If this document is so important to you, why don't you make it available to the local masses? Jean Baudrillard,
On Nihilism. Myself, I only tolerate postmodernese up to a point, though I am sure that if you dug hard within that text (which is tossed up like a juggler's silver & black balls, and there are three dozen of them, and they defy gravity!) it seems possible that one could mine some good stuff. But that isn't what I asked, Diebert, I didn't ask for some stock definition, I asked for you to reveal in your own self the destructive effect of nihilism and the symptomology of decadence. To do
THAT would require a bravery that you just might not have.
All of my critiques are wholesome critiques. I could write here until a second moon appears in the sky and could articulate in the most precise prose just where the flaws (and there are many) in this 'thinking system' lie, but you (and you especially) will roundly avoid it all. No matter if you delivered Substance by the truckload, y'all have your ways to avoid dealing with substance, and each of you, in your unique way, throws up elaborate defenses. And this is precisely the point, or the area in which my point takes form: are you real philosophers? real thinkers? real 'spiritual people'? or are you
farsantes (from Old French, from Latin farcīreto,
to stuff), or are you really capable of dialogue? Now, you say that no one responds to me, as if that means that I make no sense, but even that is a twist on both truth and lie. What is intolerable to people who take themselves utterly seriously (eg: the narrator of those Men of the Infinite vids)(and the very name 'Men of the Infinite' is in itself laughable, overblown, ridiculous...) is to be ridiculed (successfully). You see, these folks (and you in your way) are dead serious about their whole, contrived rap. At the core, there is a very 'severe' being, most grave indeed! and one who really does believe he has in his hands some Absolute Truth. The whole scene is predicated on this assumption, and for this reason it is like a religious position. You especially were always offended at a deep level that one such as I resort to irony. But irony is the
ONLY TOOL to even begin to break through the hard shell y'all have constructed around yourselves.
Diebert wrote: "Are you perhaps just looking for anything to add to your clumsy semi-intellectual assassination attempts? It's rather embarrassing."
Note the characterization, as if I am 'assassinating' anyone (and as if I've
ever run from self-embarrassment!) I am in fact bringing to the surface a whole range of material, observation and (potential) fact
that y'all syuff under the mutherfucking rug! Genius Forum is a game, largely, that is played not in honesty but through deceptions, image-management, false-appearances: all that can be summed up
precisely in those videos we are referring to!
Consequently (note the reference to causation) 'you' attract a crowd of mad-hatters and drive away those who actually want to converse things through! When we deceive ourselves at a fundamental level, this deception has consequences! When our ideas are bound up in our self-deceptions and our lies at that fundamental level, all our creations are marred. The solution: to begin to be honest.
The Talking Ass, Bless His Brown Hide,
Attempts To Bring Forward All The Truths
(Like 'Garbage', Like 'Waste',
Like All Things Swept Under the Rug)
And Make Them Part Of The Conversation: Subject.
(And this is
just one of the many reasons he is so
wondefulicious!)
Diebert wrote: "It's this aspect of over-saturation and sur-plus-reality which I've referred to often enough in our discussions and which I see as a better description of decadence. It's still born out of decay and disease, or better: it are the mechanics of decay, like cancer cells, tumors, mushrooms, worms and so on. It's an over-presence of forms, products, ideas and "fluorescent lights" which are not a sign of rich and healthy culture but of a dead and decaying one. Like Baudrillard's simulacra or how I would call them: zombie simulations."
I neither accept nor deny your definition. I note that you seem taken in, at least to some degree, by the 'abstract metaphysics' of the Baudrillardian description. For me, it is not that useful. I read postmodernese and it just doesn't stick. You can read that stuff all day and what do you actually take away from it. It is a means of expression that is distasteful, to me anyway. (But interesting).
But your diagnostic (or your preferred diagnostical language) implies a state of health. Is health attainable? And how, through what means? And I will interject another pet point of mine: the RX offered by QRS, to my mind, is
NOT a medicine, though parts of it (simple sobriety, etc.)
CAN indeed produce tonifying effects. But because of its errors and what it
denies (and what you also deny and refuse to examine)
produces another form of sickness!
Only the Dancing & Truly Lyrical Ass
Can Be Said to Be
Truly Healed...
(but that is, of course, another story...)
Dennis writes: "The highlight of the show is Diebert mothering you, in turn scolding you and petting you, and you seeking his approval."
He's a rascal, isn't he? And I turn violently from the maternal tit but so much need the nourishment from it! Still, I am content, just as long as he doesn't try to squeeze his hand into my trousers, which is what I half expect from that
Man of the Infinite of those vids!
Mein Gott in Himmel!