#; egoism.

[gayvampyr]

asking people to be mindful of others when sharing a communal space (especially one you cannot just up and leave from) is not selfish or misanthropic. come on now

[nihildes]

you didn't see shit. 🤫🏴🖤

[starcurtain]

I think the most amazing thing about Alhaitham's ironic question "How has realizing your ideals gone for you?" is that yes, on the surface, it pierced through the heart of Kaveh's feelings at the time and forced him to reflect on whether he still had enough belief to keep going, but--BUT--

This is also Alhaitham subtly asking: "Was your life better without me?"

Kaveh left their friendship because of his ideals.

Kaveh's attempts to realize his beliefs began in earnest during his argument with Alhaitham, who challenged him back then by suggesting that Kaveh didn't honestly believe in his ideals and was just pursuing them out of guilt and a desire to punish himself for his father's death.

Kaveh's attempt to "realize his ideals," therefore, spans the exact amount of time he and Alhaitham have been separated. When Alhaitham asks about Kaveh's attempts, he's asking very specifically about the course Kaveh's life took when he was no longer in it.

How did it go for you? Were you happier? Was it worth it?

I truly believe that Kaveh will be able resolve his conflict with Alhaitham--and come to understand Alhaitham's actual feelings--when he realizes that, in that exact moment, he should have turned the question around:

How did realizing your ideals go for you, Alhaitham?

Was your life better off without me?

No.

[mesca24]

[noneedtofearorhope]

the state calls its own violence law but that of the individual crime

[tastethebloodofmeatthawsmoth]

"It is necessary to destroy egoism in human beings — they obsessively cry — because when egoism is destroyed, human beings will live happily on the earth as good brothers. Whereas you say to everyone and especially to revolutionaries: Be egoistic, because the more egoistic you are, the thirstier you will be for freedom and happiness, and the less you will be able to tolerate your state of misery and enslavement." - Erinne Vivani, "The Death of the Most Horrible Monster"

[autogyne-redacted]

Been thinking a lot lately about the idea of being able to hold/negotiate/communicate your own boundaries.

Like, part of the promise of the state and of shared/socially enforced normativity is that you as an individual should be able to move through the world without people making you uncomfortable and you shouldn't have to negotiate shared space.

You shouldn't have to ask someone to turn their music down if it's bothering you they should know it's fucked up to do something that might bother you in the first place.

People shouldn't smell in ways you don't like.

You shouldn't have to ask someone to stop (man)spreading out into an open seat on a bus if you want it.

You shouldn't have to decline people's propositions, they shouldn't make them in the first place.*

.

These attitudes culminate in a call to sterilize public space. Rather than a remnant commons that we can live and act, and stretch out a little in, it must be reduced to the most restrictive preference, at all times, whether that preference is actually present or merely an abstraction.

And I get it, we're all anxious, at varying levels. When you're marginalized such that your existence in public is already tenuous, the deck is stacked against you in negotiating what happens in that space. But in the same way that we cannot outsource our violence to the state, we cannot outsource our preferences to Public Sensibilities. It's a skill set to start building at minimum.

And nine of this is an answer to what happens when there are strong tensions around shared space. Preferences do just conflict sometimes. But I think we're better off in most cases if those can be addressed by actualized people not through abstractions.

[all-things-are-nothing-to-me]

A little more printing. I'm tabling a show at the queer skatepark tomorrow. My gf's band is playing.

For fans of little c communism, egoism and love.

My favorite queer theorist (rip).

The paper jammed and I had to carefully pull it out.

[iridescentmirrorsgenshin]

no thoughts just comparing the deliberate parallels between the concerned comments layla, faruzan and paimon make to kaveh which are used to contextualise alhaitham’s comments to kaveh during a parade of providence

In the desert, layla who previously had issues with dealing with anxieties, received dubious advice from kaveh about equating worries to that of a sickness for that which is no cure, therefore you have to let its run its course

Layla reveals that this advice isn’t suitable for her, since the cause for her anxiety was solely because she didn’t have a clear goal for herself. She states that therefore, if this advice is something kaveh adheres to, then this is ultimately worse for him, as kaveh claims to have a set goal - as in, he wants to win the interdarshan chanpionship.

She notes that kaveh seems conflicted, and that this could stem from some inner sadness which he suppresses with a façade of happiness.

This points to kaveh’s internal conflict being between that of his guilt complex brought about by his perceived involvement in his father’s passing, and his genuine desire to help others at the cost of himself. Kaveh cannot balance the two in ways that will allow him to prioritise his own needs and desires

Kaveh’s internal conflict is pointed out later on in the same quest by Faruzan, who highlights kaveh’s title as a genius being incongruous with his problem solving abilities after kaveh passes out in the desert due to giving his food and water to the disturbed foxes and going out of his way to lead them to safety, putting himself at risk and jeopardising his place in the competition

However, Kaveh states that his title of a genius has nothing to do with this situation, and although he admits it wasn’t the most practical solution, it was dually his conscience that ultimately caused him to act and perceivably the guilt that would come from not attempting to help

After the second round comes to a close and faruzan inadvertently informs alhaitham of kaveh’s “tribulations”, the player gets to hear alhaitham’s reactions to kaveh’s decision through kaveh, as kaveh and alhaitham have discussed the events in the desert offscreen

Paimon points out that this is definitely ‘something’ alhaitham would say due to the blunt manner of speaking and the dryness of his words - this contextualises how kaveh receives them, as personal goading

When looking past this and focussing on alhaitham’s actual words, the real meaning can be found, and it is even a point in this scene that paimon offers the exact same comments, drawing direct parallels between her and alhaitham’s words, and therefore establishing the same concerns

Alhaitham points out kaveh’s unreliable problem solving abilities being incongruous with his title as a senior - directly paralleling faruzan’s comments in which she highlighted how kaveh’s decision making abilities were at odds with his title as a genius

As well as this, alhaitham alludes to kaveh’s guilt complex being the reason why he exerts himself for others at his own expense - which is a point that the traveller and paimon directly follow up on

Kaveh responds to their questioning amicably despite the sensitive nature of the conversation, just as he did when faruzan pointed out kaveh’s problematical decision making, and this is because of their apparent concern rather than actively seeking offence, with paimon protesting when kaveh asks: “don’t tell me you think i have serious personality flaws, too?” With the ‘too’ clearly referencing alhaitham and the conversation the two had prior to the traveller and paimon turning up

Kaveh can understand the concern in others’ words when they question his problem solving skills and the sense of his inner conflict stemming from guilt, however, when alhaitham makes the same comments, kaveh sees this as a form on animosity and personal critique

Because of alhaitham’s manner of communication and kaveh’s apparent distrust of alhaitham, the two cannot reach a mutual understanding - despite alhaitham expressing the same concerns as three separate characters within this quest

It is telling then that when kaveh gleans an otherwise unseen meaning in alhaitham’s words is when alhaitham changes his method of communication and directly, and intimately, addresses kaveh by using a script that only the two are privy to

Kaveh still doesn’t wholly understand alhaitham’s meaning, but the switch up in communication method is enough for kaveh to question alhaitham’s sincerity and not attribute it to alhaitham mocking him

Kaveh continues questioning the cause for this throughout the remainder of the event, being seen to question why alhaitham left the notes for him and whether if it was a coincidence or not. He concludes that it wasn’t a coincidence and then states “then…”, inferably questioning why alhaitham left the notes for him and what the meaning of his words were, in a script only kaveh would understand. Additionally, kaveh mentions wanting to ask alhaitham what the meaning of his notes were when at dinner after the closing of the interdarshan championship, as the uncertain meaning of his words has seemingly left a profound effect on him

Alhaitham changing his manner of communication, which kaveh usually perceives as negative, causes kaveh to question alhaitham’s sincerity, and therefore causes doubt in whether alhaitham is patronising him or not. This in turn can cast obscurity over kaveh’s assertion that alhaitham holds “disdain” for him due to Alhaitham’s expression of concern which kaveh cannot perceive due to the abrasiveness of his words. Alhaitham conveying his concern in a roundabout way only allows for kaveh to misinterpret him, which kaveh perceives as “disdain”.

A parade of providence establishes the cause for the rift in alhaitham and kaveh’s relationship mainly to be perpetual misunderstanding in communication, and sets out to propose a solution being that a change of communication.

By using a language that only the two of them know shows that for kaveh to fully understand his meaning, alhaitham must meet kaveh on his own terms when it comes to communication - the two must be on equal and frank level. this could allow a potential rebuilding of intimacy the two once shared when initially learning the language, and thus overcome the idea of “mutual disdain” which kaveh asserts due to his fundamental misunderstanding of alhaitham which alhaitham seems to reinforce with his typical language

(Update: For more analyses like this, the essay this is taken from is now uploaded! It can be accessed here and here as as a pdf <3)

[forbidden-sorcery]

Max Stirner rehabilitated the individual at a time when the philosophical field was dominated by Hegelian anti-individualism and most reformers in the social field had been led by the misdeeds of bourgeois egotism to stress its opposite: was not the very word “socialism” created as antonym to “individualism”? Stirner exalted the intrinsic value of the unique individual, that is to say, one cast in a single unrepeatable mold (an idea which has been confirmed by recent biological research). For a long time this thinker remained isolated in anarchist circles, an eccentric followed by only a tiny sect of intelligent individualists. Today, the boldness and scope of his thought appear in a new light. The contemporary world seems to have set itself the task of rescuing the individual from all the forms of alienation which crush him’ those of individual slavery and those of totalitarian conformism. In a famous article written in 1933, Simone Weil complained of not finding in Marxist writings any answer to questions arising from the need to defend the individual against the new forms of oppression coming after classical capitalist oppression. Stirner set out to fill this serious gap as early as the mid-nineteenth century. He wrote in a lively style, crackling with aphorisms: “Do not seek in self-renunciation a freedom which denies your very selves, but seek your own selves... Let each of you be an all-powerful I.” There is no freedom but that which the individual conquers for himself. Freedom given or conceded is not freedom but “stolen goods.” “There is no judge but myself who can decide whether I am right or wrong.” “The only things I have no right to do are those I do not do with a free mind.” “You have the right to be whatever you have the strength to be.” Whatever you accomplish you accomplish as a unique individual: “Neither the State, society, nor humanity can master this devil.” In order to emancipate himself, the individual must begin by putting under the microscope the intellectual baggage with which his parents and teachers have saddled him. He must undertake a vast operation of “desanctification,” beginning with the so-called morality of the bourgeoisie: “Like the bourgeoisie itself, its native soil, it is still far too close to the heaven of religion, is still not free enough, and uncritically borrows bourgeois laws to transplant them to its own ground instead of working out new and independent doctrines.”

Daniel Guérin

[quotelr]

Friends can become enemies, and enemies can become friends. Ego and pride can turn what is good into bad, and kind words can turn what is bad into something good.

Suzy Kassem, Rise Up and Salute the Sun: The Writings of Suzy Kassem

[nihildes]

can't stop, won't stop.

[apostate00]

Realiciders <3

[bellalilbunny]

[miochimochi]

Finished the back of the unity jacket. Need to think of more to put on this one. Mainly trying to think of something to paint on the hood. Maybe a black head?