more

Book/DRAFT.md

@@ -639,4 +639,266 @@ Some might say that, prior to the most pronounced proliferation of Queer Theory,
 
 But why do we avoid considering that as significant in many areas of popular and academic discourse?
 
-Because of the goals of feminism, or any view which utilizes Marxist Critical Analysis -> it an't stop at universal application of liberal principles. No, it stands against Liberalism and it does so as its fundamental position. That is to say, that which defines it fundamentally makes it opposed to Liberalism.
+Because of the goals of feminism, or any view which utilizes Marxist Critical Analysis -> it an't stop at universal application of liberal principles. No, it stands against Liberalism and it does so as its fundamental position. That is to say, that which defines it fundamentally makes it opposed to Liberalism.
+
+##### All Collectivism is Anti-Liberal
+That should be elaborated upon, because it is quite a statement to say that the goal of something is the destruction of liberalism, but I find it difficult to not reach this conclusion for the same reason I gave in my criticism of every other form of collectivism that I have commented on.
+
+The work of collectivism is never done.
+
+Even if every law written and every policy enacted is done in such a way as to not permit the preferred treatment of any person classified along some identifiable trait (other than, say, being a criminal with a history of murder and pedophilia - and even such people have laws they can refer to in order to avoid being discriminated gainst), it can still never be enough and any lingering discontent about anything in the life and experience of any person who has found a culturally familiar (or even obscure) stereotype that they believe they can plausibly declare themselves as being associated with as part or the whole of their identity can be used as fodder to decry their having been oppressed by a villain or group of villains whose identity they can perceive as their other.
+
+And since they have a path to invoking the force of the state, even as a general understanding before even having had their own instance of alleged oppression evaluated by the state's apparatuses which were provisioned to serve as infrastructure dedicated for this very situation, they will always have the comfort of knowing they could remove any doubt about their conduct or placement and find a credible piece of universally accepted evidence in the form of the state's own participation and declarations.
+
+With rule by law by a state which presents as the manifestation of divinity in the concrete form tangible to us, and as our superordinate entity which grants us life, rights, nobility and morality, those who chose to reify a mythos by proclaiming an identity which proves the mythology and legitimacy of not just the stated goal, but the understanding that the goal has not been reached (or else I wouldn't have this identity, and we wouldn't even know what that identity is).
+
+##### It's Feminism When We Want
+If it's the lense of feminism then it's the implicit understanding that, and this has been stated so many times before (but it will always be the issue, because this pertains to the essence of this way of thinking), the outcome will always be unsatisfactory and will always prove that oppression exists in teh exact form described by Critical Theorists. (in this case, critical feminist theorists), and the moment this is championed by a state government in the moment the state begins, if even only slowly, its march to totalitarianism.
+
+Any promise or claim of liberalism premised under the need for social transformation is always a lie because transformation is always a demand for radical revolution, and radical revolutionary means the laws don't work. It means that processes addressing and solutions to certain problems haven't been working and need to be replaced or eliminated.
+
+What are some things which feminism finds have not been addressed?
+- Wage Gap (in ever more confined forms of quantification which ignore so much to the contrary)
+- Violence against women (any number of things beyond physical violence by man vs woman are construed as this, and it has even expanded to mean violence of men against men)
+- Hegemonic imposition of any kind
+  - women can be not women - whaT IS a woman?
+  - expectations about how to live, feel, present and behave
+
+As we can see, these scopes can include all sorts of phenomena, such as stating that wars causing death to men are ultimately violence against women. A nation's inadequate GDP growth or high inflation, male suicide, and so on are against women. Yet more obvious, still, how some of these new concerns are actually queer theory, but which get presented as that of feminism, or intersectionality. Tracing the lineage of queer theory to feminism is also not very hard, as we can look towards any number of seminal works of queer scholarship and see that they came from people who considered and still consider themselves to be feminists.
+
+#### Queering
+Lastly, is the basic premise of gender non-conformity and, more accurately, queering. If Simone de Beauvoir is correct in her ground-breaking statement "a woman is not born, but becomes" ("une femme n'est pas nee, mais devien"), then we have before us the instantiation of queer, even before its formality.
+
+#### Queer as Ultimate Negation
+To come to be what you are on your own terms sounds like a brave, liberated, justified aspiration for anyone. Indeed, I see no reason why everyone shouldn't want to exist as they do under the assumption that they are creating meaning and a destiny for themselves and that their capacity to endeavour to do this aids us all in attaining the same - a capacity that I'd hope we should all attain and that, as a point of ethics and morality, we should all be expected to be afforded the freedom to pursue.
+
+But this isn't about your freedom to pursue meaning. This is instead the presupposing of a circumstance whereby your freedom to pursue is secondary and emerges as a condition from the direct targets of a process which is assigned to the purpose, ostensibly, of people pursuing their own meaning, but is actually a process of modifying all others who are not this person as a precondition to their capacity to find meaning in their own life.
+
+It is not a positive encouragement to do something in particular so much as a threatening arsenal of methods of negation which must remove any expression from humans and human society which could otherwise be theorized to interfere with one's capacity to imagine themselves differently from: how they perceive themselves and how it is possible for them to be perceived by others.
+
+And how do people perceive themselves? How do we evaluate and confirm that they perceive themselves in some way? Is their perception of self a genuine one? An objective one? Or just a fantastical one?
+
+Well, it isn't even so much that the manner in which one self-perceives is liable to be a fantasy, but that the notion that we could have any insight into one's self-perception, especially to such an end that we could know whether they self-perceive correctly, or even to their satisfaction, is a fantasy. For a state apparatus to be used for such a purpose is the enshrining in law a civilizational right to pursue fantasies, and this on its own is not even something intelligible.
+
+But it gets much worse than that because, in the cult, everything which comes into Being is done so collectively. They tell you over and over that they believe in the collective and that things which are have been made as such through the interpretation and confirmation of the collective. Whether this is simply the socialistic comment of "you didn't build that", or the Marxist plight of man being able to create unburdened by conditions beset and coloured by other entities within the same system, or whether the lived experience and ways of knowing are the result of structural determinism, we can see that every system of Marxist thought and collectivism as a whole depends entirely on ensuring that the conditions are sanitized and made conducive to one's true state of being by ensuring that there are no expressions which serve as evidence that the conditions have not yet been brought to the point where one's freedom to perceive has been granted.
+
+##### Controlled Expressions
+So, as we again see, it is the expressions themselves which must be controlled, which serve as evidence, and which are the goal of these cults. When the expressions are perfect, uncontaminated, without conflict, and these expressions have led us to liberation.
+
+But, then, which expressions are these? Well they are the perfected ones and they resonate in an environment devoid of any other contradictory expression. And the path of changes necessary for these expressions is made to be traversed not through knowing what the eventual perfect expression will be, but by ensuring the false expressions which prevent others from achieving capacity for free expression are not disseminated.
+
+It is a system for suppressing expression with the faith that it leads to our perfected expression. But the process of perfecting expression -> the methods used in that process - are not one of formulating a more perfect expression. On the contrary, though expressions are transmitted, they are constructed vis-a-vis the particular expression against which it seeks to be brought into conflict with. Like a fully-differentiated IgG antibody marking a particular undesired cell for destruction, the tactical expression targets the particular expression deemed to be operating within the system to prevent, suppress, contaminate, or otherwise hinder the true and most righteous expression of species or Universe.
+
+It isn't just usually negation; it is negation, and only ever negation. Why? Why is that? Because the opposite is the thing which intends to do something. In this case, it just so happens that the thing it intends to do is to consolidate a specific expression).
+
+#### It's Not an Ism
+< Commentary on Denis Rancourt's Critique on the Origins of Wokeism >
+
+There is a good pushback on the allegation that some or much of the ever-increasing social strife afflicting human society should be associated with terms like communism or Marxism because labeling these phenomena will lead (and has led) to the following:
+- Coercion by propaganda campaigns to vilify some type of socio-political object, entity, state, and so forth (just noise from war and merch towards totalitarianism)
+- fail to recognize that social hierarchies become corrupted and that choosing the right ism doesn't address this
+
+Remember why we bother -> it's because the death and destruction which occurred in the name of something may have been better described through the biological mechanisms, and maybe a physical mechanism at the level of society and the world, but that the horrors are revered and it's not just a matter of explaining a mechanism we all relate to, but in relating the great horror of fantastic society with backwards ideas, but that we are prone.
+
+"They want to say these are a form of extreme thinking and that the severity of the thinking is measured?"
+
+But it is very much a universal and human way of thinking and the historical significance in demonstrating the record of atrocities that have been borne of those ways of thinking. We will need to break down the details because we want to make it clear that it is religious thinking.
+
+#### The Health of Humanity
+It isn't only the case that systems become weak and people die. Because the systems in question are composed of humans, and so if we are saying the system is unhealthy without making this also a question of whether particular human are themselves unhealthy, or whether some are, or whether participating in activities of (cap society?) ..
+
+It isn't just the case of whether those are organic systems that become weak and that people died. Those systems are composed of humans, and so then the questions begin to arise:
+- what is the health of all humans, average human, median
+- what is the proportional impact of the humans whose health most deviates from the median
+- does some change from some humans necessarily affect all humans?
+- is there such a thing as health of relations which is, to any degree, notably separate from the the health of the humans?
+
+I assume that the other way of looking at human health in social systems is that the interaction and context of the human towards the system confers the biologically observed health of the human.
+
+But this becomes another question of the infinite regress. That is, do we imagine the root indulging factor universally relevant as only extant per a threshold of participants, or is it something we could find in each our individual experience? Yes, these pathologies are socio-politically active and intelligible, and yes the participants are exhibiting psychopathological traits, but that is something otherwise considered as humans susceptible to the ideology, or humans affected by ideology, but what about pathology without social manipulation? One's manipulation of self?
+
+#### The Trick of Reality
+We clearly play tricks on ourselves, so why not begin with such scope before complicating it with others and imagining that the phenomena begin there? Yes, it may be more pronounced and even more observable, but we should strive to distinguish the precise point at which the behaviour might emerge, and I contend that it must be something affecting us universally, because it emerges individually.
+
+What we are dealing with, not just some political system, or social doctrine, but with individual human perception which seeks to:
+- simplify the perceptual frame / processing thereof
+- maximizing the perception of one's metaphsyical freedom
+  - possibly through gnostic association which contends and expresses one's imprisonment, but as a demand for a condition of freedom which transcends all possible conception of freedom
+  - the limit to freedom is not only raised, but made undefinable, because any physical laws of the construct of reality may be replaced
+  - even insofar as ignoring selected factors while otherwise supposing that the construct is similar to what is already otherwise presented
+
+We seek to blur our vision of reality all the time, and in ever innocuous ways not simply to mystify ourselves, but even as a consequence of our ability to abstract and speculate being balanced against our requirement of time management for sanity and survival. We can't possibly know everything about anything at any time ever,and yet we retain our ability to second-guess our choices and our reasoning, such as whether we exercise due diligence, or when we downplay the necessity of learning a particular detail and then also give thought to the range of impacts that are actually associated with it.
+
+Children necessarily must mitigate their highly dynamic and chaotic mood shifts while responding to and attempting to circumvent, overcome and adjudicate authority on mediums the most formalized of which likely being a barely understood or commanded spoken language.
+
+In undertaking, if even reflexively or simply in reactance to environmental stimuli, the task of working out and negotiating, both with interlocutor and with themselves. They do this while uncovering sudden desires as a cognitive connection is made to some perceived potential and the nature of reality both depends on and shifts in tandem with the structure of reality pertaining to the condition surrounding that potential.
+
+That is, the pursuit of the potential becomes highly informative not just in terms of what social and human norms are, but the basis for truth and the control one has over reality as it unfolds to them - as one masters their ability to have reality yield what one desires. We may have to do a thought experiment.
+
+#### Experiment
+A toddler desires a treat? or something through which semblance of important living is taking place. Emotional reaction, visceral over-exaggerated -> coming into conflict defining life purpose and the actualization of self -> but without that sophistication -> it is simply the level of basic needs and one cannot fathom a requirement of any other kind more important to validate one's purpose and existence.
+
+The other aspect of the modern, evolved and instantiated sociopolitical weapons for psycho-social manipulation into a collectivist theology embodying the spirit of Marxist critical consciousness is our most recent global crisis affecting every country on their own home turf: Covidism
+
+## Intermission
+### Covidism
+"What do you mean, covidism? Shouldn't you be calling it covidians (wouldn't participants in covidism be covidians? Why aren't we calling the mcovidists?)"
+
+## Ideas vs Players
+Let's back up! What sort of players are involved here? Let's summarize from others so we know if we need to be more concerned with the players or with the ideas themselves.
+
+Areas: Race, Queer, Covidism, Sustainability, Decolonization.
+
+We briefly examine these to see if they are worthy of being focused on and whether their players are more to blame than the ideas.
+
+### Race
+#### Players
+- Everyone/No one
+- Politicians
+- Academia
+- Church
+- Philosophizers
+- Legal Theorists
+
+#### Info
+Politicians may not be true believers, but everyone can be made to be holy or evil based on wrongthink and minds can be read based on history.
+
+Professionals wield means of gameifying or gaining advantages in an already gameified professional environment and this isn't because of quotas -> they don't need to represent a group to gain that advantage (though sometimes it can help).
+
+Academia: similar to professionals, but more foundational to what is considered legitimate knowledge or information.
+
+The thing about race is that it is combined with Marxist critical analysis to make a human perception - an instance of life seeking truth and intelligent expression, sense of world and self and others - all as a miraculously flexible and dynamic faculty of contemplation - all inadmissible, but yet worse than that because one is judged on the basis of the very genetic sequence which governs this, in the most direct and immediate way for the very base material at the level of organization such for them to have a composition - the sequence as serializable form in the most arbitrary of representation almost as though it were more real than you, your mind, your emotion and so forth.
+
+And all that, but with the lineage of what procreated antecedently.
+
+##### Anteceding Procreation
+A fragile chain of nearly-rejected deceivers who faked and fooled more noble beings into allowing the mistaken experiments of ancient history to remain in existence. They were all mistakes whose greatest achievement is having fooled someone log enough to tame and delay their disgust which likely still was expressed at a later time.
+
+This can be wondered about every procreative event, as there is no further gate to pass before being incorporated into the eternal specification of the evolved species as the current ongoing propagation of the life form.
+
+Some additions by force, others by mistake or failed application of diligence; one wonders if ever there have been legitimate, deserved, honourable additions at all. If not, then it truly is a vulgar measure of the degree to which a particular specimen is magnificent, or at least not repulsive.
+
+And then, to the speculator - are you magnificent? If not truly so, then one must be repulsive.
+
+If ever we come to be categorizing ourselves along a trait somehow informed by heredity, we necessarily raise up the sentiment of genetic judgment which insists nothing of you to be considered except the repulsiveness of your pathetic and incorrectly propagated material form. How foul.
+
+On the balance of these concerns against the critique in favour of dismissal, on the basis that such a category may be:
+- destined to be eliminated before others (melting pot?)
+- too arbitrary or difficult to define
+- dehumanizing (duh)
+- not modern enough -> we can see that all the forestanding rationalizations give ample reason to overcome those, and that's:
+  a) we shan't expect the negation (mystical Alf?)
+  b) the practitioners themselves refute these very same criticisms
+  c) possibly the most significant in history at this point
+
+We should conclude that it constitutes one of the primary aspects of analysis, at least in so far as laying ground work and for our analysis, though not perhaps for majority of context.
+
+### Queer
+This one maintains itself even more strongly on the very same points as race, except it reaches new levels of magnitude in the manner that it brings its assertions and scope of attack to a higher level of abstraction.
+
+### Reality ( as being challenged )
+While some (and most) may criticize the addition of race on the basis that the reality needn't include it as per a standard of science, but the Queer challenge the very notion that we may discern or even interpret an approximation of reality at all. It is liable to put in its crosshairs any feature or fraction of reality which it finds in its vicinity (whether as conflict or even on the basis that it is already in conflict with anything specified). The very act of enumerating and identifying something outside of a proposed queer control structure is offensive.
+
+Specifically, the question of one's material construct bearing some kind of ordered legitimacy is brought into the fold, but in somewhat of a different respect:
+- question the reality of one's conception of structure
+  - any description of reality is a false reality, but queer is the effort to regain a real perspective
+- supremacy of the broadly inferior - by aesthetic
+  - that which has been seen to be superior is actually inferior
+
+It then approaches the matter even more severely because, unlike race where the understanding that there can be some essence known today which can be brought into harmony (by virtue of the fact that historical aspects remain in motion today and are imagined at the point of salvation), the very basis for queer is to negate for the purpose of attaining the conditions of imagining the unimaginable.
+
+While race questions what some assumptions were made about reality and posits some enforcement in how we see reality (usually through controlled language), and to varying degrees of intentionality, queer is itself mediated through the most fundamental aspects of what a human life considers as being real.
+
+Queer very much facilitates the premature assumptions that stable aspects of reality, as understood from the perspective of human life, are imagined and able to be eliminated with little to no questioning - almost as though, in spite of occupying a culturally recognized garment of open curiosity, one has far less curiosity about the phenomenon than one has an aversion to finding themselves at odds with a structurally-mediated social priority. The consequences of this being vast, but which might divide into at least:
+- reduced confidence in one's sense-making
+- downgraded status for established critical reasoning faculties
+- reification of a domain of grace; holy status (sanctity essential to divine promise -> liberation identity is culturally genocided in any configuration, which includes the questioning of the liberation identity's capacity to actualize)
+  - self-evident truth based on oppressed status
+
+### Transhumanism
+Indeed, this is the most obvious tie-in and the logical consequence both in terms of technical proficiency in mastering material figurations intended to unlock the true divine expression of being, which becomes unburdened by the oppressive subjectivities which arise through observation of the precious material configuration; a structure of matter whose viewing is intrinsically determined through sequences of thought tainted by the hegemonic influence of asymmetrically powerful sociopolitical interests. Under such conditions, there are only two interpretations possible:
+- you believe one representation is the correct one
+  - the right side (as per historicism?) else false consciousness
+- you make the choice which imposes the force of change
+  - change reality to make it admissible and adequate.
+  - something which becomes a more correct instance of Being
+  - even the perfected instance of Being
+
+Traditionally, the view of eugenics and transhumanism has been one of improvement and advancement of the human form, but this, at least in popular view, takes into account that we value the human experience as we understand it and wish to make it better, if even only by prolonging it.
+
+Queer views the interpretation of human body and embodiment as inherently restrictive and, in fact, the source of the restriction itself. Therefore, the technological advancement is to be employed such as to refashion the flesh such that its presentation destroys the concept and understanding of what the human form is, how it appears, and what it means.
+
+Obviously, this is a destructive process (which is why I referred to it as Ultimate Negation) and it doesn't seem to lend itself towards a series of improvements to the human form, but its complete obliteration, at least at this "stage" of "queer history".
+
+### Upheaval
+Though it may seem contradictory to the goal and process of transhumanism, that is of no concern to the queer theorist who believes that the tension of such conflicting views will create the upheaval and socio-political drive to change the pursuit of everything towards the needs of liberation (queer liberation and, thus, the needs of the queer theorist).
+
+This process of upheaval is supposed to be something which takes away and threatens the prospect of an improving and ongoing instance of technological advancement. It is a delicate ?stream with momentum and dependencies specific to the capturing of particular technological endowments.
+
+For queer, however, nothing will ever be good enough as our reality is quite generally a reminder of the inadequacy of our forms and our perceptions of those forms. The control over the forms would have to outpace our control over the representation of the forms, even at the level of interpretation, and this likely cannot be satisfied.
+
+Well, it almost can't be satisfied, except in theory, which is why we should now remind ourselves that this domain of thought is all about the transformation of world through praxis -> theory informed practice, or a continuously narrowed conception of theory and practice which are destined to merge as one; a process of refining conditions until no contradictions arise as such a contradiction is simultaneously an insistence that theory and practice are not yet sufficiently developed and hence are not truly actualized to be one and the same.
+
+Obviously this means that all perception of each and all that is referenced by them must be uniform, hence making this a collectivist cult aiming for arbitrary control over reality - such is the point at which the queer theorist is satisfied.
+
+### Dissatisfying Distinction
+Because there is always dissatisfaction with the body, ideals for development are belittling and can make any human as though they are an unnecessary specimen, if at least insofar as being a path for the evolution of the species; that is to say, a direction which brings improvement.
+
+But please note that this improvement is ultimately measured as a satisfaction with the body as it interfaces with spacetime, reality, or however else you wish to construe it. If satisfaction has arisen in a reality which includes a social element, then it is the distinction of your having a body and there being a difference between you and someone not yourself. And ultimately, that dissatisfaction may be predicated not on a fundamentally morphological distinction, but could even be as simple as the dying and the living, or that there is any perceptual separation at all through the one against the many.
+
+Children can easily be made to feel inadequate for simply not being fully developed, but adult humans too can feel inadequate for the reason of having already attained their full adult development and, as such, knowing that they will have to work hard as they cannot benefit from whatever advancement would otherwise be stated to come to fruition seemingly for free through father time.
+
+#### Digression
+Politicians have really destroyed themselves through this issue as one cannot know for sure whether someone is a true believer or has simply played fast and loose with matters that change the entire prospect of reality simply to maintain popular salience as per the estimates of algorithms and machine learning enhanced analyses. It's easy to say which is worse, but both are likely irredeemable.
+
+So, again, while race makes us question our legitimacy as per some genetic encoding because of a race category, queer maintains that you will question your very capability to discern reality coupled with a problematized judgment of one's genetic structure. An example of the latter being judging oneself as presenting a traditionally less desirable set of traits and this being placed as a point of virtue on the order of whether it abandons that tradition. Any who don't fit the traditional description are both grappling with ways of being less "pretty", and otherwise also dealing with the disdain and disgust reserved for them (according to theory they choose to identify with).
+
+### Summarizing
+That is all strong rationale for considering the potent, pervasive, totalizing and destructive nature consequent to the demands of queer theory, and how its adoption by a central authority necessarily facilitates transition to a totalitarian society on the basis of a metaphysic with an imminentized expectation of liberated collectivism.
+
+For our society, this is a key component in the development of transhumanism.
+
+## Covidism
+A very dear one to me, for what it's worth, as this was the first time we traversed past the line from demanding uniformity of verified expressions and entered into uniformity of physical access to the body. This was the first time where embodiment of the state rhetoric became a rule and where everyone could be categorized as an immediate threat. It's where one couldn't fully understand whether their participation was itself an expression of state rhetoric.
+
+For the first time, the state could dictate the movement in everyone's house, the manner in which relations of family members are to be managed and expressed, and a means by which one family member could use state rhetoric, state narrative, and the threat of state enforcement mechanisms to pressure, castigate and designate the moral standing of other family members.
+
+It gave anyone an opportunity to utterly betray their closest relatives while maintaining ample plausible deniability through the continuous publication and distribution of emergency announcements and warnings whose message always provided key declarations which can, in and of themselves, not be proven, thus it and in whatever contentious dialogue arises, we see the following:
+- make dialogue and question themselves beyond the pale?
+- you could simply participate by restating what has been uttered by the state and reinforce the stated goals pertaining to the statements
+
+### Acting on Body is Acting on Mind
+Relinquishing the sanctity and sovereignty of one's body is simultaneously acting on the believe that one should relinquish one's mind. If you can no longer make decisions and act in the best interests of your person, then perhaps you shouldn't be making decisions about anything.
+
+The main issue is how so many men would necessarily come to behave as though their destiny is granted. The creation of one's own destiny is the extent to which one can remain humble while assuming role of creator.
+
+The primary sub-topics and themes which need to be brought out are:
+- bodily autonomy
+- measuring progress
+- public health praxis
+- supreme concern
+- selfishness
+- inclusion
+- public social health justice
+- collectivism
+- citizenships
+
+### Dialectics
+The covid era has been especially potent for transforming people's understanding or confidence in their capacity to understand, as well as imprinting cognitive association or linguistic triggers to completely guide and control their thoughts and emotions seemingly at will - at least for teh most common among us.
+
+Each human was classified as both the most precious resource, as well as the primary threat. That is not simply that persons who are ill were the threat and the infirm were precious, no, it was that every single human is to be treated as the primary threat at all times, and this is an aspect which still continues to this day in at least the medical services and private institutions whenever they detect an opportunity to practice their neutral behaviour.
+
+Yes, opportunity to do:
+- validate the mechanism
+- rationalize their extra demands
+- piggy back the initiative
+- do praxis
+  - proliferate for critical consciousness
+- appropriate as evidence for other issue
+- restructure organizations
+Indeed, the issue becomes your other issue and then an argument is formulated to say they are the same issue, and that your model of it (which includes a new aspect that's been brought in through synthesis which accounts for your identified contradiction is a more intentional and appropriate means of addressing the issue)
+
+- Covid is actually social justice
+- Covid is sustainability
+  - is social justice
+- this is all evidence of transphobia and fascism-creep