A lack of animation

Last night’s dream — another answer to the question “if…?”

Can one truly live and have a middle-class accommodation to cultural norms, at all?

In relation to these norms, I can only take a conventional female role, if I am to fit in at all. The dream’s question: Can I take advice from women? They said, “We’re on the tram, and you’re deciding what you need to wear for when you launch yourself into the real world. You’ll need to dress up for it. Take the purple shoes!”

I did — but when I climbed up to the elevation where the boss had ordered all those who would meet with him to sit, I pulled the brim of my old school hat well down all around my head. I could wait — but nothing in my spirit could relate. I cannot animate a role like this with any genuine essence.

I climbed down still anonymous, and left.

There is a certain futility in engaging with anything of the bourgeois world — once you realise that all of the ideology it musters is to create an illusion that nothing changes. You can spend years and years wasting your time sharing your perceptions with a person of bourgeois persuasion, just because they’re not directed towards becoming more aware of anything. They want, rather, the reassurance that all things remain perfectly stable as they are: They will subvert your critical thinking goals for their own ends — to attempt to prove that nothing changes. Even the most complex message will be somehow reduced to this, when the bourgeois mind starts mangling it: “Nothing changes.”

The critical thinker’s goal (to clarify perspectives in order to have a better basis for action) and the bourgeois person’s goal (to have their perspective of the world, considered tried and true, once again confirmed by you) are very much at odds.

One wonders (from the bourgeois person’s point of view) how it is that they manage to keep going, on the basis of so little.


The bourgeois

The amazing thing about the bourgeois, who make themselves out to be the ultimate representatives of rationality, and who live in accordance with the principles of rationality as they understand them — they cannot see their own ultimate irrationality across a much broader spectrum than the narrow spot of economic life onto which they are inclined to their gazes.

For, if someone intimates to me (through various aspects of omission as well as other modes of thought or behaviour more active) that what I have experienced is either imaginary, or unreal, or exaggerated, or in accordance with the principles of rationality in any case — and hence morally overlookable — then all that I can say to that is that the bourgeois do not see or think as clearly as I do.

There is nothing more definitive of bourgeois consciousness than a veiled and selective blindness which serves the status quo.

Look into it, and you will see exactly what I mean.

Between punishments: living this humble life

It’s funny how little the rulers of state and education understand themselves. Their mechanistic efficacy appears to me to be based upon being unconscious about who they are, what role they are playing, and so on. This blindness enables them to function, so long as they are being mechanistic, following a script. Yet should the mechanism of the script fail, it would then become necessary for those who control others to think about the situation they are in. This is where they fail.

Effective ruling depends on both the rulers and the ruled being relatively unconscious of the bigger picture which determines their allotted roles. For this reason, and no other reason, punishment is generally applied when the continuity of routine and workaday procedures fail.

There remains  a common confusion between mechanistic efficacy and social efficacy, with the former being confused with the latter. No wonder Bataille saw that bourgeois society was the lowest expression of humanity that had ever existed!

I have been punished a great deal by our bourgeois society and in various ways, when talking through a matter might have solved a problem on the spot. From a rational point of view, the bourgeois seem to delight in prolonging antagonism, but actually one goes too far in reading “will” into the mechanics of being bourgeois. They simply aren’t habituated to treating the human behind the prescribed mechanical relationship, and so exert no effort other than to punish.

And punishment, of course, creates in those who aren’t unconscious (as they are supposed to b)e, a disenchantment with the merits of the rulers.