the speculative cycle of cruelty

forms

all world-forms are creatures that abide by the logic of evolutionary viability. creatures arent a special earthly accident, nor a cascade of violent chance, nor are they ever permitted to escape their form and transmute into higher beings. there is no calculatory or predictive or statistical measure for creaturism. creatures are world-forms, they are all allegories of one another to limited degrees, and fixed principles. also, creatures are just as well synthetic as they are literal, there is no difference between evolutionary instrumentality and synthetic instrumentality other than function and chance. therefore, all earthly creatures are most possible alien forms, the world doesnt perpetuate through virutal (infinitely possible) chance but through set margins.

the only thing that changes between creatures is who is dominating, and domination itself is not opression or subjugation in every count, but a more general rule of superior influence of/to any capacity, where influence itself is also capacity to outrun other creatures, or to intensify their experience. evolution is also not blind nor justifiably powerful, but purely powerful, every act of evolutionary supremacy is uniquely evil and intense, and monkeys (humans) dont partake in any unique form of subjugation on a universal plane, only a relative plane of capacity. other planets only differ elementaly, the creatures are different, the leaderboards are shifting, the posessor of the current violent measure of influence is relative, but the forms stay in equillibrium as always, in a pereptuating cascade of various forms of cruelty that arise as an incapacity to ever correlate without friction, which itself only produces the terrain where tension becomes quantified.

broilers

broilers are currently suffering en masse, however, the natural solution to this is to make them even dumber and less capable, given the fact we can't shut down the genocidal regimes that corporately perpetuate their suffering. the ethical paradox of broilers being born into an anaestheticized, (embryonically decognitified/decomplexified) state is not a question of diminishing the subjectivity of beings or a question of eugenics/erasure, much like the question of gene editing in general isnt, especially not of humans, given, yes it can be used as a political weapon but also more importantly its just a general technological problem due to platos shipwreck dilemma (introduction of new problems per new technological invention) especially problematic in dynamic fields.

the de-essentialization of broilers will be a really popular political dilemma with proponents on each side and therefore varied results, but in reality the proponents against this action are essentializing not only more suffering but the false image of purity in representation of a paradigmatic and virtual fetus, useless in potency. we're not defending the rights for a being who has the capacity for complexity but is being bounded to suffer, only the right for complexities to be activated or existing when they correctly meet the criteria for them to be triggered.

the ethical solution is obvious, so its not an ethical dilemma at all. rather its an ontologico-political dilemma, when the political sphere influences the essence of evolutionarily produced beings but backwards, it starts to create a political landscape over meaning production that could end in fully genetically unsustainable destruction given specific circumstances. not naturalized genes, but genes as in the possibility of a being to not be extinct, genes as in cultural modes of preservation. hypergenes you could say. the essential prototype is under danger. but not the question of the being. there is only one reason that corporations arent pushing even faster for the enshittification of broilers and thats because to conceptually defend them means to understand that they are a cosmological suffering cult and not a simple byproduct of commodity capitalism.

lizards

the lizard society doesnt just push economic-accumulative logic, it makes slow cycles extra slow, fast extra fast. but one cycle for them is longer, they may live 250 years, and see the ritual as four generations of one thousand years. so they implant nano bots or micro chips with their forms of abstraction. when its time to rest, insects slow down way too much, their slowness tortures them. whereas mammals and birds are forced to fly slightly above what rheyre comfortable with. they get hit by the enviornment, literally, they stumble and flip and fall, their punishment gets to be territorial inadequacy, irritating placements of things. lizard pods instead of houses, they crash into windows of pods.

elephants

the elephants, they dont want to be micro cruel, so theyre all the time macro cruel. their world is too harmonious, no deviation allowed. but their punishment is gentle, they just push you back down. theres no cruelty, just a staggering lack of it.

tigers

whereas the tigers, the engine they run never can allow for civilization, but theres a never ending hunt that starts to take new shapes of mimicry, its like a circus.the music only ever increases, the chase only ever gets bolder. at some point, only species larve enough to be preyed on by the tigers, must have a forced sleep shut down mode survive. because it becomes too scary to sleep, so species die of insomnia before theyre even hunted.

snails

the snails design language, its soft calcium shell operates through the logic of suction and balance rather than traction or capture, it has no concept of mechanization, its organicity emerges as its ability to transfer its own excrament through its tissue, and liquid as a coil for movement, where its very activity coincides with an ability to crush it. snails love getting crushed, because they are built to be walking traps for beings with crushability potential. a snail is aesthetico-morphologically designed to capture your foot in a quite literal sense, to be a pure metaphor for organic evisceration of complex tissue. this does not mean that crushing snails is an act that should occur, but one that does occur, and this very difference is the unprincipial nature by which the snail actually validates its existence and redeems its reward through the circuts of the world.

the snail only exists in the form it does precisely because of the tension of crushability, crushability allows it the function of coexistence with larger forces beyond its capacity. the evolutionary intelligence of snails actually subsumes crushability through its passivity in the face of crushness as an ontological reality, and not something to contingently reconsider at any point in the sense of jainism. in that sense its also a sacrifical agent because trampling itself is an affective sensomotoric connection with a snails energy, the meta-ontic equivalent of blasting open a box, it signifies latent utility. however, the snail is also angry at you for your existence, since the monkeys natural state doesnt work through the logic of snailhood, yet makes use of its resources. the monkey inside of it posesses a type of proto-snail that activates its tendencies, the living snail is the one being crushed not just due to the inactivated speculative skeleton that allows navigation, but skeleticity as a fact is only a transport vechile, a metaphor for greater snailhood. in that sense, the world of "water intelligence" is directly parallel to snail life, and the trampling of snails itself is reminiscent of the way in which territory works against stickiness in their essences as forces.

monkeys

but the humans? they are made to prey, they are only accidental predators. theyre witty, hiding in the trees, but too arrogant to accept that fate. so once they have the ability to dominate nature, what do they do? they do the things that are least like their nature. because thats the only way they can cope with the position of being able to witness the world but not relate to it. some human-conscious hypothetical animals, like the octopus, love to witness and dont mind being the only conscious animals. thats cause they didnt develop the ability the ability to witness to escape. they hate it when another animal can work with enviornments as well as them, metamorphise, transform, basically have that quirky charisma. as long as theres boring animals everywhere, they feel great, they dont mind witnessing an unconscious world.

but humans dont like that, so they systemically build and kill it in torture boxes all over and over again. thats the only way they can make sense of the world. because they built to witness so that they could survive, so that what they witness is greater than them. and when it didnt become so, the arrogance was the only prevailing factor left. the thing about this though, it means that humans can only ever auto cannibalize themselves. they cant really make sense of difference. every animal that they auto-torture looks more and more like them. thats kind of how you know why they do this. otherwise known as standing-monkeys. homo is not something we should even allow to call ourselves. the only way these things will understand their degeneracy is back through monkeyhood.

well, its only a reversal for their warped view. all fine. no, i think the standing monkey isnt the exception, its just another law of cruelty. why do i want to not exceptionalize it? well precisely because i need to make it okay, to make it temporary, or i cant live with this fact. you dont know how it is to be one of these things that has done this. it ruins me, my possibility. it makes every shared space im in feel wretched. how could it not? this isnt a mistake we can just take back. thats why the lizard also enacts cruelty. you think my desceiption of it isnt equally alienating for the lizard? it wants to turn everything into a lizard. it has a similar problem, except humans want to turn themselves away into everything else (away as in kill, to kill everything that is "[turned into]" them, without killing themselves directly) thats how that works out. and why are mushrooms non cruel? we need something to show non cruelty, or else we'll stop believing we can stop this. not that we ever could, because once you start something so bad, you dont get to enjoy the ethics of having stopped it afterwards.

mushrooms

and then theres the mushrooms. they arent cruel at all, they help equalize everything. if something ever gets too large or dominating, they spring up from the ground and remove it. yes, they predate, but they keep the balance. almost a little too well. nobody complains.