Mark Fisher and Ray Brassier

These positions and the lack of nuance that characterized them significantly affected Foucault’s friendship with Gilles Deleuze, who openly denounced the media operation of the New Philosophers. For Deleuze, it was a ‘null’ thought, with ‘concepts as big as hollow teeth’, that responded only to a logic of ‘marketing’ feeding on ‘martyrology’ and ‘corpses’. However, we must understand Foucault’s endorsement less as an intellectual or conceptual validation of the New Philosophers than as offering some political support for their approach. Considering that he made the above-quoted statement in a context where almost half of the French population was ready to vote for a Socialist candidate and project, Foucault’s radical critique of the socialist legacy may reasonably be interpreted as a strong dismissal of a socialist alternative. From this standpoint, it is clear that for Foucault, as for the Second Left, the discussion was no longer about the type of reform that would be needed, but about the very definition of the Left. The study of neoliberalism he was undertaking at the same time would prove to be a fascinating opportunity to redefine a Left freed from socialism.

The Last Man Takes LSD Foucault and the End of Revolution by Mitchell Dean and Daniel Zamora

Finally, in a 1977 interview noscriptd ‘Torture is Reason’, Foucault was asked if he could think of an alternative to the ‘police state’ that he associated with socialism. His answer was as clear as it was radical:

I would say that we are back at the year 1830, which means that we have to start all over again from the beginning. However, the year 1830 still had behind it the French Revolution and the whole European Enlightenment tradition; we have to start all over again from the beginning … In one word this important tradition of socialism may be called fundamentally into question because everything this socialist tradition has produced historically may be condemned.

The Last Man Takes LSD Foucault and the End of Revolution by Mitchell Dean and Daniel Zamora

luckily we can still shame formalists for holding beliefs.

linguistic sentences are (dis)located in their practical discourses.
and i am supposed to believe that laws, and the word of God, walks its feet?
anything, that has here been "read off" or, thought-of as-readable, has been already interpretatively assumed.
its meaning rests upon an underintellegible clarity that is always - and never not - at(and across) borderline reasoning.

“I am a dream still dreaming”

Nayyirah Waheed, Salt, 2013

"Drugs good"
~ Aldous Huxley, The Doors of Perception

"Priests, professors, masters, you are making a mistake in turning me over to the law. I have never belonged to this people; I have never been a Christian; I am of the race that sang under torture; laws I have never understood; I have no moral sense, I am a brute: you are making a mistake."
A. Artaud

[1] literally my-sister-in-SpinoNietzsche.

[2] it is quite true that it is only with Techno, and even most particularly, importantly, with Detroit Techno and the underlying affirmative movements[a politics of will-to-power] that gave rise to it - that "Alienation" couldn't simply be understood in the Hegelian sense anymore, nothing about it was stirring a negative - no transformation could happen from the subtractive practice of the dialectical [junctive] synthesis that would give rise to a classicist surplus displaced upon the all-totalizing-one.
not even the Marxian understanding of history could totalize the disruptive sound of the noise. its own drama.