The Situationist List

Re: the left jab preceding the right jab: not dress-rehearsal, but last act

From: "Andrew oommen" <andrewomm-AT-gmail.com>
Date: 24 Apr 2008 19:27:00 UTC   (12:27:00 PM in author's locale)
To: Situationist <situationist-AT-lists.nothingness.org>

View as plaintext

i really think that this discussion has lost its point. Mr. Gray, you have diverted this issue into one of religion. I only am objecting to the generalization of every Muslim anywhere raping 9 year olds and such. this is not the case. why would this be productive? how can this be anything but a slap in the face to people who would or might start to understand your real message? This is the secondary point to this discussion. i would much appreciate you treating me as an equal as opposed to some religious paranoid. If you could come down from what ever higher state you are not in, you would see my criticism as an attack on your method of argumentation. your fundamental message may be true, but i haven't contested that. you say religion sucks, i haven't disagreed. i do oppose your equally inhumane treatment of all Muslims. think about the women in those videos getting stoned; did they choose a religion knowing they would be beat to death? its not their fault that they don't have the luxury that we do to escape what ever religiously illusive situation we find ourselves in. In this case, i think your generalization excludes the women who have not choice but Islam and are torture for that. That is what i mean when i said you were tolerant only insofar that you were intolerant. I don't see this as anything different from religious illusion. Your totalizing belief/critique ends abruptly because it can't cope with the differences in perspectives. That's why i asked for a much more deeper questioning of why. the narrative of the immigrant, getting back to the first topic, is important for Bardot because it is an issue she has raise in a larger context, that of capital, but further to domination and exploitation. Additionally, i think that your total critique isn't what is necessary for change, as is explained above. I also would say that not every religious teaching is incorrect necessarily. sure, thinking of heaven and god might alienate oneself, but the concept "thou shall not kill" or Zakaat isn't bad. i think people shouldn't kill and people who have should give plentifully to those without. I think this comes to mind because the lesson of religious teaching outside of any metaphysical pandering is that we should affirm life or critique ought to affirm, not simply negate. You can't just be tolerant while being intolerant. Your critique has to go further.

On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 10:41 AM, Christopher Gray <rasputin-AT-teleport.com">rasputin-AT-teleport.com> wrote:

It amazes me that no one ever reads either what I suggest or pages I suggest on my own web site(s). I DO rail against all. What do you think my references to "the triad of Middle East religions" is all about. What do you think my references to books by James DeMeo and Bruce Lerro are about?! They are comprehensive studies, not articles. Educate yourself with real books not tv generation "cyber-truths".

Please stop using false accusations to cover for Islam. That was called collaboration in Russia, Germany, and other occupied territories. The triad religions (as well as Sainism, Buddhism, and Hinduism) all suck the life out of human experience. They all justify hierarchy. Islam just does it more obsessively and impolitely than the rest. Is that bad or good? Who cares! Again, they all do it BECAUSE reification is a reproducible human malady!

Now please, please read more and re-present less!!!!!! That re-presentation process is called spectacularizing, and it ought to be the first thing used on this list that is not tolerated. Hell, hasn't anyone read a Situationist text besides that of Reverend Debord (e.g., Vaneigem) at all here?!

Come on. Be more than an internet predator or spectator; it's that synthesizing, going beyond, and implementing/intervening zone wherein the future will be created, if we are to have one….

best wishes,
chris

Maxwell Despard wrote:
Why focus on Islam? Why not rail against Christianity? Rail against patriarchy everywhere, not just in the religion that the PTB want us to fear. Unless you're detourning neo-con propaganda for some strange personal irony, you're missing the point.

Oh, and there's the part about your gross generalizations, raging arrogance, and general theme of saying stupid shit. God sucks. That's awesome. Move on.

On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 1:26 PM, Christopher Gray <rasputin-AT-teleport.com" onclick="return newWindow(this.href);">rasputin-AT-teleport.com> wrote:

You see, the difference between myself and the Middle Eastern triad of religious types is basic. If we don't know each other I approach. You and those reptilian beliefs, on the other hand, "stay away". When not raping 9-year-olds one has to be wary of one's own ass. They are a hording and repugnant tradition, refusing to be open to the fact that "god/Allah/Jahweh" (or whatever the supreme alienated power is called by the bowing-and-scraping) is a prick who screwed them royally in the ass with desertification and a bloated sebnse of importance in the universe. They're afraid of his shadow and cower in small exclusive groups awaiting their next inevitable spanking. Good dogs in slavery. But bad dogs at heart. I prefer the Bakunin assessment: if God existed it would be necessary to overthrow him.

Enough said on this "who's who in the world of fantastic enslavement schemes" topic as one always finds the invasion and imperial topic of organized fear (er, I mean religion) invading everywhere, because in spite of its consecrated reluctance to stand on its own alienated feet, it loves company (er, miserable company that cowers as it does). It must spread its seed of inauthenticity and fatalism by raping the whole of Earth and the universe. Such duty deserves to get fucked in the ass until it can't perform pimping tricks for deities any longer.

As Vaniegem staes in "Contributions to The Revolutionary Struggle, Intended To Be Discussed, Corrected, And Principally, Put Into Practice Without Delay" at <http://library.nothingness.org/articles/SI/en/display/121>:

                                  ________________________________________________

Has it ever happened that you spat on a passing priest? Or wanted to burn down a church, chapel, mosque or synagogue? If so you have come to realise that.

Religion is the opium of the oppressed.

All that is religious calls for sacrifices. Anything or anybody (militants, for example) that calls for sacrifices to be made, is religious.

Religion is the universal model for falsehood, for the overthrow of the real for the benefit of the mythical world which will, once it has been stripped of its sanctity, be the spectacle of everyday life.

The commodity system de-sanctifies: it destroys the religious spirit and holds its gadgetry (the Popes,Korans, Bibles, and crucifixes) up to ridicule… but at the same time it is careful to retain religion as a lasting incitement, preferral to the apparent over the real, suffering over pleasure, spectacle over experience, submission over freedom, the ruling system over our passions. The spectacle is the new religion and culture its critical spirit.

Religious symbols testify to the lasting mistrust which hierarchical regimes down through the ages have harboured towards men. Take the example of Christ alone… Leaders in the field of marketing products of divinity, the Christian churches have bowed to the pressures of the commodity system and put on a display of contortionism which will not cease until their trademark, the chameleon-like Jesus, has been discarded entirety. Son of God, son of a whore, son of the virgin, worker of miracles and maker of loaves, militant and steward, pederast and puritan accuser and accused, convict and astronaut… no role is outside the range of this amazing puppet figure. He has been a hawker of suffering, waiter dispensing favours… he has been a sansculotte and socialist, a fascist and anti-fascist, a stalinist and barbudo, a Reichian and anarchist. He has marched on every side under every flag; he has been in every self-doubt and stood at both ends of the lash, and present at most executions where he has held the hand both of the executioner and of the executioner's victim. He has his place in police-station and prison and school, brothel and barrack, department store and guerilla-held territory. He has been used as a pendant and dipstick, as a scarecrow standing guard over the resting dead and the kneeling living; he has been used as torment and short rations: and once the hawkers of the blessed foreskins have rehabilitated sin as a commercial proposition he will serve as a dildo. Poor old Mahomet and Buddha and Confucious… sad symbols of rival firms lacking in push and imagination… Jesus outbids them on every front. Jesus Christ… superdrug and superstar… all the images of the man who sold out to God, caught up in the hard sell of the Godhead. The most accomplished symbol of man as the universal commodity is the scrotum of the great father figure staked out on 3 pins and made into an amulet.

So you see, already you are fighting, consciously or otherwise, for a society in which the organisation of suffering will have vanished together with its compensations and where each individual being his own master, the notion of God will have no meaning. And above all, a society where the problems of genuine experience and of passions in need of satisfaction will at last take precedence over the problems of proxy living and of passions which have to be repressed.
                                  ________________________________________________

If you cannot get behind this I suggest trying to synthesize where you are and it…. If that doesn't help, try three weeks non-stop sex (therapy) with an emancipated wo/man your own age. Whips, hair shirts, throat-slitting, diapers, s/m, machete slaughters, b/d, exclusions of any that would join in, or other surrogate [self-/other-]sacrificing will only deaden the experience of living; timeouts for food/water/bathing/speaking are part of the experience. ;-)

There's more to "situationist" than joining a list… and there's less to "religion" than invading another.

best,
chris

Andrew oommen wrote:

you don't know me, so keep your ass away.

2008/4/23 richard haden <richard_haden-AT-yahoo.com" onclick="return newWindow(this.href);">richard_haden-AT-yahoo.com>:

Ooman of the OH>>MAN tribe,

   Bare with me while I try to add a little light on the subject (Perhaps in a scatological sense— a little Sepia instead)

   Perhaps it is with my ass or brown eye that I spot and judge thee a follower of the worlds great religions—as cultural artfact of tolerance. I tolerate and console those who wish merely to survive and not live…but in their silence I occupy a grater space of freedom. The Christian and Muslim Religions, by far the least interesting of his or her stories, managed back in the day, through a newly bartering publicist , a lobbying campaign, any corporate tobacco CEO would admire—to launch an improved, streamlined myth to rule the peasantry—to better subjugate, circumscribe and repress with there pre-Birkenstock(ian) sandal. To re-institutionalize and Market a vehicle of greater manipulate-able religious nicotine like substance…To the astonishment of conscience minds (minds eye) we today are constantly reminded of how truly active is the pursuit of that great "Darwin Award". http://www.darwinawards.com/

   Oh so easy to atomize through the medium of Ka-Boom; a view of the world how ever it is after the fact.

   I am still leaning towards a Univocity or a nominalistic vectoring to avoid the stains. I look for the rot on the root of ….inside. http://users.rcn.com/bmetcalf.ma.ultranet/What%20is%20Univocity.htm If we want to understand Deleuze's philosophy, it is important to come to terms with his Spinozist Univocity. Or Or that the genus (Bi Pedal) Species (Things with wings that look anthropomorphic) are substance abusing, homeomorhphic, delusions.

Something like that

Richard Haden

——- Original Message ——
From: Andrew oommen <andrewomm-AT-gmail.com" onclick="return newWindow(this.href);">andrewomm-AT-gmail.com>
To: Situationist <situationist-AT-lists.nothingness.org" onclick="return newWindow(this.href);">situationist-AT-lists.nothingness.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 12:51:52 AM
Subject: Re: the left jab preceding the right jab: not dress-rehearsal, but last act

You are not arguing with anyone but yourself. none of this disproves any point from before. you are wrong.
For your ignorance, i point you to Reza Aslan, who provides two translations of the same passage from the Koran.

"Men are the support of women [qawwamuna 'ala an-nisa] as God gives some more means than others, and because they spend of their wealth (to provide for them)…. As for women you feel are averse, talk to them suasively; then leave them alone in bed (without molesting them) and go to bed with them (when they are willing).

Men are in charge of women, because Allah has made some of them excel the others, and because they spend some of their wealth… And for those [women] that you fear might rebel, admonish them and abandon them in their beds and beat them [adribuhunna]" (No God but God, pg 69-70) (all authors original notes).

Clearly people interpret different things. Your authors take one extremist translation and call it a pillar holding up the entire religion. This author looks at all sides and looks at its contextual history, not its political "idiocracy" that has existed in Western culture.
Concedingly religion is not the solution to the worlds problems, but nonetheless, it is not this savage beast you paint it as. Your ignorance is so blatant that you don't answer the real arguments i make against your position. i say you are intolerant while calling for tolerance (terrorizing in the name of democracy, etc.). i say that your game theory is antihuman (like capital). i also argue you dont know anything about totalizing critiques (deleuze, debord, etc.). you have only made yourself look like an ass. stop beating your head against the wall and go outside to real a book, because none of these online sources will help you deal with you pathology.

On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 8:15 PM, Christopher Gray <rasputin-AT-teleport.com" onclick="return newWindow(this.href);">rasputin-AT-teleport.com> wrote:

It is Islam, probably be better named "Abyslam". Read the tenets and core. The fundamentalists are not "bad examples" of the religion, nut its "best examples". Fortified reification is not warm'n'fuzzy; it's an abomination of inverted humanness, and casts a murderous shadow o'er authentic living. The triad of reifications from the Middle East are co-dependently wretched at their very common core. They seethed forth from a desertified human geography such that sacrifice, scarcity, hording, and rigid hierarchy permeate them all to varying degrees. They are the practice of death culture.

—
Maxwell Despard
founder, HRPoets
http://mdespard.googlepages.com/