Featured Post

Brad Pitt and Tarantino's Inglourious Basterds and Aldo Ray

Continuing at Huff Po is another small minded review of Inglourious Basterds http://tinyurl.com/nyeqfc (please bear with me until I learn...

Popular Posts

Showing posts with label Foucault. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Foucault. Show all posts

Saturday, November 23, 2019

New Anniversary Edition

He who can destroy a thing has the real control of it.
Paul-Maud'Dib DUNE

Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged is a blueprint for destroying capitalism.
Did she know she was advocating the destruction of that which she asserted as the highest economic ideal system?
NO!
This is a Zizekian case of the unknown/known

John Galt knew how to destroy the bureaucracy completely;
That is, he had the real control of it.
By THE STRIKE! The EXIT!


A can destroy B so A has the real control of B. A knows that they can destroy B. (known/known) B can destroy A so B has the real control of A. B does not know that they can destroy A. (unknown/known). C can destroy A so C has real control of A. C knows that they can destroy A. (known/known) C can destroy B so C has real control of B. C knows that they can destroy B (known/known).

How can C destroy B? By refusing to destroy A? Does C wish to destroy A? does C wish to destroy B? Or does C wish to liberate B? Gets dicey eh. A can physically destroy C. The poison pill is that if A does so, A is violating legal precedent. A violation of legal precedent is worse than just destroying C without violating legal precedent (the State) so punishment, imprisonment, death will be additional because the state will have been violated which is much worse than violating a person. This is part of the genealogy of crime and what is a crime.

This takes us into Foucault's Discipline and Punish. Crime was first defined as a "crime against the Sovereign." If someone stole your money, it was not a crime against you, but a crime against the King, the Sovereign. You lost your money but the crime was against the Sovereign so the punishment was severe.

Sometimes death for an insignificant crime
BECAUSE
it was a crime against the Sovereign!

A Genealogy of Crime
By the way this is how the Boston Marathon Bombing became a terrorist event. It became labeled as a crime against the state because the Boston Marathon is an annual event held in Boston. Twist that illogical thinking around in your reasoning will ya.


This thinking is an extension of Ratliff and Hartline's experimental work on Limulus.The eye of Limulus is composed of ommatidium each one separate from all the others but affecting others dependent upon how contingent they are to another. So ommatidium A can affect ommatidium B by suppressing the response of B. If within a certain distance measurable in the experiments. But C can suppress A thus lessening the strength of the stimulus from ommatidium A and therefore suppressing A's suppression of B. In which case B's response is enhanced.

This is called disinhibition.

Can we also liken it to disinformation. Or to distraction, thus lessening the strength / import of news, facts, occurrences, and other stimuli the Government wishes to weaken as it circulates among the citizens
And I can extend it to parental behavior that lessens the will of the child for good or bad. Or to the behavior of any one person in a dyad with another person which has been described as dependent or co-dependent behavior. Does one parent disinhibit the stimuli of the other parent thus increasing the responses of the child that exhibit the will of the child and the actualization of the child, or partner, or or or or........

Wednesday, August 14, 2019

DE-SHAMING : STRATEGY OF THE INVISIBLE MAN Resulting in PARRHESIA

DE-SHAMING/PARRHESIA

Beautiful portrait. The photographer sees you.
Your DE-SHAMING Error:NOT reporting on your Birthday.
Would make them SQUIRM inside much more


“When things get tough,” Neil Gaiman advised on in his fantastic commencement address on the creative life, “this is what you should do: Make good art. I’m serious. Husband runs off with a politician — make good art. Leg crushed and then eaten by a mutated boa constrictor — make good art. IRS on your trail — make good art. Cat exploded — make good art.” One could easily extrapolate, “Big Brother on your ass
— make good art.”   
Dr. Zuzanna Szatanik (Professor of Gender Studies and Literature)
 and Creston Davis of GCAS
. .....We discussed, for example, how real thinkers and progressives have been
targeted both in the United States and in Europe for being creative in terms of
the activist tactics.  In this respect, Zuza’s and my work very much intersect
because not only does our work attempt to uncover hidden ideological power
(class-struggle, racism, sexism, lookism etc.) but how that power is used to
reproduce oppressive conditions for other marginalized and oppressed voices. 
What is perhaps even more disturbing is how pretend progressives (people
who identify themselves as victims of social and political oppression) will use
strategies to shame other oppressed groups in the name of self-righteous
“justice”.  Often groups who deploy these heavy-handed strategies
of “shame” are themselves members of highly privileged and powerful
groups even though they perceive themselves as victims
What is brilliant about Zuza’s book, De-shamed. Feminist strategies of transgression. The case of Lorna Crozier´s poetry, is that it demonstrates a very clear and compelling argument for how shame can be traversed precisely by giving voice to women. By allowing (or risking) women to voice their shame they are able to trans-gress the power that shame has had over them. As a consequence of voicing shame–women can be liberated from the power that shame has had over them both psychologically and socially (symbolically). What I especially like about the basic matrix of this book is that this same “de-shaming” strategy can be used to liberate other perceived acts of shame; indeed Zuza is brilliant in identifying the logic of shaming itself. MORE


Often when a person in power exacts 
their power onto a target (a group or 
person) they will use tactics of shame 
in order to silence the victim.  That is, 
they will “frame” the targeted victim in 
terms of “shaming” so that the target 
(the one who is a victim of sexual 
abuse or of a false accusation etc.) 
will be too ashamed to speak the truth– 
to trans-gress the oppressor by 
exposing the oppressor as the true 
culprit of injustice.  By discovering the 
power of “de-shaming” we are able to
expose the oppressor for what they 
truly are. But not only are you able to 
expose the oppressor you are at the 
same time liberated from their 
oppressive scheme of “shaming” you.

 In this way the one 
who feels shame is able to reverse the 
table by exposing the truth, 
even if the 
telling of that truth is perceived as shameful.


Ai WeiWei used to be a dissident artist in China, now free, he is the same in the world. Chinese government put surveillance cameras in his studio and home. Not in his bedroom. Ai WeiWei installed one in his bedroom. The government begged him to take it away. He refused. Installing his own camera was an act of DE-SHAMING!
    Richard Hambleton- Jumping Shadow       Fight Club?
                

Friday, May 24, 2019

Reading Assange and Manning Through Zizek's Criminality of Law and Order

Zizek's Introduction is Perfect.
Snowden Escaped Barely in Time Thanks to Assange

Foucault's Genealogy of Parrhesia- From Ancient Greece

Write to Assange in Solidarity
Manning Back in Jail. Obama Waited Too Long to Free Her
Zizek's Introduction

....anarchist outbursts are not a transgression of the Law and Order; in our societies , anarchism already is in power wearing the mask of Law and Order - our Justice is the travesty of Justice, the spectacle of Law and Order is an obscene carnival - the point made clear by the arguably greatest political poem in English, Shelley's 'The Mask of Anarchy', which describes the obscene parade of the figures of power:


And many more Destructions played
In this ghastly masquerade,
All disguised, even to the eyes,
Like Bishops, lawyers, peers, or spies.

Last came anarchy: he rode
On a white horse, splashed with blood,
He was pale even to the lips,
Like Death in the Apocalypse.

And he wore a kingly crown;
And in his grasp a sceptre shone;
On his brow this mark I saw - 
'I AM GOD, AND KING, AND LAW!'

And is not this Hegelian-Chestertonian shift from the criminal transgression of Law and Order to Law and Order itself as the highest criminal transgression directly enacted by Mao (read the US here)  himself? This is why, while setting in motion and secretly pulling the strings of the self-destructive carnival, Mao nonetheless remained exempt from its turbulence: at no moment was there ever a serious threat that Stalin (or Mao) himself would be ritualistically deposed, treated as 'yesterday a king, today a beggar' - he was not the traditional Master, but the 'Lord of Misrule':

And who is our Lord of Misrule? Trump? Congress? Or all of them? 

NO

It is the reign of today's global capitalism which is the true LORD OF MISRULE!

ZIZEK

Friday, April 26, 2019

Thoughts on Slavoj Zizek and Jordan Peterson Debate

Zizek and Peterson Debate

Much can be said and unsaid about this debate. The tickets were expensive and scalped even higher, showing the Brandens were ultimately right and Ayn Rand not. People will pay for philosophy lectures.

The Intro listed the academic credentials beginning with Z who was immediately disgusted. The ritual of the accounting and awards of the institutions of the repressive states that have granted their seals of approval - read BRANDS - for the presence of Z and Peterson on this stage, before this audience, presented for the cameras and manufactured for the prestige and brownie points - gold stars? - that will be received by the producers. Slavoj Zizek of course is being pimped for Peterson, his western supporters and their institutions.

Peterson presents a formidable and fashionable image, carefully trimmed beard, hair, and I bet finger and toenails. A Simulacrum of the early T.S. Eliot Virginia Woolf describes in her diary.

I invited X - sorry forget? - for lunch. Do come. Eliot will be here in his four piece suit. 

And this is how Wyndham Lewis has painted his portrait as a young man in Ezra Pound's salon.
T.S.Eliot Portrait by Windham Lewis

The simulacrum also smacks of the great, brilliant and unwavering man of integrity, charm and charisma, the older Leo Steinberg, who said, "Psychoanalysis saved my life." Those of us who have experienced analysis - experienced is the only valid familiarity that really counts when one is talking, writing, thinking about analysis - have all been saved by it, by Freud, and all those already saved, in order to suffer ordinary normal unhappiness rather than neurotic misery.





The other statement among many Steinberg tossed off was that in art school he graduated with first prizes in all his exhibited senior work. "And I knew then that I would never be great." So he stopped, because anyone who has personally experienced the presence of Steinberg, knew that he wanted to be great. He was superb in seeing what he called the watershed moment - 

The Foucaldian CUT

 -  in a painter's life or in painting in particular. That moment when Jasper Johns first exhibited, Steinberg was disturbed. He didn't like the work but it disturbed him so he went back and he made the Foucauldian CUT that ended Abstract Expressionism with John's breakout work. He tells of this in his book Other Criteria. 



Anyway Peterson mimics the image of those two men: urbane,cultured, educated, an extremely attractive and articulate man of his time. Z is Z, rumpled T-Shirt, roughly groomed and shaved, and wildly gesturing. A man utterly himself, warts and all, who exhibits a mass and mess of thinking that defies all linearity, continuity, persuasive progressions, categorizations and lists. 

Ah those fascist ever present lists that delineate all knowledge for us.





Two Choruses from The Rock-Eliot

The endless cycle of idea and action,
Endless invention, endless experiment,
Brings knowledge of motion, but not of stillness;
Knowledge of speech, but not of silence;
Knowledge of words, and ignorance of the Word. p. 81

All our knowledge brings us nearer to our ignorance,
All our ignorance brings us nearer to death,
But nearness to death no nearer to GOD,
Where is the Life we have lost in living?
Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?
Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?
And Foucault:

Information is not knowledge. Knowledge is not knowing. Knowledge is made for CUTTING

Peterson is a clinical psychologist by training and he sees - saw? - patients. In the part of the debate about ethics and morality he uses the example of the patient that cannot stop wrong actions, but who has also formulated a goal for therapy. To reach his goal in therapy these obstructions to getting to the goal must be confronted. Peterson employs stopping the action of wrongness in one of small seemingly unimportant instances as a point of a beginning, an initial starting place.

A series of wrong actions? A repetition of wrong actions? And Peterson is using Wolpe and Goldstein's Behavior Therapy method of "thought stopping" turned into "action stopping" while Z has quoted Hegel, "To act is always to err," which Peterson seizes on.

The Owl of Minerva flies only at dusk.- Hegel

Here is where I might have intervened with, "If your patient repeatedly performs the 'wrong' action," reading through Simone Weil here, "What is the value of the opposite, the 'right action' and consider if the patient almost always knows the wrong action, then your patient almost always knows the 'right action' and avoids it. Does the patient know the right action or does your patient know the right action but does not know she knows?"

This is what would interest my knowing in just one of these exchanges lost in the morass of communication - discourse? - between Z and P.

The civilized discussion Peterson feels has taken place has occurred on the surface, yes. Because Zizek has not probed deeper to expose the contradictions, and Peterson's use of The Communist Manifesto - which was written for the workers in the factory - instead of a deep and thorough reading of Capital. The Grundrisse is not even mentioned. And Althusser's unsurpassed reading of Marx in his Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses of Reproduction.

The inadequate scholarship of Peterson, the Western debater, is visible, but only to those who have some grasp of the invisible scholarship here in this debate. The scholarship displayed by a celebrity figure the west has manufactured and produced to be pimped by the incomparable, irreplaceable, anti-xeroxible Slavoj Zizek.

The reader might also remind herself that the USSR employed many therapies, to its dissidents especially. Behavior Therapy based on Pavlov's Conditioned Response and Skinner's Operant Conditioning was especially honored. The only one that was banned, disallowed, punished was psychoanalysis.

So of course, that was the one I wanted most to experience since I was/am a negatively suggestible person. Did I write about Happiness and Capitalism here?

Friday, November 23, 2018

Auschwitz: A Heterotopia Space - A Reading Through Primo Levi

Words written in blood should not be read but learnt by heart. - Nietzsche


Auschwitz: A Heterotopia Space
A close reading of Primo Levi’s Survival In Auschwitz

Words written in blood are not to be read but learnt by heart. - Nietzsche

We are in fact convinced that no human experience is without meaning or unworthy of analysis, and that fundamental values, even if they are not positive, can be deduced from this particular world which we are describing.(p.87)


We would also like to consider that the Lager was pre-eminently a gigantic biological and social experiment. (p.87)


Anyone who has studied and been trained in statistics and experimental design who reads this from Levi, can see he is correct. Once you see it you can’t unsee it.


In my opinion Auschwitz - the Queen of the camps -  is a brilliant design for this experiment. Thousands of individuals, differing in age, condition, origin, language, culture and customs, are enclosed within barbed wire: there they live a regular, controlled life which is identical for all and inadequate to all needs, and which is more rigorous than any experimenter could have set up to establish what is essential and what adventitious to the conduct of the human animal in the struggle for life. (p.87)


Levi interprets: We believe, rather, that the only conclusion to be drawn is that in the face of driving necessity and physical disabilities many social habits and instincts are reduced to silence. (p.87) Levi goes on to speak of the Saved and the Drowned. Within the social these extremes are curtailed. Not excessive strength nor excessive weakness but in the Lager there are no curbs at all. There is no morality there, no good and no evil because there is no law in the Lager.


But in the Lager things are different: here the struggle to survive is without respite, because everyone is desperately and ferociously alone. If some Null Achtzehn vacillates, he will find no one to extend a helping hand; on the contrary, someone will knock him aside, because it is in no one’s interest that there will be one more musselman* dragging himself to work every day;

*This word Musselmann, I do not know why, was used by the old ones of the camp to describe the weak, the inept, those doomed to selection.(p.88) Viktor Frankl uses it in his Man’s Search For Meaning about his time in the Lager. Frankl was an existentialist psychiatrist, whose reading of the camps is existential. Levi’s reading is scientific and is more distant; he is also an observer as well as a slave.My reading of this word from Frankl first was its resonance with moslem and muslim..So I am reading it through Lacan and Francoise Dolto’s clinical work in Dominique as an unconscious hatred of the Other surfacing in this nickname. And Levi associates to the Other:

In the recipe book #SplendidSoups I found where mussemann (musselman) came from! It is a curry that is MUSLIM! A muslim curry! So calling the walking dead musselmann because he looked yellow and because of the prejudice of the Jews against Muslims was an intuitive association of mine and a correct one.

Many people - many nations - can find themselves holding, more or less wittingly, that ‘every stranger is an enemy’. For the most part this conviction lies deep down like some latent infection; it betrays itself only in random, disconnected acts, and does not lie at the base of a system of reason. But when this does come about, when the unspoken dogma becomes the major premise in a syllogism, then, at the end of the chain, there is the Lager. Here is the product of a conception of the world carried rigorously to its logical conclusion; so long as the conception subsists, the conclusion remains to threaten us.

The story of the death camps should be understood by everyone as a sinister alarm-signal. (p.9)

...and if someone, by a miracle of savage patience and cunning, finds a new method of avoiding the hardest work, a new art which yields him an ounce of bread, he will try to keep his method secret, and he will be esteemed and respected for this, and will derive from it an exclusive , personal benefit; he will become stronger and so will be feared, and who is feared is, ipso facto, a candidate for survival. (p.88)

Reading this last sentence through Foucault and his method of genealogy we see the bare beginnings of capitalism beginning in barter. Or with these Jewish slaves, is it a condition of the capitalistic social and economic culture they arrived from in all parts of Europe? Would indigenous people unexposed to capitalism but only to barter have behaved the same? Did the women behave this way in their confinement? At any rate the male Jews that survived, survived in a number of ways not different - except in extremes - from ordinary capitalist behavior. Only far more vicious and evil. To steal a bowl from a slave meant that he could get no soup until he got another. The only way for him to get another was to trade his bread ration for the bowl. He is starving, and this is his only choice. No one will lend him theirs even after finishing. And the slave must carry all his puny belongings with him wherever he goes or they will be stolen by another slave. This loss of one bowl of soup can easily result in a pound of flesh lost, which could lead to death.

Lacan says that with God present everything is permitted. With no God nothing is permitted. In the arbitrary environment of the Lager which prohibits all from any spontaneous, natural personal gesture. Only what is ordered is to be said, gestured, or done. An example:

Driven by thirst, I eyed a fine icicle outside the window, within hand’s reach, I opened the window and broke off the icicle but at once a large, heavy guard prowling outside brutally snatched it away from me. Warum? I asked him in my poor German. Hier ist kein warum (there is no why here), he replied, pushing me inside with a shove. (p.29)

The explanation is repugnant but simple: in this place everything is forbidden, not for hidden reasons, but because the camp has been created for that purpose. (p.29) And this is filling the definition of a Heterotopic Space as Foucault has conceptualized it.

This is also what Lacan means by The Big Other.

Levi rarely if at all uses the word inmate - he will in referring to the seriously ill at the end - for the Jews in the camps. Instead he always refers to them and himself as slaves. He is the only one I’ve read in this literature of the Holocaust who is that linguistically careful. Did translators not want to use slave/Jew together? The English translations use inmate. Quite a difference in meaning and resonance.

This is a controlled experiment composed of huge numbers of subjects. His title is Survival In Auschwitz. What does it take to survive the ultimate in human degradation on the road to death? It is micro fascism as Foucault has taught us to see. The minute everyday crushing of human response in every movement, gesture, word. The destruction of all rituals of social and civilized life, when everything is forbidden. So what is left? Homo Sacer - Bare Man - survival without living. Hobbes: Life was short and brutal.

What is it about the musselmen who are the walking dead? Frankl will say that at some point the man decided he no longer wanted to live and in a few days it became obvious. Shortly afterwards he was selected.

There is a memory I have from my reading and my impression is that it came from the book, This Way For The Gas, Ladies and Gentlemen. Borowski describes a transport that has just come in. As it unloads its human cargo he sees a beautiful young woman who stands in the doorway the moment before she will step down to the platform where the selections are being made. She tucks in her blouse and he notes that she is not disheveled, her hair appears combed, her clothes neat. She stops, looks and sees the slaves who are gathering the suitcases and immediately understands what awaits her, what her future will be. She goes right away to the line of the old, the sick, the mothers, the children and joins them. An instant knowing and refusal to participate in surviving like that. Of becoming that. The walking dead.

How varied their reasons for wanting to die? Knowing that to survive they must join in being thieves, preying on the new ones before they can size the situation up, becoming what one must become to survive. Maybe they just said no, no more of this. They were the huge majority in the camps, doomed to die or choosing to die. The first ones arriving in the camps did not experience the walking dead until they became them. They will notice them turning yellow in their faces and comment on them. The later arrivals see them on arrival and see their future. This is planned of course, the first scene of terror awaiting the new arrivals.

This is invisible violence. They are also a sign which can be read in a number of ways by the new ones. They have information that the originals did not have. A choice lays before them. They may shudder and then attempt to not let it happen to them or to give up immediately. To resist they will have to be willing to take on behaviors that will help them survive, but only if they are lucky and determined.

Levi describes the three types of survival methods. I will only consider the Jews here:
     
  1. The most traveled road , … is the Prominenz - Prominent. The Kapos, cooks, et al. The Jewish prominents form a sad and notable human phenomenon. In them converge present, past and atavistic sufferings, and the tradition of hostility towards the stranger makes of them monsters of asociality and insensitivity. (p.91) This man will displace and scapegoat on all those under him. If he doesn’t then they will appoint someone who will.

We are aware that this is very distant from the picture that is usually given of the oppressed who unite, if not in resistance, at least in suffering. We do not deny that this may be possible when oppression does not pass a certain limit, or perhaps when the oppressor, through inexperience or magnanimity, tolerates or favours it. . But we state that in our days, in all countries in which a foreign people have set foot as invaders, an analogous position of rivalry and hatred among the subjected has been brought about; and this, like many other human characteristics, could be experienced in the Lager in the light of particularly cruel evidence. (p.91)
  1. ...there is a vast category of prisoners, not initially favored by fate, who fight merely with their own strength to survive. One has to fight against the current; to battle every day and every hour against exhaustion, hunger, cold, and the resulting inertia; to resist enemies and have no pity for rivals; to sharpen one’s wits, build up one’s patience, strengthen one’s will power. Or else, to throttle all dignity and kill all conscience, to climb down into the arena as a beast against other beasts, to let oneself be guided by those unsuspected subterranean forces which sustain families and individuals in cruel times. (p.92)
  2. Elias the dwarf is in the third category. He is stronger, resourceful, sly,  and he thrives. Because he is insane. He is the most adaptable, the human type most suited  to this way of living. On the outside he will be confined to the fringes...in a prison or lunatic asylum. But here in the Lager there are no criminals or madmen; no criminals because there is no moral law to contravene, no madmen because we are wholly devoid of free will, as our every action is, in time and place, the only conceivable one.  ...Elias, as far as we could judge from outside, and as far as the phrase can have  meaning was probably a happy person. For those who have no sound inner resources, for those who do not know how to draw from their own consciences sufficient force to cling to life, the only road to salvation leads to Elias:  to insanity and to deceitful bestiality. All the other roads are dead ends. (p.98)

Levi will go on to tell us of Henri, who on the other hand, is eminently civilized and sane, and possesses a complete and organic theory on the ways to survive in Lager. He is  only twenty-two, he is extremely intelligent, speaks French, German, English and Russian,  has an excellent scientific and classical culture. According to Henri’s theory, there are three methods open to man to escape extermination which still allow him to retain the name of man: organization, pity and theft. He himself practices all three. (p.98)


The Soviet Union and Israel refused to publish his writings on Auschwitz. Israel received masses of survivors. People who had done what they did to survive. There is no way to unknow what you did and did to others to get any slight advantage that would enable you to survive. These people composed a huge demographic in Israel, their rage and guilt was fed to their children and grandchildren. Evil trickles down unto the seventh generation. God is conservative in this estimate. The Palestinians are enduring this displacement today, this Identification with the Aggressor. In Israel there were so very many. Those who entered the diaspora were absorbed and without political power to do the same.

Tadeusz Borowski. This Way For the Gas, Ladies and Gentlemen
Francoise Dolto. Dominique: Analysis of an Adolescent
Viktor Frankl. Man’s Search for Meaning
Michel Foucault. The Order of Things
Jacques Lacan. Ecrits.
Primo Levi. Survival In Auschwitz
Nietzsche. Thus Spake Zarathustra