what are you reading now?

[woops]

hey new pope stop lurking start posting

 

[woops]

explains why @Leo went quiet

 

[Clinamenic]

explains why @Leo went quiet

 

[Clinamenic]

Stan: 1 quote 1 like
@version : 0 quotes 0 likes

 

[william_kent]

STATS RULE

 

[pattycakes]

...everything around me, crylarf get the fire emote, thumbs and a shocker y'alllll

 

[jenks]

I enjoyed Perfection, though I had to skip the précis of Wallpaper magazine 2002-2009 in the first 6 pages. It captured the superficiality, nostalgia, and ergodic consumerism of the young urbanite nicely. They should have had a kid or two, but of course ruled it out for insane reasons.

I think it made a point of following Perec’s form quite closely on purpose - almost like an Oulipo constraint. I’m re-reading Les Choses now and it’s interesting how little has changed - just the product names.

 

[hmg]

"Write me like one of your French novels"

Swastika Night is hysterical, in the traditional sense. I'll probably finish it tho.

 

[thirdform]

Derek Raymond - I was Dora Suarez

 

[pattycakes]

Now onto Lord Jim by Joseph Conrad. Gifted to me by @Clinamenic earlier this year.

This is getting on my nerves. He spends so much time describing everything. I want more action

 

[thirdform]

This is getting on my nerves. He spends so much time describing everything. I want more action

conrad is just the 19th century version of 4chan wank bank fantasies. you should never listen to any recommendations of @Clinamenic — you rather disembowel him.

 

[pattycakes]

As much of a scoundrel as he is, it was my pick. He just bought it for me. I loved Heart of Darkness so thought to give this one a go

 

[Clinamenic]

conrad is just the 19th century version of 4chan wank bank fantasies. you should never listen to any recommendations of @Clinamenic — you rather disembowel him.

I heartily recommend everyone here read some Bordiga

 

[version]

I heartily recommend everyone here read some Bordiga

Against anti-fascism: Amadeo Bordiga’s last interview

The text of the interview was originally published in Storia Contemporanea no. 3, September 1973. Bordiga also spoke to journalists Sergio Zavoli and Edek Osser for a filmed interview, excerpts of which were included in a documentary on the rise of Fascism. Translated by Giovanni Tiso.

libcom.org

 

[thirdform]

I heartily recommend everyone here read some Bordiga

readings are not recommended in science. and you still want to run some pseudo-scientific guff about progressive capitalism. how can you accomplish that when you don't know the rudiments of science and think re-endoginization of capital is a scientifically valid term?

 

[thirdform]

Against anti-fascism: Amadeo Bordiga’s last interview

The text of the interview was originally published in Storia Contemporanea no. 3, September 1973. Bordiga also spoke to journalists Sergio Zavoli and Edek Osser for a filmed interview, excerpts of which were included in a documentary on the rise of Fascism. Translated by Giovanni Tiso.

libcom.org

one of the few interviews ever worth reading. incisive and completely devoid of personalistic rubbish, thank Allah.

 

[Clinamenic]

readings are not recommended in science. and you still want to run some pseudo-scientific guff about progressive capitalism. how can you accomplish that when you don't know the rudiments of science and think re-endoginization of capital is a scientifically valid term?

You've already been subsumed. Talk to the invisible hand, sister!

 

[Clinamenic]

I play as Bordiga in Fortnite.

 

[thirdform]

You've already been subsumed. Talk to the invisible hand, sister!

the invisible hand is an erroneous proposition mathematically.

We discussed this the other week. don't start leaking big mac puss out of your rectum.

∀ n ∈ CapitalistSystems, ∃ f ∈ {ForcesOfProduction, RelationsOfProduction} such that:

lim₍Innovation → ∞₎ [Socialisation(Labourₙ) + StateControl(Forcesₙ)] = CollectiveCapitalₙ

⇒ InvisibleHand = ∅, as Capitalₙ → ConsciousPlanning

∴ ∃ (n + 1) = Communism, emerging immanently from n — not refuted by n₁ < (n + 1)

⟹ LaissezFaire( n ) ⇔ ⊥, since:

Stateₙ ≠ ExternalImposition
but = Result[FeudalPower → ∅, LandedProperty → CommodityForm]

⇒ Attempt(N + 2) = Contradiction, as:

CapitalistDevelopment ⇒ StateMediation
⇒ ¬Possibility[ReturnTo(N −)] ⟹ N + 2 ∉ ℝₑ

 

[thirdform]

seriously man, get some new punchlines. you are not an endorsement for the innovation of capitalism, at this rate.