The Placebo of Simulacra

At some point, everyone experiences difficulty, an issue at hand, a struggle which they hope to overcome. These struggles are as varied as the stars, and may take the best part of one’s life to play out; many will not succeed. One of the greatest struggles facing so many people today is developing nurturing, fruitful relationships grounded upon honesty and mutual respect. Such enriching associations have become increasingly rare as life itself has become almost absolutely commoditised into a one-size-fits-all, third-party-designed, constructed mush that calls itself ‘community’, while actually choking the roots of the older, organic communities that grew out of the mutual aid that characterises so much of nature. As the broad mass of people they have become dependent upon faceless, apparitional institutions called states (or, to use their more ancient, monstrous name: Leviathans), they no longer need to relate to others in order to be given their daily bread or to have their trespasses forgiven.

The desire to relate and create real communities has not wholly dissipated but instead continues to rumble underneath the concrete of constructed relations. But the desire is rarely – if ever – manifested in a rationally-chosen act that leads to real emancipation. Why? 

Masking the Referent

Among the great driving forces of a mass ideological movement is the desire to mask the referent. By ‘the referent’ I refer to the desires and goals of referent individuals who head up the lead hierarchy of such a movement. In an age where individual referent ambitions are for the most part derided, where self-interest is seen as ‘base’, ‘lowly’ and altogether without virtue, social movements which seek to gain power have used great abstractions to mask the referent self-interests of their leadership.

The referent may be masked in any number of cloaks, cut from different ideological cloths, yet all serving the same purpose. Whether it’s ‘the nation’, ‘the class’, ‘the state’, ‘nature’ or even ‘the individual’ as an essential platonic form, various abstractions serve the purpose of masking the referent. Indeed, in many situations of ideological struggle it is imagined characteristics of the mask that causes the greatest deal of disagreement between rival positions. While the leadership seek to convince both their selves and their followers of lofty, ‘higher’ motives other than pure self-interest, they must also unmask the referent of their ideological opponents, deriding them as self-interested, short-sighted reactionaries. This leads to a game of lies that has become deeply embedded into politics, and found most profoundly among the more explicitly ideological groups.

Political leaders, corruption and triangulation

Reblogged from Consentient:

Contrary to popular belief, the differences in political behaviour of 'leaders' of different times and places are far smaller than their similarities. An increasing number of scholars are beginning to view such people as likely psychopaths, and I would argue that when you look at the close details of their lives, that it's very hard to argue that any of them are sane and reasonable.

Read more… 809 more words

Towards Libertarian Poststructuralism

Amongst most libertarian groups in the United States, certain concepts have been met not with open arms but outright hostility. Concerned not with the actual content of these ideas, the reaction against them has mostly been fed by an antipathy towards their place of origin. I refer here to the rift between the tradition of ‘Continental’ Philosophy and much of the Anglo-American ‘Classical’ and ‘Analytic’ traditions. Over the past few decades, the segmentation of these traditions into almost entirely separate philosophical pantheons has led to a great deal of ill-will betwixt those who endorse these rather different approaches. This piece will not concern itself with the history and particularities of the disagreement – so much has already been written of that. It will rather refer to ‘American Libertarians’, and for the most part their general ignorance of continental philosophy and the benefits of it, were they to explore post-structuralist ideas.

In the United States, Continental Philosophy and the post-structuralist approach has not been wholly dismissed. Much of the American ‘left’ has embraced it – seeing it as providing a powerful critique of the incumbent liberal democratic paradigm. Indeed, it is ironically helped by a general dichotomous narrative held consciously or unconsciously by many American leftists, that of “American bad, non-American good”. This is the mirror image of the narrative encountered amongst many constitutionalists on which I have written about before. Understandably, the cosiness of elements of the American political left with continental philosophy has alarmed much of the conservative right-wing, and this distrust and ‘defensive ignorance’ is found even among the more bohemian elements of American Libertariandom.

Open letter to online libertarians - part 2 - the distilled points

Reblogged from Consentient:

Some of you asked for this, so here you are. This is my beef with you lot, in general.

1. You are concerned with things that are not even real. You waste a huge amount of time swapping abstractions with each other. This is not only a waste of time in itself but it affects the way you view any given issue.

Read more… 599 more words

The Oscars, spectacle, power, and the media-political complex

Reblogged from Consentient:

By any standard, the 85th Academy Awards must surely rank as the most spectacular awards ceremony ever. After reading Entito Sovrano's recent essay on The Spectacle, and after having him visit me at my home and join me in watching part of the Oscars, I thought I would offer my thoughts on the complicated yet crucial subject of spectacle and the media.

Read more… 1,573 more words

Spectacle, Substance & The Tripartite Self

The Tripartite Self

Contemporary western society is dominated by spectacle. This has been the case for a long time and, judging by its present dominance, appears set to remain so for the forseeable future. Guy Debord brought this concept to the forefront of radical social analysis in the 1960s, but much has changed (and worsened) since then, and I doubt even he could have foreseen the developments that have followed.

Particularly since the 1990s and the development of the internet and mass instant communication protocols, the spectacle has developed into an even more absurd and oppressive state of dominance; and while there had existed for centuries iconic figures that were well-known, and whom stood out from the masses, the increases in the power of communications technology that occurred during the 20th century have accelerated – and at the same time broadened – what has become known as ‘celebrity culture’. But since we cannot explain culture purely as a result of technology, this begs the question: what ethological processes are at work behind this trend?

In recent times, ‘celebrity culture’ – the adoration, ‘celebration’ and even worship of those individuals considered (by programmers) worthy of mass broadcast – has moved into a new realm of absurdity. There now appears to be a plethora of ‘celebrities’ who are celebrated for no other reason other than they ‘are’ celebrities. Having been thrust into the spectacle without reason – whether by opportunism (e.g. a prostitute ‘caught’ servicing another celebrity decides to take advantage of the publicity and sell herself as a product) or by the more usual means of vacuous ‘talent shows’ – they simply remain there.

This is spectacle in its purest form – new developments in the ‘narrative’ of the spectacle are derived (or recycled) from previous elements of the spectacle itself. Indeed it is no longer so much the abilities of the celebrated persons that are lauded as it is their ‘platonic selves’: the images of them that are pumped through the veins of the media and dripped into the mouths of those in a mindless state of open-mouthed awe.

Furthermore, it is not so much what the individual in question does (in terms of career, vocation or activity) but rather the mundane ‘private’ – or ‘real’ – life of the person which garners interest from the public and cements the dominance of spectacle. This move towards the popularity of ‘reality’ derives from a desire not for spectacle but to experience The Real: authentic life outside of the process of spectacle. This trend in the motivations of the public is actually encouraging because it demonstrates the beginnings of discontent with pure spectacle. However, as an immune response within the paradigm of the spectacle, what is presented to satiate the desire for The Real is spectacular ‘reality’ – a commoditisation and further expansion of the spectacle, as I shall explain.