/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11744319]

Can someone give me a quick rundown on Nick Land? I think I understand his general philosophy but what about the whole drug-quelled alt-right lapse? Is that over or what? It's really hard to find any information on the guy

[Anonymous No.11744327]

>>11744319

Have you read or listened to any of his interviews?

[Anonymous No.11744332]

>>11744327
No but I guess I should start there then. Sorry I'm a brainlet :(

[Anonymous No.11744336]

>>11744319
the procession of Land
academic Land > amphetamine Land > twitter Land

[Anonymous No.11744346]

Me and Nick land are among the few individuals to fully understand the implications of Deleuzean thought and achieve the BwO. It is no coincidence that we both went insane soon after. Six visits to the psych ward later after deterritorializing myself with hardcore psychedelics, I have now returned to the fold of Platonism. The ethics of difference, it would seem, end only in a padded cell or a coffin. For my mother's sake, I now adhere to virtue ethics. Kinda miss fucking bipolar scene sluts but then again that's probably how I ended up with HIV. I only hope my future wife can forgive me my immature philosophical infatuation.

[Anonymous No.11744374]

>>11744346
Is this pasta?

[Anonymous No.11744413]

>>11744332

This is not the worst place to start, though the interviewer is insufferable:

https://syntheticzero.net/2017/06/19/the-only-thing-i-would-impose-is-fragmentation-an-interview-with-nick-land/

If you'd rather watch videos, I'd start with this one. It's fairly accessible and is about an hour long.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAT14h5_lMo

[Anonymous No.11744419]

>>11744319
/r/theoryfiction

[Anonymous No.11744437]

https://vastabrupt.com/2018/08/15/ideology-intelligence-and-capital-nick-land/

[Anonymous No.11744481]

>>11744103

[Anonymous No.11744883]

>>11744319
oh shit, the village grain storage is on fire and it's spreading faster than it can be put it out, better murder all the firemen that come here, we're gonna starve to death either way.

[Anonymous No.11744904]

>>11744883
oh and also because there's a fire I belive in demons who only exist because I believe in them and they retroactively lit the fire (not in a makebelieve sense, in a real sense). Also race realism.

[Anonymous No.11744922]

>>11744319
he's the insane clown posse of contemporary philosophy. basically if charlie sheen read critical theory. if you're a super insecure pseud who is just interested in vacuous posturing, land is your man.

[Anonymous No.11744927]

>>11744883
>>11744904
>>11744922
low test and cringepilled

[Anonymous No.11744931]

>>11744927
the guy wanted a quick rundown retard

[Anonymous No.11744942]

>>11744931
why did you post that shit then?

[Anonymous No.11744967]

>>11744319
Just read Meltdown, OP. Also this >>11744336
>The story goes like this: Earth is captured by a technocapital singularity as renaissance rationalization and oceanic navigation lock into commoditization take-off. Logistically accelerating techno-economic interactivity crumbles social order in auto-sophisticating machine runaway. As markets learn to manufacture intelligence, politics modernizes, upgrades paranoia, and tries to get a grip.
>The body count climbs through a series of globe-wars. Emergent Planetary Commercium trashes the Holy Roman Empire, the Napoleonic Continental System, the Second and Third Reich, and the Soviet International, cranking-up world disorder through compressing phases. Deregulation and the state arms-race each other into cyberspace.
>By the time soft-engineering slithers out of its box into yours, human security is lurching into crisis. Cloning, lateral genodata transfer, transversal replication, and cyberotics, flood in amongst a relapse onto bacterial sex.
>Neo-China arrives from the future.
>Hypersynthetic drugs click into digital voodoo.
>Retro-disease.
>Nanospasm.

[Anonymous No.11744981]

>>11744942
because if you are making a thread about his "alt-right" lapse you probably don't fucking know what hyperstition is.

[Anonymous No.11744988]

>>11744981
I don't get it. OP is retarded so you need to act retarded too?

[Anonymous No.11744992]

>>11744988
you have never taught anything to anyone before, have you?

[Anonymous No.11745005]

>>11744992
literally nothing you said a) accurately reflects what accelerationism is b) explains the differences between "periods" of Land, or c) points him to sources where he could learn about a and b. You aren't teaching, you are memeing about a philosophy you obviously don't understand.

[Anonymous No.11745028]

>>11745005
the only reason you're not picking on >>11744967 instead is aesthetical. People already basically gave him the Land rundown, thought I contribute with a simple accelerationism analogy. I'm not going to fucking bring in the entropy-metaphysics or how his breath smells of Moldbug cum. Now stop gatekeeping.

[Anonymous No.11745108]

>>11745028
alright then, let me actually tackle this meme then, because I see it all the time and apparently you people actually think you are saying something worthwhile.
>oh shit, the village grain storage is on fire
This is the worst starting point possible, because it implies that accelerationism is destroying production (literal produce, grain). A better analogy would be a wheat farm which begins to produce so much grain that it begins flooding the town. Accelerationism doesn't sabotage products, it's products sabatoge us.
>and it's spreading faster than it can be put it out
Better, although again it's better to focus on the hyperproductive elements than deprivation. Twitter Land does think it can be put out, by the way, which is why he is suddenly so concerned with protecting capitalism.
>better murder all the firemen that come here, we're gonna starve to death either way
Accelerationism isn't inherently prescriptive, although twitter Land certainly gets there. This would acually be a really useful time to try and extrapolate on Land's shift; when acceleration collapses into l/r/u/acc, ect. Academic Land wanted a xenofeminist revolution to topple patriarchal capitalism, so keep that in mind. Early Land would say that the firemen are a part of the reterritorialization, they are a part of the process even if they look contrary. Late Land would shoot firemen (terrible analogy, again, because twitter Land thinks the people trying to burn everything down are leftists)
>oh and also because there's a fire I belive in demons who only exist because I believe in them and they retroactively lit the fire
Only amphetamine Land, and demons is a needlessly moralizing turn of phrase for a technological singularity. The comment about "only exist because I believe in them" has literally nothing to do with Land; not only was he not the only person to "believe" in the entities he claimed to have contacted, but ironically he couches all of this in empiricism. Land has plenty of interesting things to say about retrocausal influences, even now, and he has pretty much entirely disconnected from his "mystical" aspects.
>Also race realism.
Again, only twitter Land. The Land who "belive[d] in demons" did not push alt-right memes.
Also, read Meltdown.

[Anonymous No.11745115]

>Can someone give me a quick rundown on Nick Land?
girardfag posted a good summary of his thoughts recently: >>/lit/thread/S11682323#p11683027
IMO Nick Land is mystified by the exponential explosion of intelligence the human race has experienced since the Renaissance, and think we should go beyond humanity if our species should reach a cap in intelligence, abandoning electrochemical brains for AIs in the process.
It's like Moore's Law: we can't reduce the size of transistors anymore to make more powerful CPUs, so engineers and scientists are experimenting with parallel and quantum computing, to find a new paradigm yielding more computing power. Except we are the CPUs in Nick Land's mind.
He sees capitalism not merely as a economic system but also a selection system that is always changing our life conditions to select for intelligence. Capital ultimately escaped the control of humanity in his theory, which is ironically not unlike Ted Kazincyski and Jacques Camatte (a very pessimistic Marxist who influenced primitivists). The twist is that he endorses the inhumanity of the technocapitalist-industrial system.
>what about the whole drug-quelled alt-right lapse?
People get more conservative as they get older, and a long period of amphetamine abuse can make you more extreme in that regard. It's not that complicated I believe.
That said, he was more based when he was younger because he was unconditionally excited about the possibilities of an absolutely unleashed capitalism. Now he seems kinda scared somehow and spend too much time virtue-signalling to his NRx cult on twitter with hollow anti-leftist rhetorics.
>Is that over or what?
Read this piece if you want to learn more about his life: http://divus.cc/london/en/article/nick-land-ein-experiment-im-inhumanismus
>Before I met Land, I already knew of him through the gossip of new undergraduates taken aback by what they had heard on the grapevine: Did Land really claim that he had come back from the dead? Did he really think he was an android sent from the future to terminate human security? In person he belied these outrageous claims (both of which he did indeed make in writing), being thoroughly polite and amiable and, above all, willing to engage in earnest conversation with anyone.

[Anonymous No.11745138]

>>11745115 (me)
shit I've should posted the rest of the paragraph
>He had paid his philosophical dues and could hold his own in a discussion with any professor; these discussions often turning vituperative, however, as Land railed against the institution and its conservatism. But he preferred to spend his time in the bar with undergraduates, always buying the drinks, smoking continually, and conversing animatedly (and where possible, vehemently) about any topic whatsoever.

[Anonymous No.11745770]

new vid
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJvrSXEt1XQ

[Anonymous No.11745859]

>>11744319

[Anonymous No.11746413]

>>11744319
Sci-Fi for philosophy majors.

[Anonymous No.11746424]

>>11746413
fuck yes can this be a new genre now?

[Anonymous No.11746425]

Yep, all we needed was a few hits of speed and
*crack*
sip, ahhh
some deleuze.

[Anonymous No.11746429]

>>11745770

Thanks for posting this

[Anonymous No.11746463]

>>11744346
EPIC

[Anonymous No.11747207]

How did Land go from a Deleuze adept to a basic /pol/yp?

Like, was there ever a connection that makes this development foreseeable?

[Anonymous No.11747232]

>>11747207
>Justin Murphy:[...] I’m just curious if you could kind of mentally go back to the 1990s, when you’re theorizing all these kinds of radical ideas at the beginning. What was the first crack in that tendency for you? Like what gave, exactly? Was there a particular realization or insight or problem or anomaly in your viewpoint in the 90s that kind of cracked and made you see that all of these radical emancipatory ideas are not going to work, or how would you explain that?

>Nick Land: These things come in waves. Wave motion is crucial to this. There was an extremely exciting wave that was ridden by the Ccru in the early to mid-1990s. You know, the internet basically arrived in those years, there were all kinds of things going on culturally and technologically and economically that were extremely exciting and that just carried this accelerationist current and made it extremely, immediately plausible and convincing to people. Outrageous perhaps, but definitely convincing. It was followed — and I wouldn’t want to put specific dates on this, really — but I think there was an epoch of deep disillusionment. I’d call it the Facebook era, and obviously, for anyone who’s coming in any way out of Deleuze and Guattari, for something called “Facebook” to be the dominant representative of cyberspace is just almost, you know, a comically horrible thing to happen! [Laughs.]

>I just really responded to this with such utter, prolonged disgust that a certain deep, sedimentary layer of profound grumpiness — from a personal point of view — was added to this. But I don’t think it’s just a personal thing. I think that accelerationism just went into massive eclipse …

[Anonymous No.11747877]

>>11747232
>I just really responded to this with such utter, prolonged disgust that a certain deep, sedimentary layer of profound grumpiness

Makes a lot of sense tbqh.
He expected techno-capitalism to be something far more spectacular than Facebook and iPhones.

But he was right about the rise of Neo-China tho.

[Anonymous No.11747889]

Basically, he's a liberal--he's just unusually self-aware

[Anonymous No.11748015]

>>11744374
This is pasta, I recognize the bipolar sluts bit because I sympathized with it