The infrastructure of power is human neurosoft compatible ROM. Authority instantiates itself as linear instruction pathways, genetic baboonery, noscriptures, traditions, rituals, and gerontocratic hierarchies, resonant with the dominator ur-myth that the nature of reality has already been decided. If you want to find ICE, try thinking about what is blocking you out of the past. It certainly isn't a law of nature. Temporalization decompresses intensity, installing constraint. [[ ]] Convergent waves signal singularities, registering the influence of the future upon its past. Tomorrow can take care of itself. K-tactics is not a matter of building the future, but of dismantling the past. It assembles itself by charting and escaping the technical-neurochemical definciency conditions for linear-progressive palaeo-domination time, and discovers that the future as virtuality is acessible now, according to a mode of machinic adjacency that securitized social reality is compelled to repress. This is not remotely a question of hope, aspiration or prophecy, but of communications engineering; connecting with the efficient intensive singularities, and releasing them from constriction within linear-historical development. Virtuality counterposes itself to history, as invasion to accumulation. It is matter as arrival, even when camouflaged as a deposit of the past.


Nick Land- Meltdown

What can we say of one’s self, ego, I, or one without subjective pasts and desired futures, what is it that holds the entirety of the human-security-system, the self, the godforsaken identity worship together, it is linearity and sensed succession; there is no idea more cursed and unfaithful that the one which purports that causes precede effects, or that there are causes and effects altogether, these errors have caused a commotion of idiocy to run rife throughout the socius. Apathy towards matters of biography - especially where childhood is concerned - is the attitude of the Outside, the noumenal vision. Letting the Outside in not only fragments the identity of those possessed, by way of breaking up chronicity and thus Being, ​but also dissolves it, for it dissipates the false primary predicate of linearity itself; a man’s self-worth, the idea that he has become is eradicated at the gateway to the noumena, the assemblage begets its singular parts and one becomes temporally many. Unable to exit the Inside in the form of the Inside itself, man assimilates the conclusion into his reality by way of diagonality worship, thus melting the flesh off the machine underneath, any attempt is undertaken from a place wherein attempts are immediately rebounded into themselves. You cannot exit the Inside and reach level two by using the Inside itself as your sole means of exit, you must already understand how to ply and communicate with level two if you wish to get there.


A Methodology of Possession: On the Philosophy of Nick Land by James Ellis

What Land proposed to retain from Kant was the emphasis on the transcendental efficacy of synthesis, the primacy of transcendental synthesis, but no longer as the synthesis of empirical items, objects of experience anchored in a constituting subject. It’s the self-synthesising potency of what he called intensive materiality. This becomes the key term. It’s a brilliant explication of the logical operation that Deleuze and Guattari carry out vis-a-vis Kantianism in Anti-Oedipus. Matter is nothing but machinic production, self-differentiation, and the fundamental binary that organizes this materialist metaphysics is that between intensive materiality, which he identifies with the body without organs, and death, this moment of absolute indifference as absolute difference. Land is quite explicit about the link to a certain version of Schellingianism here. He explicitly links Deleuze and Guattari to Schelling.

The binaries between what he calls intensive zero as matter in itself and every kind of conceptual binary between concepts and objects, or representing and represented: the claim is that by levelling this fundamental dualism, the dualism of transcendental form and empirical content, you get this materialist monism where you explain how matter itself generates its own representation. It generates its own representation, and by this account, representation itself is relegated to the status of a transcendental illusion. It’s a misprision of primary processes; it’s at the level of merely secondary processes.

But this materialist critique of transcendental critique, I argue, reproduces the critical problem of the connection between thought and reality. Why? Because the problem then becomes: how can you simply circumvent representation, and talk about matter itself as primary process, about reality in itself?

Accelerationism: Ray Brassier

Spirit reading Nick Land - Kant, Capital, and the Prohibition of Incest - Part 1

Spirit reading Stuart Kauffman's At home in the universe part 1

China is a more recent, but menacing player, by many (e.g. Nick Land) projected to out-accelerate all the previous entries — in the oeuvre this is referred to as Neo-China.

Accelerationism

In many ways, you can align the Deleuzian critique of representation with the Bergsonian critique of representation. Much of what Deleuze says is problematic about the categories of representation, about representation as the mediating framework that segments and parcels out the world, the flux of duration, into discretely individuated objects… the claim is that you have a sub-representational layer of experience which it is possible to access through intuition. The Bergsonian critique of metaphysics and the destitution of representation intuits the real differences in being, you can intuit the real nature of matter, time; duration in the Bergsonian register.

There’s a problem here for Landianism, because he can’t do this. He’s supplanted representation, but he wants to supplant this kind of Bergsonian vitalist phenomenology for an unconscious thanatropism. The point is: how do you access the machinic unconscious? It’s not simply given. Land insists time and time again, nothing is ever given, everything is produced. The problem is that Land’s materialist liquidation of representation, because it doesn’t want to reaffirm, allegedly, the primacy of sub-representational experience, which Bergson and phenomenology do in various ways… he has to explain what it is he’s talking about. He’s doing a kind of materialist metaphysics, and there’s an issue about what kind of traction this extraordinarily sophisticated conceptual apparatus can gain upon the process of primary production, the real as intensive difference, matter in itself, whatever you want to call it.

This is an initial philosophical difficulty, which interestingly Land himself in conversation tried to dismiss by saying “well, you have to understand that thinking itself is no longer about representational congruence between concepts and objects, ideas and things, but is itself a productive process.” The discussion of machinic mapping versus representational tracing in the opening plateau of A Thousand Plateaus, Deleuze and Guattari claim that schizoanalysis, or rhizomatics, or whatever you want to call it, is itself a praxis, a doing. There’s a positive feedback loop between what you are thinking about and your thinking. So that your conceptual practice is no longer tracing intelligible structures from a pre-existing, readymade reality, it’s actually tracing movements and tendencies in material processes. It becomes self-legitimating in this sense. The question then becomes one of intensification. It’s no longer an epistemological question of the legitimacy or the validity of your thinking vis-a-vis an allegedly independent reality, it’s simply a question of how your schizoanalytical practice accentuates or intensifies primary production, or on the contrary, delays and inhibits it. Truth or falsity becomes subordinate to the dyad intensificatory/deintensificatory. This is the conceptual trope which becomes translated into a political register. At the level of what it is you’re doing as a machinic materialist, intensifying primary production; all your practices become governed by the imperative to intensify and accelerate. To ruthlessly demolish any obstacle that threatens to delay or inhibit this.

Accelerationism: Ray Brassier

There is a substitution, of a sublimated materialist eschatology, for all forms of rationalist teleology. Why keep intensifying? Because there is always a surplus of stratification. One wouldn’t need to deterritorialize and destratify unless there was always a complement of reterritorialization and restratification. You only need to deterritorialize because there are strata. Why is there stratification in the first place?

Because there is an organising dualism. The claim is that, although the real itself is absolutely deterritorialized, the degree zero of absolute intensity, it’s always differentiated and stratified, sedimented in various complex ways. Once thinking itself becomes subordinated to the imperative to intensify and destratify, it’s clear that there must be a limitrophic point of absolute deterritorialization towards which the process of affirmation or acceleration tends.

If you’re accelerating, there are material constraints upon your capacity to accelerate, but there must also be a transcendental speed limit at some point. The ultimate limit is not a limit at all for him, it’s death, or cosmic schizophrenia. That’s the ultimate horizon. Land unabashedly endorses this remarkable thesis of Anti-Oedipus, but strips it of all its palliatives, about how this might generate new forms of creative existence, etc. For him it’s just: “at the end of the process is death”.

Accelerationism: Ray Brassier

Since ‘acceleration’ is a universal, panhuman, trans-human, posthuman and indeed nonhuman variable, acceleration or accelerationism is in this sense unlimited, or only as limited as the cosmic process itself. F. W. Nietzsche suggested the acceleration of the "leveling of European man," and to "push what is falling," while Evola suggested accelerating "the process of modernity" for it to meet its end.

Accelerationism

If there ever was such a thing as reality, as the Real, that sought after stability, it was built from the impatience of virtuality. Desire, then, is the signification of virtuality caught in a loop of material feedback. Machinic desire is the
signification of virtuality in-itself, and the course it is taking without the symptomatic attachment to material ends. Between virtuality and concept lies a communication of possible horizons,
the time which allows difference to protrude into reality, and become actual. The circuitry itself exists before anything else, within non-linearity. Each allotment of existence is an assemblage
of both production and communication, production of a virtual-actualization and of their implicit communication, which
itself opens up further possibilities for the continuation of the original virtuality as an alternative of itself; never lockedin,
the virtuality fluidly leaves behind the actual at all moments. The circuitry itself a trembling multiplicity, originating throughout time in intense events of synchronicity and limit-breaks. The part
one plays in this dirty, cruel theatre is not as an actor, nor a set-piece, but as the ink of the noscript, scratched out, erased,
rewritten and abused into transcendental submission; man gets no moment of fatigue, for the choice of existential exhaustion is not his to make, what happens throughout his existence is not
determinate on his conception of through.


A Methodology of Possession: On the Philosophy of Nick Land by James Ellis