/lit/ - Literature

>>12519038
>Somehow I feel this is very relevant but would be much clearer and in a way more mundane if someone adopted (or perhaps crafted) a more neutral and level-headed vocabulary.
yeah, i agree. part of finding a way across or through the current divide would be good. a lot of divides, really.

>I'm not advocating for any Enlightenment-lite rationalizing but rather not using the modern media landscape as a reference and starting point, which I think you're implicitly doing despite yourself and is the main reason this looks so convoluted.
yep

>Treating this particular era with calm as what it is, merely one small step on a long undirected (but not unconstrained) journey that started 5500 (or 250000, or 14 billions) years ago might help.
no doubt.

it's metaphysics of control. that's what interests me. once upon a time we had religious structures; then Revolutionary ideology; and of late postmodern pseudo-capital, call it neomarxism or neoliberalism or whatever. in these times of foment i tend to think the conditions for really interesting leaps forward take place, and i'd prefer them to be philosophical rather than cultural or political. the Sorcerer's Apprentice: if you want to picture a fucked-out and angry Mickey, with a hat he can no longer remove, while the brooms have swept the palace clean and moved on elsewhere, you would have a bang-on description of me. and i'm still fucking mad that i don't understand how the Wizard Hat actually works.

maybe someday.