AUT: re: Nietzsche was right!

[andrew robinson <ldxar1@xxxxxxxxx>]

In case you haven't noticed Tahir, these "ahistorical"
abstractions are very much confirmed by what is going
on in America and elsewhere, in definite historical
contexts, and especially in how everyday life is
organised and how it relates to politics.  And that a
vote for Kerry would mean the same to most voters as a
vote for Bush, in such libidinal terms, merely proves
the strength, not the weakness, of what I am saying.

The desire for America to be strong is itself a slave
morality, because what is to be strong is the spook,
and for the spook to be strong, the individual
Americans must be subordinate to the abstraction, both
by conforming to it (by being American and not
un-American), and by submitting to it (by accepting
the curtailment of civil liberties, possibly a draft,
etc.).  If America is defined as Master, this is
precisely because Americans are defined as slaves (of
this master) - so what else is this but slave
morality?!

There is something needs analysing, when the different
historical and contingent settings reproduce, over and
over, a return of the same.  What is driving this
sameness?  The answer is that the slave mentality and
its social articulation in everyday life continue to
reproduce themselves with disastrous consequences.

As for "ahistorical" and "no politics" etc etc., this
is bullshit because the politics of a Nietzschean
awareness is to challenge slave morality, to refuse
it, and to orient social and political strategies
towards a process of refusing slave-morality and
constructing a world of masters-without-servants.  You
yourself have just said that we need to concentrate on
organising resistance in everyday life and not at an
abstract level of state politics.  Well, surely
crucial to this is resisting slave moralities, through
which people subordinate their own everyday lives to
state politics and to spooks.  Hence, a very clear
politics of resistance in everyday life - kinda like
the autonomist refusal of work, but broadened into a
refusal of ALL relations which express
slave-moralities and which embed these in social and
territorial contexts.

Yes, spooks operate ahistorically, in that those who
live in concrete historical conditions react in terms
of the spooks.  But of course their articulation is
socio-historical, and can be challenged
socio-historically.  It is against the becoming-spook
of the socio-historical that a post-Nietzschean
politics can articulate itself - and against the
proletariat or working class as molar totality - this
is the crucial point where I differ from a Tahir type
of politics, because the point is not to replace one
spook (nation) with another (class), so the individual
worker ceases being a slave of a nation only to be
subordinated to a new abstraction, but rather, to
refuse all spooks in a reclamation of the entirety of
everyday life - of course as something absolutely
immanent, and NOT as a new "transcendence", a new
aufhebung, but rather, as the smashing of
transcendence which releases the immanence beneath.

Andy

PS I reacted too early to the election; it now looks
like there may have been massive rigging through the
Diebold electronic system which is very, very hackable
and is owned by Bushites.


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
www.yahoo.com




     --- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---