I'm told that I should clarify I am not literally saying she supported Mussolini
Yeah it's anarcho-primitivist poetry, but you can do anarcho-primitivist poetry without saying 'power' a billion times or fixating on the alignment of thought and desire to (re)production
It's cool how using 'fascism' in an extended philosophical sense is something I just made up, myself, for the first time, in that post
By 'fascist' I mean, more or less, calling to militantly reestablish the dominion of a lost order of (re)production as the organizing principle of thought and of desire
Bonus points for validating the true order of (re)production by the pre-reflective disposition of the uncorrupted body to comply
Amazing to see people talking themselves into dunking on the literally most vanilla Theory/continental definition of 'fascism'
Wait till you hear my take on Canto XLV! Yes, Pound's much- beloved critique of financial capitalism is not as innocent as it seems
Gonna go write some antifascist poetry about how when thought and desire got unmoored from their auxillary role in a natural (re)productive order they turned cancerous, have a great night
OK the materialism-knowers have logged on to remind me that fascism is a historically specific political force and not some vibe or way of thinking and so really there is no 'extended philosophical sense'
Guess I've been caught! Or maybe, God help us, concepts can apply to things in different degrees of concreteness, with different implications
Let me be painfully literal: what OP says is that key parts of di Prima's corpus are suffused with an ethics and metaphysics that is reminiscent of Völkisch ethics and metaphysics, and so treating that corpus as an ethical and metaphysical guiding light seems inauspicious
And personally I'm just so, so tired of encountering these vitalist manifestos everywhere as my mental health slowly collapses on itself
Maybe you think the aspects where di Prima's ethics/metaphysics and the Völkisch overlap are orthogonal to what makes fascist political movements actually bad
I don't like those odds, but who knows
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The thing that's not emotional labor that people call emotional labor -- labor managing others' emotions -- is a good concept and does have a name: affective labor
If my boss has me put up Christmas decorations in the office to improve morale, that's affective labor but not (uniquely) emotional labor
If working alone in the office at night makes me want to start a fire but I grit my teeth through it, that's emotional labor but not (uniquely) affective labor
When I want somebody romantically I want to be her and also myself, genders included. I can never tell if that's a super niche relationship to gender or the basic form of heterosexual desire
My gender is I Can't Believe It's Not Transbian
Btw I don't mean wanting to experience both sides of having sex with one another or whatnot, more just adding a female protagonist to the book in your head
'I Love Dick' is the only female sex-confessional I know where female heterosexual desire's not primarily desire-to-be-desired. Is this why it's still considered so shockingly abject?
I think there's something to the thought that, in the absence of social-material superiority to mitigate it all, desire whose primary object isn't your own sexual value is embarrassing beyond recuperation.
It's pretty often overlooked that in between plotting a revolution to abolish the humanity of women, Incels spend all their time analyzing their own 'sexual market value,' talking about how they would give anything to feel, just once, female eyes look at them in genuine desire.