unspeaking the unspeakable

diary … diarrhea … diarrhy-ha …

everything begins in mysticism and ends in politics

but ... everything begins in politics and ends in mysticism

drama shifts from visible stages of society to invisible stages of body, electrical surges in flesh (what technocapitalism calls neurological issues) – a consequence of withdrawing from electrical surges of production : loci of energy transplacing, rooting in soils of human molecular vermicology

evolution of mysticism –

… from purity’s skirmishes to purity’s dream (here, an overlap with art)

… from a distant or estranged relationship with institutional religion to institutional religion's irrelevance

… from emphases on lines (progression from darkness through darkness to light) to circles (geometric orientations toward centers and circumferences)

… from religious mysticism to aesthetic mysticism

do we not seek a union – at least a constructive dialogue – between mysticism and politics (rather than a crocodilian estrangement)?

we all are food. this that democracy

technocapitalism is a caste system. that there’s some mobility between castes – as equally down as up (though the edges are further protected ... and almost everyone wants [tediously] to go up) – changes little. verticality is still respected and dominates society (those up are envied, talked about, desired; those down are despised, invisible, shunned, pitied); each caste tends to be an enclave to itself with its own assistance networks, jokes, moralities, vulgarities, hypocrisies …

the privilege of traveling among castes (living among them – not visiting and analyzing) relativizes, instilling doubts (remember montaigne and his cannibals?) about the received wisdoms and mores of any specific tribe/caste or the systems in which they individually and collectively operate

a privilege not normally counted among privileges

a question naturally arises – the human seems (in the ubiquity and enforcement of the caste system) inextricable from the caste system – of the nature of the human. when i question this – its totality, enforcements, methods – question not from the authorized pedestal of questioning (the academy) but independently (for the academy speaks complicitly within the system regardless of any sympathies of any of its contents) i am shunned or dismissed as pathological, misanthropic, insane, bitter, romantic (whimsical, utopian) ... not just from one tribe, but all of them, their codes of dismissal differing according to the respective tribe's grammar. yet each secretly corroborates with the others in their unspoken shared geometric assumptions

we severely limit our knowledge and experience to get on

with our lives. we label that which is outside our knowledge and experience (annoying, detrimental to us! gets in our way of getting on!) with exclusionary pejorative labels. as a species we limit what is most distinctive about us (vision, empathy), emphasizing instead common elements (domination, avarice), using our distinctions primarily to further subjugate, to become the hyperapex predators of the commons