In Correspondence part 1. The State of the Scene.

Ft. autohynoptic peepmachine

The Following is a series of questions and answers between me and an anon mutual I found very interesting, if not controversial. this may potentially be the start of a whole series if it is well received. I also have printed out each correspondence as I received them without editing or censoring them. as always, Enjoy.

@heterodoxwhile1

correspondence.

The Mother Yeast (gonzo epistolary)

001 // DISPATCH MESSAGE # 4701 = ((AHPM))

mingling with pick-mes regurgitating the words of better men as empty commodity is to court a dull neutering. worse, to leave them to their own devices as they linger & fester in reproductive budding. just a steady sapping of virility with each convictionless tweet or bimbo philosophic babble hollowing out the symbolic power and veracity of axioms they seek to terraform as a literal mandate of the frivolity characteristic of femael brain; subversion by yeast.

i’m of course looking at you, Big Guy, and the coal mine this place has seemingly turned into over the last year. you’d think we’d be experiencing a renaissance in the group chat model, but all discourse gurglers can come up with is the same old shit — dislocation & inaction. All the while a cosmopolitan social media striver is held up as the emblem of the “Online Right”. kinda like that one time when your friend scaffolded cosmopolitan libertines and dilettantes as the “Art Right” & Harpers called the Fedpost “the new right”.

Pathetic.

It’s painfully obvious that you, and by you I mean we, are not sovereign neither in this ecosystem or where it concerns your canons, and I can see why everyone has just decide the throw their hands up and embrace parasocial transaction as a matter of prudence and preservation.

Response.

Gio:

Thank you my fren for these thoughtful communiques on the subject of “this thing of ours”. Saying that now a days brings a question mark to my mind, because perhaps there is no “thing” and no “us” as we like to believe. Or the way it was when it was a cadre of posters and bloggers testing each other's brain iron against one another. Things were quite different back then, and things are different now for a variety of reasons, because things always trend in a similar direction. Especially when there is Mammons, and more importantly, social clout to be had, as you have acutely pointed out.

Before I say anything, I must acknowledge that I'm not immune to this cycle, nor do I pretend to say or act otherwise. Because the simple fact is, I like to think that after years of being in something and producing things, its not so bad to finally take the plunge and establish a little cottage thing for myself as I did last year. Nor do I think I am that much of an original thinker or poster. I posted so much coal over the years, and there is a sense of ubiquitous boredom and exhaustion in the past year, or few years. It used to be that I felt secretly intimidated by the people I was around, because I could never come to such conclusions or think such things, without perhaps breaking free of my own research and assumptions. There was a desire to learn and a desire to “effort post” back then. I honestly don't know why some people take me as an authority on anything.

BUT one big caveat that must be stated is that I do not wish to go down the road others have, those whom shall remain nameless (but you can guess) who find a sort of superiority complex in “exiting the scene”. Because they found the truth above others, and hence lily pad to another thing out of some bad faith they have. Some guilty conscience that compels them to spiral out and “DENOUNCE” all the things that made them who they are in the public eye. This is to me, a form of F-slurity, a soggy soulledness you can say. And more importantly, if you care about something, enough to spend hours contemplating its history, its health, its current state of falleness, etc. Then you cannot truly “exit”. That's what I feel at least about the Eright, and at the beginning of my series “a confederacy of shitposters”, I state as much. To leave in a grandiose and vainglorious way is a sort of admission of fickleness of character.

Anyways, this subversion of “female yeast life”, if I can explain, is the creeping in of the current order of the social into an organic underground scene, you can say. It is not simply to bash women or to say there is something “feminine” about it, but merely that the feminine mode of sociality accompanies the inter-group dynamics of a scene being exposed to the grander social geist. There is a movement upwards of social climbing, an awareness of the audience perhaps, and from here we enter the coal mines. The repetition of the same, the mining of greater insights from posters and homogenized into the think piece for a more normie-adjacent audience, as you have alluded to.

Vitality in online dissident spaces ironically enough, come about in cycles when there is something that galvanizes disparate groups and forces our hand into posting original and insightful, transgressive things. Because there is a necessity there, and a unity. This was the spirit of 2016, at least to me. In the absence of a unifying purpose, and in the wake of these scenes being brought into the awareness of normie-world, stagnation follows. Drama sells until it doesn't, refurbishing old insights sells until it doesn't. Dilettantism and “reactionary chic” comes about when one is sort of long-ways away from an original source, when certain ideas and opinions have become palatable to a larger audience. Of course things of worth are still produced and things are still talked about in unique ways. But overall we feel this retreat into solitude in a sea of coal for a reason. Even the mightiest of posters and thread-men are just waiting for the next cultural moment to energize THIS THING OF OURS one more time.

002 // DISPATCH MESSAGE # 4702 = ((GIOP))

but i feel like parasociality is the only model on a very meta level, its an image of thought, how you think about the online onlining. The cycles tend to be similar with E dissidents, and you are correct, its always the faemel acceptance into ingroup first.

(do you remember the french alt-right pr0nstar?)

but then again, its not as simple as back then, with alt lite influencer women that just regurgitated things, even the chthonic feminine influence in E-cologies is more sophisticated in that they try to formulate their own takes.

Response.

Gio:

It is interesting how you use that notion of image of thought applied to the internet, because Parasociality is an inevitable outcome of the arrangement of distance, virtual space meeting the “face” or rather “presence” of a poster or “content creator”. The “ONLINE ONLINING” like the world-worlding to Heidegger, is the building of a world that is complex, reveals and conceals itself in equal measure, is filled with virtualities/potentialities and actualities. And like all things, to Heidegger at least, and to Deleuze, “starts in the middle”, if that makes sense, for it is non-exhaustive.

Heidegger came up with “worlding” to ward off the possibilities of complete disclosure, a cutting off of vitality and potentialities that means there is “more to come” in a particular world. The onlining of reality is an extension of this, at least to me, for it is inexhaustible, despite going through ebbs of being dull and over-played and perhaps colonized by corporate and glow in the dark forces that seek to corral its potentiality for “more to come”.

The “world is only present by worlding, it cannot be fathomed by anything else” Heidegger says, and in that was him coming very close to Taoism. In other words, the experiential element, being in the “swarm” as Byung-Chul Han phrases it (himself a Heidegger scholar with a keen interest in the internet and Parasociality). It is the only way to experience is, and also THINGS or THE THING is integral to worlding. The thing discourses itself to us in worlding, we engage with things, they reveal themselves to us in the world. So as the Tao Te Ching says,

“The named is the mother of ten thousand things. Ever desireless, one can see the mystery. Ever desiring, one can see the manifestations”

“Do you have the patience to wait

till your mud settles and the water is clear?

Can you remain unmoving

till the right action arises by itself?”

Bracket the sort of woo-woo wisdom people get from these verses. They reveal a deep ontological truth about our engagement with the world, especially one that is growing more virtual and online. To remain nameless and not seek clear distinctions in things, but to let them arise, and to capture a moment when the world is worlding, the thing is thinking (the online onlines?) and reveals what is to come. This is the disposition that allows in my opinion, the poster to create a world, to seek not, but let things come and manifest the gems, by cultivating this free-flowing engagement with the world. The online is like this as well, it will reveal things to you that you did not know were there inside of yourself.

I can go into Heidegger's worlding and Taoism, but the online to me unites these 2 things in that the online is a sort of primordial Hades or firmament river at the bottom. It lays “between heaven and earth”, between virtual and actual. The online onlining creates tulpas and personas that proliferate, sometimes out of the hands of the poster and the content creator. Parasociality is also an assemblage creation, like Heidegger's world. You slip into it, there is “online lore” created over time, and it can run away into a horizon and life-world on its own eventually.

Now finally, the faemal, the chthonic, in some ways it was always waiting in the underworld to emerge as a dominate force in the online. The “digital anima” as Meme Analysis calls it, the lost little sensitive young men finding a voice and a world in the online, entering its EXO-WOMB. Unleashing our Oedipal drives and desires, the onlining revealing the proliferation of desires over time. The online is feminine in this sense, it receives and empties itself for the desires of the other, and transforms them in subtle ways.

Women in predominately online male spaces does this as well. Receptive to desires, transforming them, perhaps polluting them over time. But maybe we are too harsh on the Egirls, we simply have to take it for what it is. Its a natural cycle in a way. I mean porn helped proliferate the widespread use and even video capacity on the internet for a reason. The altright pornstar was interesting to me in that we keep rolling on in this void and many contradictions manifest over time. An altright pornstar, a temple prostie by any other word. Sometimes you just have to appreciate what clowns of God are thrown up to us. Like Boyd Rice wrote once in the song “Disneyland can wait”, there is “no longer any plastic demons, but a graceless shuffling horde”, so too as dissidents we sink into clownish caricatures of the mass, the THEY.

003 // DISPATCH MESSAGE # 4701 = ((AHPM))

deeming parasociality the model may prove to be a death wish, as evident from its very conspicuous influence on discourse production; you can’t beat the femael mind in the game of self as fan object, vulgar exhibitionism of disclosure or pithy bimbo irony.

you become neutered and yeast-like; striving the way they strive and appeasing their sensibilities to advance. look at some of the well know shit posters in scene; all fundamentally posting like dive-bar hags with femael inner monologues.

femael brain has fundamentally changed the nature of shit-posting into a calorically-deficient game to be “seen”.

of course, there’s a part of me that considers my general polemic against the sphere as perhaps unreasonable but then the sphere belly aches when its stagnation as just commerce and infotainment, with a little bit of gossip and blood sport on the side, settles the ecosystem. Some might call it obsessive, but such would be shortsighted as this is just merely the product derived from the brand of existential parasociality sowed by sphere talking heads and knowledge workers. You all claim this to be a “movement”, but seemingly want it to be a movement of content production with a vague opportunity of guest speaking at some conference. You’re — not you per say, of course — are selling inaction.

i produce nothing in this sphere, especially under such narrow parameters and devotion to disembodied flights of gnosis(content), and only came to this ecosystem years ago as a matter of intellectual enrichment and sincere guidance — I’m at the very least willing to admit that, while the scene has continued to erode as a result of categorically mistaking aspirational opportunism for admiration and genuine investment. Worse is when revelation unearthed in these networks be pillaged & show up in the journal rags of other contexts, with their hermeneutics, laundering their tired schtick. ReHerd(u̶n̶h̶e̶r̶d) is a good exp of this. Reactionary Feminism is another. Compact, cosmopol f@ghags, et al.

On the latest Red Scare, Anna K expresses that it’s no one’s fault that we’re seemingly being tyrannized by this totality of auto-referentiality. that this contained, virtual space that seldom corresponds with embodied reality — experiential reality —, an essential prison, has no consequencing culprit. But it is the choice of content creators and discourse merchants to continue to parasitize grotesque feedback loops of recycled and aggregated information, instead of initiating it within a context. It’s a choice to continue the circle jerk. Again, I must mention the oeuvres and canons that are being instrumentalized as fuel for media parvenu and layabouts who have no real investment in the state of the paradigm, and it’s decimation, but rather are more concerned with how to advance within it as a disaffected individual, and producing dissident discursive discourse with just enough edge to yield applause but not enough to actually effectuate anything, really, has been du jour practice for this type of yeast since mass communication emerged.

Response.

Gio:

I think in one respect you are being too negative, but then again its a genuine and honest critique of the scene, and most online spaces outside of it. Perhaps we are thinking that we are something more than an interest-fandom because we talk about shifts in the entire sociopolitical order of things. The best posters fall into fandom, into stagnation, for it is the cycle of things. Ironic detachment was always a curse and a blessing when it came to shitposting.

I think what you are getting at is the transformation of shitposting from something witty, cutting, clever, and having an ability to spoof and even transform perceptions into the mere appearance of shock and bombast. In other words, the caloric-deficiency is coming from the awareness of a crowd and of social pressures (I guess you can say this is inherently feminine), and this leads to ENGAGEMENT-FARMING.

I said this to a friend recently (a female one ironically enough, a Gal-Pal) that “the real Nietzschean or zen position (there is a harmony between the 2) is to sort of state your peace and let things go. just vibe with it and realize people are caught in certain spirits or wills, and it is of them, and there is a sort of significance in this because some people are caught with a will to create, and others a will to destroy.

and that in the end we will all come to some realization about ourselves, and even if most don't, its OK, it is the will of things, and sometimes creating on your own is the best policy, and not to let others slip into your own view of life and works, lest you be condemned to their fate of mercilessly being poked and prodded by the crowd.

grifters really are the flies at the marketplace, and sometimes slipping away from them is the best”

ceding reaction to outside forces was bound to happen, the forces of clout, of “legitimacy” and the ability to reach normieworld is too great. I myself am not immune to this, I would jump at the chance to have some security. Maybe not, but the pull is there. The difference I feel is when you are consciously selling your takes and your wares as an extension of the all mighty CONTENT itself, but of something else.

This business of the “movement” is very interesting because it was never meant to be as such, but because we post within the absence of legitimate “knowledge institutions” on the Right Wing, we filled the void. ConservatismTM with their foundations and think tanks produce nothing but pap and pablum. Policy papers and talking points that exist within the framework of the enemy. But the intelligent frog sees signs of our fruits reaching to the top of the vine, into the mainstream, at least in terms of awareness of our talking points. Combine this with failure to launch in terms of IRL political movements, and you get an ecosystem of this “knowledge creation”. Byung-Chul Han nailed it in “Infocracy” when he said that knowledge is a form of community-building, and the exchange of knowledge constitutes an online community. But this of course is not enough, there will always be bonds lacking.

There is something that Vitruveon Gamer tweeted recently¹, about the scene being addicted to Copulin (female pheromones) and “normies blindly regurgitating memes of the month”. You can say its just incel rage at sex havers, but the point is apt. The scene talks endlessly about re-heated PUA insights, dating, low iq women on grifter podcasts that go viral, relationships, etc. And you can't help but feel its a sign of decay, or that any other topic is defeated in the sense that there is nothing we can do about it. Can you change the demographic picture? Probably not. Can you talk about the “copulation rate” increasing? Probably.

Its funny how the sex havers and the incels are at odds in the Eright, and both share some ideas, but are diametrically opposed at other ends. And this is what those on the outside who wish to strip mine the scene of ideas, either as “extremism experts” to destroy us. Or as orbiters wishing to, as you have alluded to, homogenize the safer insights and sell them as their own. This is something they can never get, not even Tinkzorg has landed on this. That the psycho-sexual component runs deep. Either as a trad neurosis about the infiltration of the self by orgiastic libertine social elements. Or as an anxiety over not in some ways participating in a Bacchanalian frenzy, it all meets in the middle.

Either you are a Steppe warrior who looks at the ugliness of the world, and sees that polycule orgies are not filled with hot skinny Mediterranean women, but cryptoids. Or you are a temporarily embarrassed homesteader without his trad blonde pigtails waifu. The libidinal energy runs through it. And the same impulses the Eright has to transgress and question modern sexual hangups that the sexual revolution wrought upon is, is the same one that leads to “female mind parasociality”. But my point is, neither leftoid nor reactionary chic think piece writer understands these dynamics. Its either lumped in with “you all hate women”, or “this is all a fetish”. But its HOW you resent women, its HOW you have a particular idealized fetish that bleeds into politics. The romanticist incel 2 and the PUA lifestyle masculinity grifter have quite a different view of things.

The reason I speak of such things is that you accurately pinned down the supranational elements and the regurgitation of content, and an overt playing towards issues of gender-war ephemera in this thing of ours. But I think there must be some understanding as to how these things developed, and where they are going. Me and Prudentialist often bring up 2 key insights on the Digital Archipelago. One is that there is no “touching grass” to do as the virtual/digital eats away at the real/meatspace (as to your point about people being disconnected to the real in your second last paragraph). And two, that usually dissidents trade off on pet issues in the absence of talking about other ones, either out of fear or simply not being able to do anything about it. Don't wanna talk about the JQ or race? Talk about the WQ, Paganism vs. Christianity, or vice versa.

I cannot help but feel in the last few years the Eright is subject to a sociological gaze either by enemies or cynical opportunists. By “extremism experts” or think piece writers. And so there is a desire in the more astute content creators to jump off into being a sort of tour guide into the depths of darkest Africa. People have accused me of this, but in spite of that, maybe I am just not good enough to write for networked think piece mills. I don't know, I only think of these things in the abstract. I think the lyrics to a Sneaker pimps song is quite illuminating, although it was about the quest for fame and recognition in the conventional sense.:

“You talked it over
From your bedroom throne
Making sense of nothing
With your one armed man

Read your future in the magazine
Search the stars for clues
Read your future in the magazine
Tells you what to lose
Just to find yourself”

We write and tweet from our bedrooms, and some of us have had their “futures told to them in magazines” and it told them what they were gonna lose, and that's a terrifying thought. We search the stars of signs all the time of being “back” from “it's over”. There will always be some quasi-mystical or spiritual thinking in an avant-garde, in a dissident space, because when you lose all hope in the mainstream and turn your mind against it (which is natural and right) you look around in the smallest of crevices for meaning and truth.

I think spirituality is something you see talked about less and less on the Eright now a days, or even solid political theory. Of course there are some who still are deeply invested in such esoterica, but such things don't generate as much clicks and engagement, apart from talks of spirituality that just fuel more blood sports, like Nietzsche vs. Trad Christians. Back in the day there was a real effort to test ideas and talk about different religiosities, I think because there was a real thirst for it, online new atheism had become cringe. People converted over an aesthetic image of a faith, but then there was a sort of exploration of doctrines. Now a days, this too becomes a lifestyle fandom. But maybe we are making too much of these things, and there is a cycle, and before we know it things will pick up again anew, and posters will have fresh eyes again.

But one thing you are right on, is that there are people who don't really care about this thing of ours apart from whatever they can market or clear-cut. That don't have an investment and don't really follow the E-etiquette we set out for ourselves. Maybe this is old head belly aching, but these are real concerns that should not be ignored.

004 // DISPATCH MESSAGE # 4701 = ((AHPM))

I don’t know, maybe this is all a feat of you all’s ability to cajole fervent parasociality out of your audience. Maybe I’ve been had and really, you all are just apparitions emanating throughout this luminal bondage I’m seemingly in. Who knows, but I’d like to hear what you think, genuinely, outside of “just want to live bro”, something I’m sure you know Agamben would shutter at.

My last tweet to you read “there’s no genealogy, cosmology, or topology, especially no ecology, when the mandate is mercantile. the sphere lost its most potent and integral quality”. Professional discovery of these networks change the fundamental incentives — and maybe that’s our fault for not being better patrons.

Response.

Gio:

We exist between “Agree and Amplify” and “Notice and Move on”. We force the hand of our enemies and push farther, but in doing so in the absence of genuine power, this slides towards noticing things, noticing more things and moving on. To amplify our positions, and also amplify what is really going on behind the tapestry of lies and state-enforced psychic mandate. What is “to be believed in order to be a good person”. We cut through all of this with a knife. But to cut and cut and rip out layer after layer till we realize there is nothing at the bottom. Cut through another lie and the enemy spins another one just as fast. Or more over, its not about getting people to “truly believe lies in their hearts”. That's not necessary when you have the ability to enforce lies as if they are truth. “nobody who is sane and normal actually wants kids to mutilate themselves”. True, but nobody who is sane and normal wants to lose their jobs or more importantly to most normos, their social circle over it.

“what if we all believe the woke agenda is wrong, but we just can't admit it? What is we try and awaken people to it?” True, but in reality, many people of halfhearted belief go on to persecute apocryphals just the same. The belief in “mass awakening” is something the Eright still can't get up from when we were all Ron Paul Libertarians or apart of the quasi-new age conspiracy movement. The point being is that it is very easy to slide from agree and amplify to notice and move on.

Incentives change when you monetize noticing and moving on, but then again, there isn't really any alternative in the absence of institutional cover, the DIY punk mercantile patronage gig economy hand-out system is the best we got. Maybe “dissident elites” will get piss off enough at the system and GO MAD, and in a bid for chaosmaxxing and nihilist-maxxing, fund frog enemies of the regime to stage ever more elaborate performances of guerrilla ontology subversion. Hobbyism also leads to a sort of disengagement or unseriousness, and if you have a normie job, its probably not a good idea to spend free time in things that can get you in trouble.

So perhaps the secretly based normies can fund the frogs, they already do, but its never stable, and so we repeat the same cycle. Hopefully agreeing and amplifying catches up to noticing and moving on. The overton window shifts with enough of the former, that the ladder leads to actual change. But change is a hard thing to measure. Because even if on a legislative level, based world is here tomorrow, there will be millions of brainwashed people, or conscious ideologues, who will work to destroy the society that has left them behind. There is no easy answer. In a better world the mercantile would not be a concern.

You mentioned self-referentiality and us going back over the same ground, the same in jokes, the same memes and creole language we developed. A lot of this is to escape subversion and censorship, and thus was built up over time as a safe guard. But a part of me thinks we love is, we love the little hurdygurdy songs we write to each other, and so we are often floating in our own little worlds, like everyone else. And so we are not immune to these forces of hyper-technics. But without black pilling too hard (another in-group term) perhaps things will have to change in the future, and maybe a thousands years of history will happen in a few, and out the other end, based world will be in our reach. But please, we shall do a part 2 of this.

End.

1Screen cap in case.