructed and unfortunately impactful social reality equally proportionate to the banker himself. if you imagine a banker, at this point in time you would have to abstract the jewishness away from him in order to feel that you're remaining neutral about it in your mind. the mercantile ideology at some point gets connotated to the essence because of the political reality. it would be far less likely that an essentializing freak philosopher would run around doing this if it wasnt either a reflection of the times or some type of propaganda apparatus, and even if they were, it would be too heterodox to even matter or be impactful to anybody else.

nobody gets to decide which side is the hostile one, in ideology everyone is equally charged as guilty by the consequential causal links reproduced in the chain reactions of the social assemblage. the violence tied to the bigotry itself could be humorous primarily because it points to social realities, not just because of the humorous connotation of invoking genealogical social parodies to begin with. sociological analysis from a justice-oriented point of view has shifted the hostile nature of political conflict by removing one degree of the causal chain. bystanding, non-banking, maybe even anti-capitalist jewish people dont get co-opted into the history of the jewish race and its banking practices by sheer accident, theyre also assumably charged with the political reality of being a higher precedent social role capable of actually entering that role, which is why it cant be said that the genealogical or semiotic violence is fully unjustified.

𓍯7 philosophy gets to do what it wants even if there are moral consequences, because abstract categories themselves re-shape the existing lived weight of non-archetypal lived experiences of realities - the abstractions feeding back into experiental weight. it isnt the case that there are no jewish bankers, nor that there are no speculative indian philosophers, but theres a reason why these categories exist, and it shouldnt solely be the responsibility of the philosopher to cease all forms of rhetoric or polemic just because some beurocratic machine is going to genocide someone, which, it is going to find a way to do and justify that either way for as long as these machines are in place, which is almost certainly primarily the fault of europe. the philosopher's conceptual scaffolding itself is a cause, the form of the indirect violence that perpetuates signifiers directly shapes not just abstractions but their perceived weight, but at the same time, the socially productive machine often times oscillates cultural metaphors into stagnatory phases before even a single mediated thought can arise about them, and in this case all mediation does is actually kill the immediate fetal offspring of cultural acceleration.