Some of them make me uneasy, but I'm intrigued nonetheless.
- a kindly Discordian responds to the Aphorisms. That is possibly the biggest compliment I've ever been given for my work. Thank you. :-)
A couple of other points - since, as I explained, only a few of the Aphorisms are my original work, so please feel free to repost and reuse, the only provision being that you include a link to the original list, as above. Also note that on the second anniversary of this blog, the Aphorisms will be updated with new ideas from the second year of posting.
Seriously, how come I have to googlestalk my own blog to find out that people are finding my work useful? It could be argued that I need to be more involved in webforums etc, but as I think I've explained before, I've never found one where I can actually get a hearing. The Marxists think I'm a mystical loony, and your average memetician/magickian/whatever reacts to kneejerk caricatures of Marxism they half-remember from primary school, rather than the actual living intellectual tradition. If a kindly commenter to this blog could point out a webforum or wherever where Chaos Marxist concepts would get a friendly, skeptical but open-minded reaction - or even better, where people want to take action in accordance with them - I'd be most grateful.
I'm not a serious Wiccan any more, but it's interesting to note that I appear to be posting here on a lunar cycle. :) The more I look over the older posts, the more I'm amazed that I wrote them. They sound more convincing than I've ever felt. I am worried by the idea that to actually make the ideas work would require someone with a completely different personality than I have - a pretty cool guy who networks and makes connections with people and doesn't afraid of anything. I have realised that, for all my big (and accurate) talk about how ego loss is necessary for becoming a vehicle for a current that can change reality, I kind of like my ego and the comfortable-though-dull sphere I've carved out for myself in horrible capitalist reality, and I am ashamed to admit that right now I don't actually feel like risking it. So do as I say, not as I do. Please, somebody.
In response to your third paragraph - I'm unsure where you'd find other Chaos Marxists. And any webforum has its own issues too - I know that over at PD we pretty much regard everyone as a looney, so don't take it personally.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure I won't find "other Chaos Marxists", and actually I hope I don't - the last thing I want is followers, people who read the things on this blog and parrot them uncritically. (Although if all those people paid me some money, it might be tolerable.)
ReplyDeleteWhat I do want is people with similar goals and similar ideas who I can bounce things off and come up with new and better goals and ideas.
magically i'm a chaote & chaos marxism sounds interesting. hate to get corporatist: do as i say, not as i do means you won't risk eating your own dog food. which is ironic since i found your blog looking for this old post of Thistle's.
ReplyDeleteis chaos marxism "good" only because you say so?
Chaos Marxism is definitely not good, it's chaotic neutral. :) Less flippantly, the question is whether it's [b]useful[/b], whether it serves as a guide to productive action or whether it's just the writers of this blog mentally fapping. I need more input before I can decide that. Practice really is the test of theory.
ReplyDeleteWhat's unique about CM, in my unbelievably arrogant opinion, is that it suggests paths for long-term social and collective action. You can't really "do it" standing alone in front of your altar or whatever. So, to make it work you need a scene, a mystical order, a revolutionary party (see Aphorism 83). I am an extremely shy person and I only have the vaguest idea of how I could get one of those together. Perhaps someone else would be better equipped.
i love unbelievably arrogant opinion. please define "chaotic neutral".
ReplyDelete"reality" is the interchange between micro & macro. gleichschaltung seems to describe the current state of play. however, a play of Nuit is the objective. your first aphorism says it all.
Crowley wrote: The Great Work is the uniting of opposites. It may mean the uniting of the soul with God, of the microcosm with the macrocosm, of the female with the male, of the ego with the non-ego—or what not. By "love under will" one refers to the fact that the method in every case is love, by which is meant the uniting of opposites as above stated, such as hydrogen and chlorine, sodium and oxygen, and so on. Any reaction whatever, any phenomenon, is a phenomenon of "love", as you will understand when I come to explain to you the meaning of the word "point-event". But love has to be "under will," if it is to be properly directed. You must find your True Will, and make all your actions subservient to the one great purpose.
come by the abrafadabra forums..and say novum sent you.
ReplyDelete