30 October 2006

Manifesto v. 0.9 vel Liber MCMXVII

(edited 2010/04/09)

Chaos Marxism is an anticapitalist memetic-combat current.

We see dialectical materialism (and its physical manifestation, revolutionary socialism / classical Marxism) as close akin to other projects and techniques of consciousness change such as public relations, psychology, and "magic(k)(!)" or however it's being spelled this week.

Global corporate rule is a reality on the material and on all ideological planes. You can only defeat an enemy by becoming symmetrical-but-opposite to it. The symmetrical opponent to global corporates will be a global organisation of the industrial and service-industry workers, whose psychic energy and surplus value is the nourishment of the corporate entities which determine our current consensus reality.

Capitalism is a vampire and we are the Slayers. We seek the coming to full consciousness of the majority of the world's population. This will take the form of the transformation of the worldwide proletariat into a "class for itself" - or to put it another way, the manifestation of a collective world thoughtform which can kick the corporate egregore where it really hurts. This might well happen by organising a collective of what Paul Slazinger calls Mind Opening Specialists. A cadre party of the Leninist type, properly understood, is a magical order. We must remember Lenin's magical motto - "patiently explain".

We are the bastard children of Aleister Crowley and Rosa Luxemburg. Trotsky built our hotrod and Robert Anton Wilson souped it up. We declare eternal war on all cliques and shibboleths. We are prepared to chase this thing through all the words in the world. What we do is the only important thing.

Magick is serious business. Therefore, we are prohibited from ever taking ourselves too seriously. We are not interested in wasting time explaining to vulgar materialists why magic is neither a fraud nor useless, any more than we are interested in explaining to mealy-mouthed liberals why dialectical materialism is not responsible for the horrors and crimes of Stalin, Pol Pot etc. We see no reason why fascist filth should enjoy such apparent street-cred among metaprogrammers, when the project of October 1917 had the potential to be fundamentally world-changing than anything that the goosestepping jackasses of the 1930's could have imagined.

Anyone who endorses these ideas and is actually prepared to do something about them is one of us and is invited to become one of the writers of this blog. This manifesto is subject to radical change without notice.

11 comments:

  1. interesting. I've definitely got time for any magi who want to actually do something.

    I suppose marxism is as good a stepping stone as any.

    keep up the good work.

    ReplyDelete
  2. ah again the link between magic and marxism, an excellent communion in our opinion...razorsmile derives its own ethos from a combination of trotsky, deleuze, debord and osman spare, with a little grant, de landa, bey and luxembourg for additional inspiration. we welcome the manifesto and offer greetings ...

    ReplyDelete
  3. I hate to be a bother but I have to disagree with you on one point. Symmetrical solutions are not necessarily the best way to go. The US army was not defeated in Vietnam by a symmetrical army but by a much smaller lighter army using completely different tactics. A response to a monolithic enemy such as global capitalism is not necessarily a monolithic global organization.

    Additionally there is no reason why multiple solutions can't be enacted separatly but in parallel. Try for a global union, but don't have that as your only gambit.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The Viet Cong fought the US off their own particular patch, like Hezbollah did to Israel. But that didn't kill the beast - only wounded it. I'm talking about ways to kill the beast. I'm not talking about a Bey-style TAZ, but the possibility of a whole new global order.

    You're right about the need for a wide range of tactics, of course.

    ReplyDelete
  5. That's just it you see, I'm not convinced we CAN kill this beast but I'd be bloody happy to kick it off our turf.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "We see no reason why fascist filth should enjoy such apparent street-cred among metaprogrammers."--La Picho

    Aleister Crowley, as much as I love him, was in no way a communist. Rather, I see his transformation of occultism as a way to shore up the influence of a European aristocracy in decline--at least for a small group of insiders within an somewhat limited sphere. Most of his contemporary followers were proto- if not outright fascists. He himself once claimed the Nazi state to be the first government to accept The Book of the Law. And a cursory examination of the LiveJournals of Oriental Templars will reveal a disturbingly large number of them to be fans of the US military if not members. In fact, it should never be forgotten that the military concertedly uses mind-altering techniques to create good soldiers. Propaganda, to be effective, must extend to the deepest levels of consciousness. There's a reason why so many leaders of so many new religious movements of the 20th century started or continued their careers in military intelligence (Crowley, Hubbard, Twitchell, Aquino, et. al., and both Leri and Lily's work were funded by the CIA and so on).

    There is something to be said for Marx's observation that Kapital mystifies. But it is only the romantic strands of occultism which creates problems for those who would wed it to Marxism. Perhaps neuroscience is a way out of the conundrum; that and the idea that whether or not there is a divine component in the physics of the universe, religion seems to play a genetic function. After all, direct electrostimulation of a certain part of the brain does induce visions of one's personal God.

    Like Crowley, Wilson and Leri subscribe to the ideology of no ideology, a kind of knee jerk reaction against knee jerk reactions. This helps them avoid a lot of pitfalls, surely, but insures they'll hit at least one. Weirdly, maybe, the anti-ideology meme is more prevalent on the right than on the left. I've read Loompanics articles, Instapundit entries, heard Rush Limbaugh all decry ideology in the abstract. The connecting thread here is libertarianism, basically pro-corporate techno-utopianism without collectivism: industrial elitism.

    Wait a second. Sorry. In no way do I want to tar Wilson and Leri (or even the common libertarian) with the filthy brush of fascism. Their hearts were way too big for that. But those bastard socialist children you mention really would have to be bastards. There is nothing in the libertarian philosophy which inherently guards against the fascist impulse except for wishful thinking. Thinking doesn't necessarily make it so. Hod does not carry the divine authority of Chokmah.

    All of this is because a truly communist perspective requires collective adherence to a program. The communist understands that collective ideology is necessary to the achievement of revolution. The inherent difference between the communist and fascist ideology isn't just one of content, however. Most importantly, it's of genesis. The collective ideology of the communist is collectively constructed. That there is a consensus reality isn't the issue so much as who owns the means of production. And there's really no reason an ideology must be inflexible. In fact, in order to succeed, it must adapt to material realities, which is why Marx and Engels regarded their philosophy to be a political "science."

    Encouraging a sense of collective entitlement is a critical component of the new propaganda.

    "A response to a monolithic enemy such as global capitalism is not necessarily a monolithic global organization."--fenris23

    Actually, it is global capitalism which is asymmetrical in the sense that it consists of an incredibly small group of actors waging a primarily symbolic warfare against the remainder of the population. Anything short of "monolithic global organization" is likely to encourage more of the same. The communist spirit is international. The Soviets failed specifically because Stalin refused to export the revolution, though he exported militancy. The policy of "Socialism in One Country" sounds an awful lot like "National Socialism."

    ReplyDelete
  7. as much as I love him, haha, what a gas, man!!!

    ReplyDelete
  8. very cool rhetoric - as rhetoric (as ideology) can be praxis too. The violence of the symbolic is no doubt just a revolutionary as gun.

    I wonder, still, what role Magik can play - at the same time as allowing that I understand little about what it is...

    m-

    ReplyDelete
  9. Fancy seeing some icepick magick from me and my pal Stalin?

    ReplyDelete