Accelerationism

well that was a waste of time
>whoa things change and like capitalism, whoa
who is this boring turd, and why should i care what he has to say?

that site has a cute name, too bad about the content

delete this

This shit is really fucked up. Im scared

spooked out of your skull

The story goes like this: Earth is captured by a technocapital singularity as renaissance rationalitization and oceanic navigation lock into commoditization take-off. Logistically accelerating techno-economic interactivity crumbles social order in auto-sophisticating machine runaway. As markets learn to manufacture intelligence, politics modernizes, upgrades paranoia, and tries to get a grip.
The body count climbs through a series of globewars. Emergent Planetary Commercium trashes the Holy Roman Empire, the Napoleonic Continental System, the Second and Third Reich, and the Soviet International, cranking-up world disorder through compressing phases. Deregulation and the state arms-race each other into cyberspace.

By the time soft-engineering slithers out of its box into yours, human security is lurching into crisis. Cloning, lateral genodata transfer, transversal replication, and cyberotics, flood in amongst a relapse onto bacterial sex.

Neo-China arrives from the future.

Hypersynthetic drugs click into digital voodoo.

Retro-disease.

Nanospasm.

what's his endgame?

Well, if you have to ask...

Utter transhumanism with absolutely zero regards for morals

We must leave our mortal, rotten bodies behind if we want to strive in this universe.

transcendence above all

thank ye kindly good sir, i love a good nick land/accelerationist/transhumanist thread

but don't those mortal bodies also supply the creative impulse to do everything in the first place? create capital, globalization, space shuttles, etc. even transhumanists will still follow a biological imperative, no?

what would be the point of living forever, like a head in a jar, if you couldn't appreciate things aesthetically, fall in love, enjoy galactic tourism and so on. i want to live like the jetsons, not like lawnmower man

Does anyone have the excerpt of Nick Land where he compares humanity to crude oil?

It's pretty great.

No, he's right. Please don't use coloured slang on Veeky Forums Thank you.

isnt this the guy who had amphetamine psychosis

is there room in that allegory for nietzschean
oil

it's highly refined, and crudity is anathema to it

yep

Because he's not defending accelerationism as a pathway to marxism.

C'mon man

He also makes up his own wacky brand of physics. I can't find it.

Did his contract with the Chinese military not get renewed or something? Why is he suddenly coming back to the west.

Ir is not supposed to have a point. His position holds that we are hosts to the capital, and only temporarily so. We shall fade, but it shall remain, once it is fully automated. Basically

>Fully Automated Gay Luxury Technocracy Dystopia

makes sense

>fully automated gay luxury technocracy dystopia

so like a really really horrible version of the jetsons. makes sense

i'd def read some kind of science-fiction story set in that world. kind of like a Culture novel written by HP Lovecraft. or a strung-out version of Mervyn Peake. or a horribly sober version of Hunter Thompson

Read Watts?

yeah. that's a good call. I read blindsight and I think one other one. he's good and very smart. didn't blow me away but that's no knock on him. again, i think i was probably too brainlet to understand everything that he was writing about

PLEASE HELP

What are you talking about?

I can't find it off-hand, but it had me looking up Reza Negarestani and Cyclonopedia.

Man that shit is dark.

>He begins by elaborating on the story so far: the conspiracy to return Cthelll, the earth's core, repressed runt sibling of the sun, to immanence with its solar mothership; the plotting of the return of the Tellurian insider; and the agency of oil as tellurian lube. All this we know and approve of.
>But what is important is this: ultimately, a theory that locates the source of the ills of the human psyche is the accretion of the earth 4.5 billion years ago is - obviously - far too parochial for the purposes of the Committee. It owes its local inhibitions to Land's fondness for Bataille and his disproportionate attention to Freud's later, flawed model of trauma in Beyond the Pleasure Principle...

feels tellurian man

books.google.ca/books?id=wt2gAclC27EC&pg=PA27&lpg=PA27&dq=nick land humanity oil&source=bl&ots=j84mMjrnrI&sig=F4lDil1TC19CoZUDzcB-19QB0cA&hl=en&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwjHp76L9Y3UAhVMPBQKHSVkBp0Q6AEIUTAI#v=onepage&q=nick land humanity oil&f=false

hm ok

Whigs get out

Nick Land is such a memester.

His philosophy borders on the nonsensical because he reads like what would happen if William Gibson performed a facial on Bataille, but his writing is still compulsively readable.

It's quite interesting to me, how that works.

is this guy physically unable to write clearly? It's like post-structuralism all over again

One of his biggest influences was Georges Bataille so that's hardly surprising

...

This will always be funny

>In this germinal accelerationist matrix, there is no distinction to be made between the destruction of capitalism and its intensification.
"destruction" is the end of self-development, "intensification" is self-development speeding up, "destruction" means "value", as a real autocatalytic reactive substance in history, as a valid category for analysis of social development just ceases to exist

>The auto-destruction of capitalism is what capitalism is.
not dialectical enough of a description

>“Creative destruction” is the whole of it, beside only its retardations, partial compensations, or inhibitions.
there's two sides to the balance sheet

>Capital revolutionizes itself more thoroughly than any extrinsic ‘revolution’ possibly could. If subsequent history has not vindicated this point beyond all question, it has at least simulated such a vindication, to a maddening degree.
an extrinsic revolution has to be premised, if survival is desired, since self-destruction leaves noting

It's really fun to read, though.

>he reads like what would happen if William Gibson performed a facial on Bataille

that's exactly my point, the philosophy might be ass but it's still very fun to read and i'll take shit philosophy in fiction over genre shit any day

I've read his book no Bataille (less of an analysis and more of a strange pseudo-novel written in Bataille's style, which i like a lot because Bataille is my second favorite writer and the people he influenced tend to be nothing but hacks) and his book Fanged Noumena, which was also quite a read.

Nick Land isn't a transhumanist

ok, but he's close enough. he likes thiel and thiel wants to live forever. he channels the immortal spirit of capital through him like a fever

maybe he's just not very good at transhumanism, since for him everything dies in the end in a meltdown. or he's better at it than cliche readings

i really don't know what i'm saying anymore tbqh

But what has he himself done to personally accelerate reality other than copying odd words from a thesaurus into tl;dr essays?

he's into posthumanism

Drawing attention to a phenomenon only hastens its realization in hyperstitional terms. Plus he's spent his career accelerating philosophy towards something outside the confines of academia.

Your right, he's a post scarcity Maoist, and his writing is schlock that only gets away with his shit because that viewpoint is that rare, so people view it as they view a novelty.

>Nick Land shits out another portion of obfuscatory muh accelerationism bullshit
News at 11

>Your right, he's a post scarcity Maoist
don't think so lad

Please explain the latter portion.

he's basically given us - in articles like the one OP shared - a concise definition of a largely unknown theory that didn't really exist before he came along. in part he's connecting different threads that were already there, and now he's trimming the corners and polishing up the edges and so on. so we have a word, a concept for this thing. not bad for a philosopher. a kind of zombie marxism where capital itself just needs to eliminate people. even ayn rand didn't go there.

negarestani is doing something similar, maybe going even further. usually we ask, okay, so what do we *do* about it? NL has suggestions for this too, many of which he cribs from Moldbug.

Maoist?

this...is NNN.

>so people view it as they view a novelty

That's exactly why i read is stuff, user.
He's an incredibly memorable novelty, so it's still worthwhile remembering, In my opinion.

As weird and crypto-marxist Land is, he's one of the few philosophers that really dared to further advance and turn Marxism on its head just like Marx did to Hegelian Idealism, one of the philosophers today that are truly memorable and not utterly mediocre and superfluous.

Agreed 100%.

Land has consistently tried push philosophy into new territory, and break the grip that academic institutions have over it. This can be seen from his early years with the CCRU, which attempted to fuse philosophy with cosmic horror and cyberpunk fiction, the occult, and jungle music, all the way to his contemporary engagement with and legitimization of the blogosphere. On the latter point, his choice (?) to leave academia and work on the web represents a shift to a marketized, bottom-up approach to philosophy and political theory.

so he's a Hegelian
haha i'm jking

bump for help from a Land scholar

How do you qualify as a Land scholar?

I was hoping you'd be the Land scholar and help me find the passage I'm looking for.

>his choice (?) to leave academia
Eh... I don't mean this to disparage him, but he never really chose this. He was politely forced out of Warwick because of his increasingly incoherent behavior. More recently, he was pushed out of the New Centre for Research and Practice after a targeted campaign against him and the LD50 gallery.

How much are you paying the Chinese to viral market for you Land? Or is it one of the perks of the job?

cao ni ma

All the power to him, he's basically living what he preaches by accelerating himself right into schizophrenia.

He doesn't have to pay anyone to spread this since he's basically spot on the living schema of the Veeky Forums collective mind.

Fair point. Regardless, the fact that he's done the bulk of his post-2000s theoretical work on the web is significant for the reasons previously outlined.

Sounds like a PKD novel

I guess I don't see "legitimization of the blogosphere" as anything important to his philosophy. He publishes books also (self publishes, Time Spiral and Urbanatomy are run by he and Anna Greenspan). He writes for magazines and newsites, at least those who are willing.

Sure he has a blog and a twitter, but so does any writer these days. If anything, he's more active online because of his exile from left-wing academia, or "the cathedral" as he calls it.

Listening to his lectures at the New Centre, you very much get the impression he'd rather be part of a traditional, institutional entity with it's community and back and forth of intellectual sparring and collaboration.

I actually think it's kind of sad the only places that will publish him these days are The Daily Caller and similar alt-right alt-lite types of online platforms. He shares very little in common with them or their type of writing. You can see from his Jacobite article how embeded he is in the post-structuralist tradition. It's that kind of dialog he deserves. Not whatever bland, anti-intellectual xenophobic user base that the Daily Caller manages to attract.

Where are his blog and twitter? All I can really find are mentions of his account being banned.

xenosystems.net
@Outsideness

>All political institutions are cyberian military targets.

>Take universities, for instance.

>Learning surrenders control to the future, threatening established power. It is vigorously suppressed by all political structures, which replace it with a docilizing and conformist education, reproducing privilege as wisdom. Schools are social devices whose specific function is to incapicitate learning, and universities are employed to legitimate schooling through perpetual reconstitution of global social memory.

>The meltdown of metropolitan education systems in the near future is accompanied by a quasi-punctual bottom-up takeover of academic institutions, precipitating their mutation into amnesiac cataspace-exploration zones and bases manufacturing cyberian soft-weaponry.

>To be continued.

-the final words of Meltdown. I think it's fair to say he sees the acceleration of academia (really all formalized institutions) into something new as desirable/inevitable. Also, he engages in plenty of back-and-forth sparring/collaboration with his fellow bloggers/tweeters.

Not that guy, but his blog and twitter are

twitter.com/outsideness?lang=en

xenosystems.net/

How can someone be too radical for academia? It's not even as if he isn't speaking their language. He's not a nazi or even a conventional right winger, and actually sounds a lot like a Marxist-turned-evil on crack, as well as the whole post-structuralist tools that academia loves to swing around like an enormous phallus. I agree with you, and his excomungation from the Cathedral says more about the state of contemporary academic inquiry than it says about him really.

Besides, it is a dangerous endeavour of him to pander (or at least downgrade his explanations) to the alt-right types, since he is pretty much also an antagonist to them, with all the technological doomsday machines and all the Deleuzian frenzy going around. I wonder if he came up with the name Dark Enlightnenment and realized how edgy it was and how much more teens he would lure from the conventional Right into becoming nihilist minions of the capital.

>How can someone be too radical for academia?
Its really the "Human Biodiversity" (HBD) stuff. It's essentially eugenics given a facelift, and most of the people active in it aren't shy about their irrational anger towards non-whites, even while they try to make reasoned arguments about genetics.

I understand why Land would feel the need to engage the topic, given how much Darwinism plays into his philosophy, but personally I can't help but feel there isn't enough time left to worry about the genetic make-up of humanity. It's a question that's going to be irrelevant, either through genetic technology or extinction.

His anti-immigrant, anti-globalist positions also ruffle feathers in academia. If it weren't for the HBD stuff though, he'd probably get a pass on this. Anti-globalism has enough advocates on the left.

From a "first order politics" it makes enough sense that he'd be pushed out of leftists institutions. It's just a shame those institutions are so focused on "first order" problems and not second order problems (aka philosophy of politics, ontology, epistemology etc).

That he was pushed out of Warwick makes plenty of sense, it's not exactly a radical university. What's the real shame is the New Centre cutting ties. As a pretty radical, online-only, space for contemporary philosophy and especially for accelerationism, it seems like a huge loss. Don't get me wrong, I think the New Centre is still doing interesting things, I just think it's a shame they caved to outside pressure from leftist activists who otherwise had little to no relation to the New Centre.

>Besides, it is a dangerous endeavour of him to pander (or at least downgrade his explanations) to the alt-right types,

Insofar as they share some common political goals, anti-immigration, anti-globalism, the alliance makes some sense. "Enemy of my Enemy" type thing. But yeah, I don't think NRx or Right Accelerationism has any long term potential within the alt-right, as it currently manifests itself within political power structures. Banon might have heard of Land, but I doubt he understood it.

>xenosystems.net/
What the fuck is this? There are so many links one gets easily lost

No kidding. I'm not sure what to make of it, seems like there's not much there...

>What the fuck is this? There are so many links one gets easily lost

scroll down, on the left side bar you'll find sections labeled Tag Cloud and Categories. You can browse posts by what intrigues. The top bar also has useful links. The rest of the left sidebar are links out to other people's sites.

I mean, it is a blog. Don't expect huge long essays. Look to his published books for that.

It's mostly Twitter shitposts lately. His Chinese handlers have requested that he stick to short posts because they were having difficulty understanding whether his longer diatribes were ideologically congruent with the Technocratic Capitalist Republic of China's party line.

Land has formally complied but his underground network of 50 Cent Army defectors to whom he has served as accelerationist prophet (and English teacher) have displaced his content within the comments under varying usernames. It's a matter for the savvy reader to separate the wheat from the chaff.

Regarding the English teacher part he seems to have been successful at least.

So isn't nickland the ex marxist who turned neo reactionary?

cool numbers

that's him

also bumping a good thread, as nick land threads often mysteriously are

hahah awesome Nick Land posts on Veeky Forums

synchronicity: i just found out about Land yesterday. i'm going to try to pirate Phyll-Undu bc it looks dope and similar to what i am trying to do with my writing only instead of nihilism and amphetamine psychosis i am trying to channel paranoia and conspiracy theories

>in cold blood
killing kings is self-defence

I tweeted to Land whether he likes Death Grips or not and he hasn't responded yet.

I want you guys to take a look inside the following link, and compare it to the OP:

publicmedievalist.com/dark-enlightenment/

Now, I have read his stuff that are specifically about Dark Enlightenment. In no moment I made the gross misinterpretations that the link claims. What do you guys make of it? Personally I think calling it anti-Enlightenment instantly blocks people off into thinking you must then be a conventional Right thinker (wtf I can't even), and it's amazing how much people are oblivious to what the capital does to them, even when Land writes it as crystal clear as he does for the case of his DE stuff.

Being in Shanghai, he is probably having a hard time scooping up the drugs he needs to actually get into the music and ascertain its transcendental value.

> The profound institutional crisis that makes the topic ‘hot’ has at its core an implosion of social decision-making capability. Doing anything, at this point, would take too long.

"wow i bet no one has ever thought that before haha"

>accelerationist

stopped reading right there

You know when the ideas are bullshit when people send more time talking about the person.

that's a good link user, thanks for contributing

Thinking that DE is anti-enlightenment is weird. If anything, it's pro-Enlightenment in the sense of going back to Austrian economic sensibilities but without the cozy warmth of bourgeois prosperity dialled up to eleven. On the recent Red Ice interview NL himself was saying how debased the concept of classical liberalism has become. He's just unique in having digested Marxism so fully that he wound up siding with capital itself in the end against the working class (which is under postmodernism a completely new entity that bears little to do with classical Marxism).

Of course, there are other anti-Enlightenment guys, like Brett Stevens and others, who push for a more ethnat dimension. Land gets along with them well enough, but his overall project isn't ethnat at the core. He just thinks that sovereign states with particular cultural characteristics are ultimately more conducive to capitalist progress - that is, the progress of capital itself - than for serving alt-right ideas of mannerbund for their own sake, and so on. Again, it's the kind of stuff that makes Land more interesting than most other counter-mainstream figures or culture critics, and what makes the new right so divided. But everyone here already knows most of this already, I figure. And he does write well. As has been said before, he's in his own way more Marxist than most of his opponents in taking the side of an autonomous capital against labor, and drawing the rest of the political/cultural/social conclusions from that. No wonder he lives in China, though, going that hard against the current climate is hard even for a guy like Peterson, who was built to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous social justice fortune. And the left even turns upon Zizek from time to time, and he seems to be joking about his love for Stalin more and more frequently.

But yeah, it's too bad that one of the most interesting English philosophers of his generation has to basically live in exile and relative obscurity in China.

youtube.com/watch?v=oAT14h5_lMo

youtube.com/watch?v=AIWUMkKZhus

omfg my abs are on fire, those last couple sniffs before it went full chipmunk fuckin killed me man

There's nothing about him that's neo-reactionary imo.

He's just taken leftism to its most absurd (logical?) conclusion.

>He's just taken leftism to its most absurd (logical?) conclusion.

No, I really have to disagree. The Patchwork is definately a reaction against the leftist, global multicultural utopia. Land is definately a reactionary, in the original sense of the word, of being against the modern political movements of Democracy and Internationalism/Globalism.

He wants micronations, the patchwork is a political enviornment in which states act like corporations, are bought and solid, liquidated and created anew. The Patchwork is not an "order", a top-down hierarchy of systems of governance, it is a bottom-up approach.

In that sense, Land has a lot in common with Libertarians. I was listening to his 'Outer Edges" lecture series at the New Centre, and mainy of texts used are Libertarian and Anarchist political scientists.

Agreeing with this. Might as well add one of NL's own definitions here:

>A model Neoreactionary State is a rationally-organized sovereignty-services corporation. Period.

>A model Neoreactionary State is a rationally-organized sovereignty-services corporation. Period.
All states are sovereignty-services corporations. As for 'rationally organized', I see no reason to believe that any state shaped on Landian lines would be any more rationally organized than the typical state.