[-empyre-] The city as a skin -- Sparta and the helots / retrofitting -- not

[simon]

Dear <<empyreans>>, Nick,

you write: "the political is not of itself it is borne out conflict" and 
"not in a dialectical state but through demos"

this is exactly the negative I was referring to parenthetically: "and 
make a dialectic that would ground OCCUPY? (Albeit in the negative.)"

I would like to know of how you conceive of this Platonist construct 
that "work waits for no-one" and I agree with you entirely about the 
inter-temporality (intermission? interval?) whereby the duration of 
OCCUPY is interrupted by injunction, its "counter story" has a 
necessarily choppy narrative. I don't however know why it is Plato whose 
sense needs to be countered by this story. Perhaps he is being invoked 
as the first director of Socrates in a primal scene of philosophical 
dramatisation? I also wonder about whether it is sad that there is no 
homogeneous whole for either philosophy - anymore, with that romantic 
sigh of belatedness - or OCCUPY; while in OCCUPY's sense itself (and 
sensation, or aesthetic, to which I was/am alluding) I see no illusion, 
necessary or not, hopeful or harmful: neither philosophy nor OCCUPY are 
required to be homogeneous nor indeed do they need to be subjected to a 
verification, a veridification or any such fact- or truth-finding 
process - which would anyway leave suspicious marks on their bodies, 
which would have nothing to do with identity creation, and which would 
doubtless lead neither to confession nor conviction - for anyone -, but 
rather implicate the question-putters, pull them down off their purism. 
I think of the heterogeneous series of Reza Negarastani where it sheers 
asymptotically away from that of Gilles Deleuze. Or Kacem and Badiou, 
although the latter's heterogeneity takes the guise of a pure numerical 
and monolithic multiplicity. Lastly, I appreciate the nod to Adorno, and 
would like to know what it means, unless by inference you are suggesting 
that I nodded first, at the negative dialectic? Not the case!

Best,

Simon Taylor

www.squarewhiteworld.com


On 21/03/12 20:44, nicholas watts wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> I have been silently engaged in this fascinating discussion, but i 
> have to interject on a couple of points made by simon.
> to begin with political is not of itself it is borne out of conflict 
> not in a dialectical state but through demos, therefore what occupy
> constitutes is a counter story to the platonist construct that work 
> waits for no-one,(here in london occupy was only halted through an 
> injunction) therefore imposed tempor-rality
>     it is a counter story to the platonist sense that
> the rulers act as if there bodies were filled with gold and the ruled 
> sensed that there bodies were filled with iron, we never know what 
> content IS, therefore a distribution of sense is an illusion  is 
> perhaps our only hope, we know that we are not the 99 percent, there 
> is no homogeneous whole in the same way that there is no such thing as 
> philosophy sadly.  perhaps there is something in the idea of negative 
> dialectical approach assumed on the lack of content, the argument 
> against Adorno was that he assumed he knew what content was.long live 
> the occupy movement.
>
> respectfully.  Nick.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20120322/f4fce7ca/attachment.htm>