S M O K I N G

[zhao]

the real solutions can only come from the political. Not in the sense that the individual avoids responsibility and blames the state say, but rather that in order to change the conditions which inculcate the unhealthiness in the first place (ie- in this case the sedentary lifestyle is set by the system of infrastructure, town planning, the strains of the kinds of jobs available...). This is why health (no quotation marks) requires a broader view than the merely individual, and must be grounded always in the explicitly political

yes these problems are much deeper rooted, epistemically, in the foundations of the ideas which shape the age we live in (are maybe on the verge of transition away from). but i as an individual will still be trying to break from consumptive patterns in small increments while i wait for economic systems to crash and cities to collapse.

"Capitalism" isn't a league of supervillans who all cackle around a marble table at their secret lair.

STN is funnies.

Capitalism is an identifiable set of assumptions and ideologues, which comprise a particular way of both looking at the world and of organizing it. the notion of Capitalism being "neutral" and consisting of nothing other than the "free will" of its participants is an illusion perpetrated since its conception, and one that still (apparently) keeps its deathly grip on our imagination.

 

[noel emits]

What the 'problem' 'is' is the externalisation of the sum of our pathological conditions. It takes on an almost autonomous existence and perpetuates itself by encouraging in some floundering way the conditions that support it. It's not 'capitalism' as such, not a specific ideology or conspiracy.

The first difficulty with tackling this problem is that it's not possible to see the nature of it with any clarity while we are ourselves infected with its viral tentacles. As we start to identify these as distinct from ourselves and our own nature we get a better view of the 'problem', or at least we start to see that there is one. Getting healthy is merely the process of removing these 'barbs', and getting 'healthy' in the more traditionally understood physical sense can be of huge benefit in supporting this process. Indeed the process of self-reclamation will very likely make you want to treat your body with more care.

A workable 'political' solution can only come about where there is understanding, and understanding can only come about when a certain amount of autonomy, slack, has been achieved. There already are political programs but they must be grounded in people resisting the sicknesses, otherwise they will merely be new forms of the 'problem'. Even if a somehow workable solution arises it will simply not be understood or welcomed by those that are not ready.

Politician (or theoretician), heal thyself.

 

[Mr. Tea]

Not even Tea and vimothy?

Haha, you wanna hear Vimothy's response to my opinions on public services (namely, that I am a "Communist"!).

 

[swears]

Seriously, I think you're more of a leftie than people give you credit for, Tea.

Like Martin Amis, lol

 

[Mr. Tea]

Oh shush you, I'm just a big old softy really.

*pets passing puppy*

 

[nomadologist]

if zhao's gonna turn us (me) on to gerhard richter, maybe i should turn him on to italo svevo?

i'll second that

 

[nomadologist]

[The clearest sign of the reign of biopolitics, and the medicalization of the human subject, is precisely the obsession both with drugs and sanitized notions of 'health': take, for example the middle class paranoia about "stress" [now a vast medico-pharma-corporate industry]: how to avoid stressful situations and environments and activities, how to "cope" with them. "Stress" has become our name for the excessive dimension of life, for its over-powering invasiveness, for the "too-muchness" to be kept under control. It becomes labelled a 'medical condition' rather than, say, a legitimate ontological expression or response to the pressures of 'commonsensical' capitalist realism (For this reason, today, more than ever, the gap that separates psychoanalysis from therapy imposes itself in all its brutality: if one wants therapeutic improvement, one will effectively get a much faster and efficient help from a combination of behavioral-cognitivist therapies and chemical treatment (pills).]

All politics now reduced to [medicalized] aesthetics (what Benjamin termed the aestheticisation of politics - fascism).

You could flush the rest of the thread and I wouldn't mind much, but this is an exceptionally well-written paragraph.

 

[nomadologist]

is there any man who was a purely healthy desire for another woman? or do all men not have some weird dirty kink that colors and intensifies this vanillla desire?

and is not even the pure healthy desire to copulate, moved only by fair features and curves, a bit brutish even in the best case . . . .

Desire is from the unconscious and as such it's everything kinky we can't possibly bring ourselves to admit to wanting. You can quote me on that

 

[mistersloane]

You could flush the rest of the thread and I wouldn't mind much, but this is an exceptionally well-written paragraph.

Yeah, I've been totally blown away by some of the stuff you've been writing recently HTML, wicked.

 

[nomadologist]

Yeah, I've been totally blown away by some of the stuff you've been writing recently HTML, wicked.

Wouldn't it be funny if HMLT were actually Zizek himself, pretending to be Welsh? It would make a whole lot of sense right?

But then again Zizek's avatars online are probably really lame character studies where he pretends to be an American teenaged girl or something in a Buffy the Vampire Slayer chatroom, and repeatedly slips up and says "Other" or "Lacan" between a lot of "Whatevs" and "Totally"...

 

[noel emits]

Thing is though it's utterly irrelevant tosh. There's nothing revelatory there, all that stuff is already patently ludicrous no? Apparently not. This kind of tedious critiquing of how dumb the culture is amounts to shooting fish in a magic barrel that keeps filling up with more fish. It's easy, pointless and never ending. And it's also a really neat way to stay distracted and avoid doing anything real. It plays right into the 'systems' hands.

And just to be clear these 'sanitized notions of 'health'' have nothing at all to do with what myself and zhao (and others maybe) have been talking about with regard to healing and resistance.

 

[nomadologist]

Sounds like someone hasn't read his Lacan or Hegel or Zizek :slanted:

 

[noel emits]

Sounds like someone hasn't read his Lacan or Hegel or Zizek :slanted:

Is there supposed to be some content or information in this post because I can't see any.

Sounds more like somebody hasn't read their zhao or noel emits to me.

 

[nomadologist]

I have read all the posts on this thread, but HMLT's (here and in the couple of other smoking-related threads) are the best imo

Gek a close second

But of course, I agree with them for the most part

 

[nomadologist]

yeah that's really interesting that one, I used to have a book of interviews with Richter and GOD was he boring, which kindof impressed me because to be simultaneously the most brilliant artist on earth and the most boring human being has to be some form of higher achievement.

i think richter was hilarious at points--

when asked why he stuck with the "bourgeouis convention" of painting,

he replies "I am bourgeouis enough to eat with a knife and fork. I am bourgeous enough to paint."

something like that

 

[noel emits]

But of course, I agree with them for the most part

That much I figured. Cosy reassurance and reiteration of shared assumptions. How rad!

I've tried to explain how any proposed 'political' program, even if perfectly workable, will not be understood or accepted, and indeed will be doomed to failure and corruption if the basics are not tackled first.

Of course by my own logic what I'm saying here will probably not be understood so perhaps there's little point in discussing it.

I think some of us can see how this is born out in the characters of certain persons where the endless convoluted knots of critical analysis and theory serve only to further obfuscate and defer the addressing of any real issues. How ingeniously they avoid and 'rationalise' away anything that might actually work.

 

[nomadologist]

sorry, i meant bourgeois. i know how to spell that!

oh, noel, i would love it if something as wonderfully easy as "try hard to disentangle yourself from capitalism" would work. I truly would. it's just that i don't think it ever will!

or, it could all be a character flaw of mine that makes capitalism so all-pervasive! who knows?

 

[gek-opel]

That much I figured. Cosy reassurance and reiteration of shared assumptions. How rad!

I've tried to explain how any proposed 'political' program, even if perfectly workable, will not be understood or accepted, and indeed will be doomed to failure and corruption if the basics are not tackled first.

Of course by my own logic what I'm saying here will probably not be understood so perhaps there's little point in discussing it.

I think some of us can see how this is born out in the characters of certain persons where the endless convoluted knots of critical analysis and theory serve only to further obfuscate and defer the addressing of any real issues. How ingeniously they avoid and 'rationalise' away anything that might actually work.

I'm in total agreement with you as far as the trap of critique goes. As a model it has to be abandoned... Critique alone fails, but to give up on reason entirely leaves us ... where exactly? Your conclusions are utterly, tragically glib. How can anyone take you seriously with such a settled notion of "natural" from which we must remove the "viral barbs"... from my point of view reality is fucking viral in every direction, in every ontological register. The natural is a construct which emerges only as the negation of its opposite.

Oh but that's right - we have "what works" ... which will surely help us "going forward" won't it? Lets achieve "best practice" .. . sure you don't want to "blue sky" it while you're there...?

 

[noel emits]

oh, noel, i would love it if something as wonderfully easy as "try hard to disentangle yourself from capitalism" would work. I truly would. it's just that i don't think it ever will!

I though I'd explained a bit clearer than this up-thread. What you have there in quotes is not what I've said here at all. For a start it's not 'capitalism' that is the problem - that's just a manifestation - the 'problem' is really us and our pathology. So, you can't tackle it without tackling yourself, you can't even understand it really I would say. To me going about it any other way is fairly useless and ineffective.

 

[nomadologist]

I though I'd explained a bit clearer than this up-thread. What you have there in quotes is not what I've said here at all. For a start it's not 'capitalism' that is the problem - that's just a manifestation - the 'problem' is really us and our pathology. So, you can't tackle it without tackling yourself, you can't even understand it really I would say. To me going about it any other way is fairly useless and ineffective.

I disagree with all of this vehemently.