[eDebate] to the SLF

Cyborg Misfits sadist
Wed Sep 18 05:12:16 CDT 2002

A message from the City of Golgonooza

in response to the claim that we didn't justify our earlier comments. Every
apparatus  circulates mean-intensity currents around its core in
concentrically expansionist loops, each of which is indifferently a line of
defense and a line of attack. Furthermore, the question as to whether this
?fin de siecle air-conditioned totalitarianism? (Lyotard, _Derive a partir
de Marx et Freud_, no English translation, 1973) can be conceived in terms
of regulated/regulating loops is at least a moot point; for this reason ,
Lyotard introduces a model of the cybersocius, this time a model that
constitutes a ?theoretical object capable of corresponding to [capital?s]
liquefactions? (Lyotard, _Des dispositifs pulsionels_ no English
translation, 1994). Hence the ?tungsten-carbide stomach that eats your
words your images Critique even hate are incorporated? (Lyotard 1973).
Unlike the system-event pair, this model does not offer a propriety and
negatively regulated system on the one hand; rather critiques forms the
pale shadow of the omnoivous/indifferentist system?s next meal, and will
inevitably result then in just one more fecal, indentitarian alloy, while
simultaneously offering the system new territories to consume. ?This is the
strength of the capitalist system,? Lyotard writes, ?Its capacity for
recuperating anything and everything (Lyotard 1973) Apart from the
anti-isolationist mode of operation, the steel gut retains two further
advantages: In the first place, critique is rendered an accurately futile
exercise-- ?the despair of the M-C-M [cycle]? (Lyotard 1973)-- unless the
critic is viewed as the hapless vanguard laborer working to cultivate new
territories for the system; second, the system now regulates itself in
expansion, seizing the alleged ?initiative? from earlier
?critico-practical? orientations (lyotard 1973) and overcoming the
strategic and tactical deficit of re-action, re-sistence, and fighting
rear-guard actions to re-establish homeostasis.
Now the other argument is that we are somehow making a divide between
action and critique (as if that was ever possible). As kant teaches us,
"police action=critique" (Kant, Critiuqe of Pure Reason, trans. N. K.
Smith, 1958, Bxxv).


>mr. stupid old man,
>you have given no reason why "tearing down PlanetDebate" is fascist but 
>rather appeal to some, vague amorphous "fascist" tendency of critical 
>grant the lyotard card.  proves that critique alone without action is 
>self-referential academic crap like the kind of critiques that they pander
>planet dabait.  instead of whining w a shamaham style paranoid critique of

>knowledge as it is displayed in contest rounds, the slf takes a new 
>alternative route which is to destroy the policy dabait establishment.
>hardly is the destruction of property "fascist" as you name without 
>argumentative substantiation.  rather, it is the elite information
>which harvard dabait and phallus jerkins will call to stop free access to 
>information relevant to public dabaiting.  this fascist backlash which 
>actually probably will not succeed given what will take place resembles 
>traditional fascist police backlashes to all kinds of property liberation 
>that have occured in the past.
>destruction is creation.
>like we said, there is no viable counterplan ground for the negative.  the

>permutation rules the day.  old school counterplans (phalllus jerkins 
>supposed claim to fame) have been largely replaced by critical arguments 
>because of their vulnerability to permutations, i.e. anarchism is no
>hot as a counterplan but you see more critiques of statism, etc.  phallus 
>jerkins supposed dabait theoretical innovations have largely failed at the

>highest levels of competition.  anyway, if you review our simple pirate 
>plan, then you will clearly see that your weakass "nice guy let planet 
>dabait make $$$ off dirty intellectual property because we are so positive

>and for peace and constructive ideas" has been pre-empted.  duh. duh.  
>permutation, sink planet dabait resisting commodification + print your own

>cool articles for free.
>given that you have presented absolutely zero justification 4 planet
>then why should the judges not cast their inclination towards the 
>planet dabait is good because....?
>shameless pandering planet dabait offers a net benefit to shamelessly free

>planet dabait + free evidence that indicts their operation and points to 
>micro-evidence alternatives to fill the vacuum which is...?
>old sadist's argument for why planet dabait even merits a copyright when 
>they don't pay royalties or get permission from the publishers is...?
>old dumb sadist's reason why we can't just add "harvard dabait fucking 
>sucks" to every tagline and thereby not be in violation of the actually 
>non-existent copyright is...?
>or if we scramble the taglines since unlike planet dabait we do not
>in "PROPER CITATION" (see that fucking crap that they got on their site;
>adamantly disagree "proper citation" must include the addition of "harvard

>dabait fucking sucks" to each tag which makes it complete and proper as
>as counteracting the disgusting elite harvard insignia at the top of every

>web page; with every action there is a reaction, you see)?
>give us one reason why piracy is fascist when it endangers capital 
>we are so fucking sick of your dubious and impractical morality especially

>when it comes to some fuck like dallas perkins who has done more fucking 
>"immoral" shit than anybody in the community.  oh yeah, and joel rollins
>a good guy when he's not lying to the wilsons about the circumstances of 
>justin wilson's death to cover his own coward ass.  oh yeah, shanahan was
>cool when he demanded the highest salary at the UTNIF because he 
>egotistically believed because he drew the most students and therefore
>the most $$$ for the institute that he deserved the highest pay.  this 
>bullshit hierarchically structured world of old boys' dabait financing
>die as critiques begin to self-reflexively change the structure of the 
>community from one of obvious and transparent elitism to one of greater 
>cooperation.  these fuckers need to learn to put their $$$ where their
>is.  i am so fucking sick of looking at their bullshit wine coolers while 
>they sell foucault.  i mean give me a fucking break.  dallas perkins who 
>tried to stop the critique from happening now sells foucault.  fuck planet

>debate.   you like foucault once you figure out you can make $$$ off 
>foucault.  fuck you.  no mercy.  TKO> RIP. adios.  4 or 5 unstoppable 
>international mirror sites in less than a month beginning in days.  
>>From: sadist at bored.com
>>Reply-To: sadist at bored.com
>>To: edebate at ndtceda.com
>>Subject: [eDebate] to the SLF
>>Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 05:32:10 -0500
>>A message from the City of Golgonooza
>>Whereas we appreciate the efforts of the SLF, we have to say, instead of
>>tearing down Debate Planet, and disappering into the fascist critique
>>itself, afterall "we have already said and repeated, we laugh at
>>since it is to maintain oneself in the field of the criticized thing and
>>the dogmatic, indeed paranoic, relation of knowledge." (Lyotard). Why not
>>use your skills to create a website that has many debate related articles
>>on their? Actually ask for access to put up cool and otherwise kick-ass
>>articles and excerts from books. That way promoting knowledge and
>>something, rather then investing in the fascist field.
>>Thus Spoke the Old Man
>>eDebate mailing list
>>eDebate at ndtceda.com
>>To subscribe, UNSUBSCRIBE, and see the subscriber list, go here:
>Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
>eDebate mailing list
>eDebate at ndtceda.com
>To subscribe, UNSUBSCRIBE, and see the subscriber list, go here:

More information about the Mailman mailing list