#I don’t know if I should tag this as anarchism or communism but just know that it was written with that tone | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

grandhotelabyss · 3 years

Quote

Speaking of his comparatively small output, Ishiguro said: “I don’t have any regrets about it. In some ways, I suppose, I’m just not that dedicated to my vocation. I expect it’s because writing wasn’t my first choice of profession. It’s almost something I fell back on because I couldn’t make it as a singer-songwriter. It’s not something I’ve wanted to do every minute of my life. It’s what I was permitted to do. So, you know, I do it when I really want to do it, but otherwise I don’t.”

Giles Harvey, “Kazuo Ishiguro Sees What the Future Is Doing to Us”

(A long New York Times profile to crown the publicity campaign for Klara and the Sun, which I will read and review just as soon as it arrives, though I have a foreboding that it won’t add much to Never Let Me Go.

We here at Grand Hotel Abyss are interested in what we have elsewhere called “esoterica in the literary press”—what in other genres of writing would just be called themes or subtexts but which demand a more menacing appellation in the field of journalism, where writing is supposed to be transparent as glass. The undercurrent in Harvey’s piece is dolce far niente, which you can see if you compare how Harvey characterizes Ishiguro’s writing practice—as inspired laziness—to the way it’s described as an almost spiritualized martial art in the Guardian profile [“a process he compares to a samurai sword fight”].

Why this cryptic defense of the indolent? It accompanies an attempt to reinterpret the politics of Ishiguro’s fiction for the present, even though the first novels belong to the early triumphalist neoliberal moment in their skepticism of all organized politics. Never Let Me Go extends this skepticism to the organizations that have taken the place of politics and therefore breaks through into a true critique of neoliberalism. Never Let Me Go speaks to so many on a nearly forbidden channel because it is, more specifically, a critique of the feminine modes of domination that our era brings to the fore [e.g., as I’ve mentioned already, “why won’t men go to therapy?”].

We’ve discussed Nancy Armstrong before in these electronic pages; she wrote the book on the realist novel as a feminine mode of domination, and when she turns to Ishiguro’s science fiction—noting, as did the late Swedish Academy secretary Sara Danius, his odd resemblance both to Jane Austen and to Franz Kafka—she seemingly gets the message:

That is to say, as Kathy verbally replenishes her biologically depleted emotional life by describing all the connections she has made by means of this ruthless logic, what can only be called positive affect pulses back through the web of pathways which end in death. As it does so, her story converts the deaths of individual students into the form of life in common shared even by the dead in Walter Benjamin’s poignant lament for the passing of the traditional village storyteller. As it thus converts loss into connection at once banal and unavailable to normal individuals, Kathy’s story, I would argue, proposes a model of community that does not hark back to a bygone pastoral world, as Benjamin’s does, so much as open up the possibility that even individuals who consider themselves irreplaceable can and must acknowledge the continuous biological substratum on which they are already inscribed.

But Armstrong’s dense theoretical disquisition on a new post-novelistic model of community, as much as Harvey’s journalistic portrait of the artist as neo-social-democrat, doesn’t penetrate to the real Ishiguran esoterica. The author presents himself as a genial bumbling Englishman, a very decent liberal, a kindly multi-genre humanist like Gaiman or Mitchell—see his Amanda-Palmer-quoting daughter—who lacks even the grit in the eye you get from Amis or Rushdie. This is the softer book-club version of what Harvey and Armstrong are selling. Harvey writes,

Ishiguro came of age as a writer in the early 1980s, when market fundamentalism was sweeping Britain and the West, a development that caught him entirely off guard. “I never wanted revolution,” he said of his younger self. “But I did believe we could progress towards a more socialist world, a more generous welfare state. I went a long way into my adult life believing that was the consensus. When I was 24 or 25, I realized that Britain had taken a very different turn with the coming of Margaret Thatcher.” Although his books never explicitly address Thatcher’s neoliberal project, they reflect its dismaying human consequences. For Ishiguro’s characters, not working is not an option, or even a proclivity.

So much in his work is “not an option.” I think of the doomed clones torturing the fly in Never Let Me Go, the pianist enacting his great performance only when thinks he’s alone in The Unconsoled, the painter becoming a fascist because he sympathizes with the poor and oppressed in An Artist of the Floating World. The temptation is to recuperate this for a progressive politics in some watered-down Adornian reading that would show his works’ negativity to subtract from the world the very shape our hopes ought to take so that they become handbooks for utopia once you reverse the writing [I weakly lapsed into this at the end of my essay on Never Let Me Go]. His post-Nobel insistence on his genial liberalism points this way as much as does Armstrong’s summary of his work’s purpose as “provid[ing] a glimpse of what it might be like to live without the misbegotten notion that being a self-contained subject is the best and only way of being fully human,” or Harvey’s quiet argument for social democracy as a system that will allow us to be productively lazy just like the author.

The theme, the subtext, the esoterica is something else, though, something less like socialism in cipher and more akin to a philosophy of quiet retreat, inner exile, beneath the posture of conformity, something like Kierkegaard’s Knight of Faith or Jünger’s Anarch, though let me finish Eumeswil before you quote me on the latter.

The 20th century is dying more slowly than Onegin’s uncle, but it’s still clear what the future holds: corporatist biosurveillance city-states, which will come in “woke” Zuck/Bezos forms with democratic-socialist veneers and “based” Thiel/Musk versions that are more frank, but which will be the same in the end. Why else does even the present political left’s theory of “equity,” as encapsulated in this genuinely disgusting meme, imply the coerced correction of inherent biological inequality? This is the point I’ve been making since my essay on Spike Jonez’s Her in 2014: what the woke and the based want is basically the same thing—the juridical and biological extermination of the human being. Some will advertise this state of affairs as the expansion of humanism and the alternative to neoliberalism Ishiguro says he was hoping for. They will buy and sell our information and our atoms and tell us it’s freedom, they will bribe us a pittance to be serfs and call it socialism, and like Kathy and Ryder we will do our best to play our part with pride and decency. It is to this future that Ishiguro’s best novels offer a guide.

Further reading: check the Kazuo Ishiguro tag over at the main site for me on A Pale View of Hills, An Artist of the Floating World, Never Let Me Go, The Buried Giant, and a first response to Ishiguro’s Nobel. Confession: I’ve never read When We Were Orphans; I should have by now, but I know so little about its historical setting and am always intimidated by the word-problem aspect of detective novels, so I’ve put it off.)

#kazuo ishiguro #giles harvey #nancy armstrong #neoliberalism #fiction #literature #science fiction #english literature

3 notes · View notes

my-depressed-cat-blog · 5 years

Text

Why is it Taboo to seek Mental health Treatment?

Since the growth of school shootings across the United States, there's an ongoing debate regarding solutions. Among the most looked at causes behind mass shootings would be the psychological state of these shooters themselves. Most bulk shooters have several things in common with each other.

1. Grew up in a fatherless home 2. Was on prescription antipsychotic drugs 3. Had stressful events happening in their lives

For class #1, the answers are apparent. We need to revamp the family law courts so that there aren't "winning" parents and "shedding" parents. I talk about this subject in-depth within my published report delivered to the U.N. titled,"Global Human Trafficking in The Family Law Courts", which can be seen on Amazon.

However, for the sake of this Report, I want To concentrate on the mental health aspect. It is undeniable that our school systems and our health care systems are still handing out psychotropic medications such as candy! Kids who aren't paying attention to class are quickly prescribed Ritalin. Depressed teens are quickly give Prozac; the situation for adults is not much better.

Let's look at modern Rappers such as,"Lil Xan","Future", and the newly deceased 20 year-old rapper,"Lil Peep", that died from a Xanax tablet laced with Fentanyl. The rapper was found on Instagram frequently swallowing hand fulls of Xanax tablets daily. His young fans who idolized him are most likely following suit.

In accordance with this"business-insider" news site, the United States of America is the world's pioneer in prescribing anti-depressant medication. Based on one of its posts printed, it was found that 12 percent of all Americans are on some type of drug used as a treatment for mental illness.

There are pros and cons to these amounts. Require South Korea for example, an extremely developed nation, yet it is ranked #3 for suicides. In the Korean culture, visiting a physician for depression is a societal stigma which reveals weakness, especially on part of a male. It is not surprising considering that 80% of all suicides in the world are attributed to men. Since mental illness is pretty much ignored in South Korea and among men in general as a result of society pressures to remain "stoic", people are killing themselves left and right.

On The flip side, the United States, which is ranked between #30 - #40 (depending on the study), for suicides. So, there's some evidence that perhaps anti-depressant medications can work. Or is it just cultural? Jamaica often ranks in the very bottom of the list for suicide speeds despite being a poor nation. Even though the bad, the communities are extremely close knit, and their culture is quite cheerful. Maybe it is because marijuana is legal to smoke from the country! Who knows!

But, I do know one thing; anti-depressants along with other drugs used to treat mental illness carry many side-effects. "Suicidal Thoughts", is often listed among the significant side-effects of Prozac. Imagine that! A medicine designed for suicidal people which might cause suicidal thoughts! There is not any doubt that taking psychotropic drugs alters the brain chemistry, exactly like alcohol or any other intoxicant.

It is In my view that occupational therapy, talk therapy, and community interaction are one of the best remedies for depression. However, yet again, there is a draw back to these kinds of therapies as well.

Anytime An American sees a counselor for depression, suicidal thoughts, or any mental health issue, they're then"logged" and"stereotyped". Those who frequent a mental health counselor might have such activities used against them at a custody battle or people who try to buy a firearm.

Imagine you are battling depression, in order to go see a Counselor, just to have it used against you in the future. This is why many, myself included, dread the notion of visiting a mental health specialist during times of great anxiety. Once you visit these folks, you're very"tagged" and will be"marked". If you find yourself facing any future litigation, the courts can find your medical documents whereas they will say,:

"Ahhh! You moved into a mental health Counselor a few times for depression! You aren't fit to get a gun or have custody of your kids!" .

Sometimes, this may true, whereas In others, it could be an unfair stereotype. When people mentioned that they see a counselor or take anti-depressant medication, individuals will often sneer at you or maybe have a step backagain. We correlate mental health issues with schizophrenia or acute manic depressive types. The truth is, we are all suffering with some form of mental illness.

If You are just too happy, the doctors will say you are"manic". If you're too grumpy, they'll say you have"type A" personality. If you're too sad, they will say you suffer from acute"melancholy". It's similar to going to a mechanic. If you talk long enough, they'll find something wrong with you!

The truth is simple. Seeing a psychological Health counselor could lead to you losing rights to your child, to your firearms, and your standing as a individual. It is a sad fact. Under our present system, most individuals do not seek help for fear of being demonized.

The best ways we could prevent mass shootings is by Encouraging a friendly neighborhood, surround yourself with loving people, do your very best to participate parents, seek natural remedies to mental health disorders over drugs if possible (Sports, perform therapy, etc..) . If you are hearing voices or so are often trying to complete your suicide, then you should certainly seek medical intention.

Requiring Mental health screenings to purchase firearms appears to be a fantastic idea until you realize that many do not seek help so they can buy a firearm! Why don't you display people's health condition before they purchase alcohol, get a driver's permit, or board a plane? Mental health can make almost any action dangerous. Our country should stop searching for"quick" repairs and start taking a look at the true cause of our demise.

Our Fast-food, sex-violence, entertainment, glorification of misunderstand anarchism. There is"liberty" and then there is"accountable" freedom. Make decisions in life, nevertheless, make those choices in regard of how it will affect your society in large. Legislators can't solve these difficulties. These issues are those that will require households to measure up, unite, and take the reign of classic values without going overboard.

A middle ground between advanced thought and Traditional values have to be balanced. We should not be scared to progress our societybut we must also not completely dismiss traditional ways of living that have served our humanity for so long.

Last, we have to Promote more anonymity within our mental health departments. Must like the"confessionals" at a Catholic church. If people can be anonymously treated without so much of a paper-trail to stigmatize them, I am certain that many more people could step forward and request help.

As A boxing coach, this work often requires me to be a counselor, speaking Together with my students, building up their confidence. If you are depressed and Need help, but do not trust or fear physicians, a fantastic option in my Opinion is to stay busy in category settings. Building relationships are Essential in combating mental disease. In poor nations, suicide Prices Tend to be low because their communities are so tight . They're Poor, but no one is as lonely as the modern man who types away In his chilly artificially lit office cubicle.

#mentalhealth #Treatment #Depression #anxiety

2 notes · View notes

topherfoxtrot · 3 years

Text

You should give Tribes of Europa a try and here's why!!!

First of all the premise is lowkey awesome. Well executed? Not so much but let's not get ahead of ourselves. In the near future in what's referred to as "black December" all technology in the whole world stops working at once for no reason. After the chaos and mayhem this phenomenon caused the european continent divided into dozens (and potentially hundreds) of micro states the show calls TRIBES. Don't be fooled by the semantics tho. Those tribes are everywhere in the political spectrum loosely including eco anarchism, fascism and a military republic with no president, but a Father instead. Interesting right? We only get to know three of these tribes. Some others are mentioned, we we'll get to that soon.

And who are the characters you might be asking yourself. Well the main characters are three siblings from the Origine.

The older sibling is Liv (who I personally call Lara Croft). She's driven by family and by her moral code that is strongly influenced by her tribe and their leader/founder who happens to be her father. She's also really skilled in combat and knows her way around a crossbow.

The middle man is Kiano. If you search the tag you probably has seen him already in the countless shirtless scenes he makes in the show (😴😴). Being hot is not his only character trait tho. He's also driven by his family and wants to be free above all other things because only thru freedom he can look for his siblings.

The youngest is Elja (no idea how to pronounce that). I found him really annoying at the begining but he grew on me. He's really interested in the events before and during the black December, he was not born at the time or was too young to remember. He also finds an interesting artifact. And he has no idea his siblings are alive.

Oh did I mention their entire tribe and culture gets slaughtered in the pilot? Let's talk tribes.

Yeah the siblings are from the Origines, the first tribe we are introduced to. They are a really small community (roughly 70 people) who retreated to the forest in order to survive. They are against technology for the most part and occasionally trade with a nearby community (that also gets slaughtered by the crows)

Crows? What? Yeah so here we have our second tribe. The crows are one of (if not the) biggest tribes in Europa. They value honor and strength above life, are super okay with slavery and have some social mobility which means that slavery is not forever. But only in some cases. Their leader is called The Kaptain and upon meeting him everyone must chant HAIL THE STRONGEST. He also has a cane and an oversized fur coat.

But wait why the crows were attacking the origines? Yeah remember the artifact Elja found? Yeah turns out everyone is after that because it's some atlantian artifact. Atlantians? They're the third tribe we get to meet. I mean we don't. We only know that they're super secret and for some reason their tech survived the black December which is super sus.

Anyways when the origines are attacked Elja runs away, Kiano is captured to become a slave and homegirl Liv is found by a unit of the crimson republic. There's our forth tribe. The crimson republic is highly militarized and possesses a lot of guns and bullet proof vests and all those call of duty shenanigans.

The three siblings then develop their own storyline and I honestly hope they never find each other again lmao. You care about trigger warnings? Cuz I do!

The show contains lots of violence (no gore tho).

Two sex scenes with nothing explicit (yay).

One character spits his own food but there's no vomit.

Slavery imagery (people living in sub human conditions) and vocabulary (character calling another charter their possession).

Death of a parent.

In one scene we see boobs but they're in the background and it's super quick.

A female character sexually assaults a male character (not explicit but hella uncomfortable).

That's all I can think of now but might add more later. Hope you enjoyed this summary. If you like what you just read give the show a chance. Love y'all.

#tribes of europa

1 note · View note

mitigatedchaos · 7 years

Note

Assuming I can shatter China, too (for the sake of sidestepping questions of likelihood-of-success, let's make that "assuming I can shatter China *first*"), any objection to me cracking the US into a few more drownable-in-a-bathtub sized chunks?

Drownable-in-a-bathtub is too small for any reasonable national government, but setting that aside…

How perceptive.

That the dominant hegemony is a democratic republic founded on liberal and enlightenment values, human rights, and democracy as ideology has some advantages. For instance, it likely plays a part in just about every autocrat having to pretend to democratic legitimacy. But those advantages are pretty intangible, so we’ll set those aside as well.

And let’s assume a breakup of Russia and India as well.

Sometimes I oppose things not just because I disagree with them on values, but because I think they won’t even work for the stated goal. (Doesn’t everyone?) So a lot of the opposition to American power wants to supplant America with Communism, or Anarchism, or smash it to bits, or dissolve it into global capitalism, or install a world government.

And while often this is based on ideological values about how people should live,

it’s also based on “OH FUCK GEORGE BUSH COULD JUST RANDOMLY INVADE SOMEWHERE AND NO ONE COULD STOP HIM.”

But while knowledge is knowing that America has hegemonic power, wisdom is knowing that that level of relative power isn’t entirely unique to America.

So not only will those ideas, like turning America Communist, be undesirable in themselves, but they will fail to actually abolish hegemony. They won’t even work for that stated purpose that was supposed to justify such a radical course of action.

For someone like me, this is a terrible deal.

So as long as anyone else has a continent-spanning superstate, I and the other American nationalists have no reason to dismantle ours.

But this question posits that a breakup of the other 9 million square kilometer nations has already happened.

At that point, I don’t really need a continent-spanning superstate. It has certain advantages, but the pressing need, to avoid living under someone else’s hegemony, is gone.

And I’m willing to make weird ideological trades. (I may be a lot less pro-immigration than most of the ratsphere, for instance, but there are conditions where I’d be willing to add all of Mexico to the United States.)

It may surprise you to learn this, but I’ve periodically thought about breaking the United States into a new level of “Regional Federalism” to deal with the increased political polarization. It wouldn’t work as well as we might like for that, due to the primary divide being urban/rural, so some other designs might have to be investigated, but I’m not as opposed to the idea as some readers may expect.

So let’s suppose we take the idea of a North American Union. There’s a sort of slider on a continuum of being more like a unified central government towards being a bunch of barely-connected separate nations. We’ll put the slider more towards the latter.

The American states are too small to be effective countries in the way that we’d like, and many of them are landlocked - very unfair! So we break America into 3-6 countries, based on the regions. Each one has some coastline of its own (if 3-4 countries), or else, through the NAU, the Great Lakes Region gets prenegotiated access to the sea.

This gives us a group of countries which each have a power level somewhere between that of France and that of Japan.

Minimum military development spending is pegged by the NAU to some % of the GDP and is shared between all of them. Actual militaries are individual to each country. There is a mandatory mutual defense pact, and a military coordination center, but pre-emptive wars and the like are optional. If Texas decides to invade Iran, New York does not have to pay for it. Outside of this, minimum military % GDP spending is tagged to 2.5%, and NAU members can sue each other if they fail to meet it.

The US Dollar is not abolished, but becomes a basket currency based on the currencies of each of the new NAU member countries. New currencies are issued for the new countries so that their economies don’t have currency problems like the EU does.

The official language of the NAU is American English. Proficiency in English must be taught in every NAU member country. There is no prohibition on adding other languages at the member country level.

The Bill of Rights is kept.

Other than this, since we’re looking for a dismantling, the power of the NAU government is pretty limited. The number of representatives for each member country is not proportional to population.

For the individual countries, I think multi-party parliamentary systems might result in a bit less infuriating dipolar partisanship. However, to be more decisive, each should have a President elected by Approval Voting.

That’s all pretty radical, and it’s more of a rough sketch than anything, but I am willing to make ideological trades with people that are primarily anti-nationalist because of things like the Iraq War - they’re just trades that no one can realistically offer.

Then again, by the mid-century, who knows?

#anons #asks #policy #politics #flagpost #tired #north american union

7 notes · View notes