/lit/ - Literature

The idea is to fight the Holy War within. Zizek always gets triggered about the Bhagavad Gita because Himmler liked it as well; mythopoetics goes hand in hand with conquest. But this is to miss the point, or at least only to pick up on one side of it. It's the same thing as the misappropriation of Nietzsche: you can read him esoterically or exoterically, but it's very hard to do *both* at the *same time* because he's just such a fucking genius. Same with Deleuze. That which is true is true because it can be read in these two equally compatible, different ways - Dark Deleuze and so on - but that polarity is just more mimetics at work. But beyond a certain horizon speaking theoretically is just pointless static.

What you don't want, perhaps, if you are a theologian-statesman of some armed state, is to cross the streams between your esoterics and your exoterics. Immanentizing the Eschaton and so on. Because it won't happen, there's always that extra part, some other heretic, some other apostate, some other nonbeliever, some other false prophet. Gnostic warfare is total war both in time and space. Biopolitical and theopolitical. Bad scene.
>unless you're a spess mahreen

>>9702897
Much better to say it like this tho.

>>9551363
>prove me wrong

i'd rather agree tbqh senpai