#it's not easy to revoke citizenship but let's make our feelings about him known | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

hologram and flamingo, superimposed / the self-contained luxury of esoteric fascism

“imagine a man of his age risking what little life he has left for something so absurd as a country.” (Heller)

while the sentiment “Anne Frank might have lived in Brooklyn now and be an 80-y.o. respectable Brooklyn woman, but she was denied the US visa” is very clear to me, the “Brooklyn” part is what makes me question this sentiment

as if it is only Brooklyn–of all the US–that is a suitable place for Anne Frank and the most terrible part, is that it might very well be so. today’s Brooklyn is, evidently, a very Anne-Frank-friendly place. it is easy to be friendly to Anne Frank today. especially in Brooklyn.

carry your inner Brooklyn in your heart indefatigably [imaginary Brooklyn]

yet the Syrian refugees, denied entry to the US

having green cards on their hands

is a different story

inasmuch as Brooklyn is a friendly place

the positionality of the hypothetical Arab in the modern world is altogether different from the positionality of the hypothetical Jew in the modern world

not to mention that Syrians come in different ethnic backgrounds and national affiliations

different histories different sensibilities to the cultural figures set in motion in mind of the hypothetical Brooklyner it all is horrendous to be sure one could only wonder if there is a little child writer amongst those people stuck in the USA airports

and if it validates everything in a perverse manner

as if we only can be capable of appreciating carefully trimmed writers

attending to European standards of being humans a child already and inevitably enveloped in the political and literary contexts, the discourses and their perpetuators and perpetrators, performing multiple political and cultural and plainly human violations another curse in haste sent into the useless, irresponsive sky. finally I feel like home in the US. well done, mr president “illegal immigration” is not a target of Trump, as became crystal clear by airport detention of green-card holders. green cards=>their status in the US was legal. the target is people(s) of “wrong” races. I hope I will be deported or denied entrance to the US one day. to be sure, it’ll be a drama for me and my family. yet such is the sacred duty of every honest noncitizen as revealed today. history is coined today said my imaginary Marx looking like philosopher Daniel Dennett too, in the sheen of his rarefied beard* phallogocentrism, said Derrida (what did he know--almighty phallus precludes these beings from knowing anything( as facebook reached the definitive completion of becoming a police machine--with border patrol checking facebook accounts for undesirable political messages--let’s remember this day there was a lot of speculations and evidence as to how facebook controls and polices citizens. and it'd be naive for the state apparatus--unimaginably naive--not to. were you a state representative, would you refuse to use such an endless source of most intimate information? of course not! yet this

is taking it to a new level

“it’s official”

“it’s a boy” “it’s a beast” what do I do? the answer is of course not to abandon social media and nook into a corner but to use platforms for more open and straightforward political commentary between silence and speaking out time and again one chooses speaking out not because it makes so much of a difference but because thus one earns self-respect loyalty to oneself even though I often find myself sadly devoid of the pleasure of aligning with American elites, whether they are the establishment or the opposition. particularly in this dreadful time when everyone starts speaking in slogans. the very mechanisms enabling free speech and exchange of ideas, are simultaneously the mechanisms of controlling with lots of fear devices embedded that promulgate self-censure or cautionary gestures such as “friends only” settings. and why? well, it is because if you were to express yourself freely without reservation, you should first resign from all the positions you are currently holding–at least,that is what people believe; and who could tell them that they are wrong? not everyone is capable of becoming either a homeless body or a mini Žižek (some would argue, those two figures are in some sense synonymous, but they are not: the first figure is the figure of the radical renunciation of societal etiquette, and the second is performative of radical renunciation, in which absolute conformance is deftly packaged). Trudeau looked great on the backdrop of mumblers consisting of the Western politicians of all ranges. a new Western masculinity of sorts: kind and soft, still performatively masculine. in this sense, Trudeau is very much like a naked-torsoed Putin, a statue of Putin. the next Canadian Prime Minister would be a loyal Trumpist, because Trudeau has such a beautiful chest and wide shoulders--he should have looked less of a politician in all the maleness of this role. another spectacle to watch would be, a quick drift to the right of the Democratic party. half a year, and you would not tell the tomorrow’s democrat from the yesterday’s republican. “conservatives,” in their turn, would evolve into something which eats werewolves in the full moon. I told my husband six years ago that the revoking of the birthright citizenship would happen on our memory. one could never err predicting the worst.

back to being an unrelenting misandrist, I guess

even the best among men are still men, and thus deserve contempt.

“yes, I am a hatred-spewing feminist,” she said and turned into a dragon vomiting fire.

the main concern is to not wake up, come to the mirror, and see a face of the fascist in there one day

“There are many who do not know they are fascists but will find it out when the time comes” - Hemingway, For Whom the Bell Tolls (thanks to Liz Lewis for the reminder)

to take a refuge in madness seems to be an appealing option these days

only it, like any other eccentricity, is a luxury for a dispossessed, displaced human being, madness means a series of terrors enacted upon them, and then the quick, violent death--and I, not being such a dispossessed individual, will merely spend several months taking the vertiginous drugs after a short incarceration in a pristine laboratory-like clinic. yes, I am the same self-centered, narcissistic fascist. I am the heartless sadist, a servants to the esoteric ideas of my own superiority. that’s why Trump is crystal clear to me, and, the whim he is, it is merely a historical whim also that I cannot praise and laud the vulgar fascism that he propagates. with the methodicalness and accuracy that befitted fascists (something close to this W.G. Sebald once said, I cannot find the exact quote, said with a cold, lingering surprise--the writer whose oeuvres are one vibrating (vibrant and reverberating) lament and repentance over the crime of the Nazis, the lament never expressed directly and straightforwardly, but gently, in all sorts of circuitous ways, allegorically, if you will, yet that surprise of his pierced me as my own icy surprise: it could hardly contain admiration “Every woman adores a Fascist” (Sylvia Plath)

no

Everyone adores a fascist yet of course oh of course everyone is repulsed by a fascist, you would want to say, yet a month ago I did not read objections to suggestions that Hitler was a brilliant politicians, and no one questioned--among those who consider themselves sane-- or asked on Quora,** if Hitler really was that bad surely bad but �� not that bad

that’s because things change quickly. and I am the worst fascist (well, I am a femi-Nazi after all), who is ascribing the name of fascists to anyone who is regretfully male or - - - (the continuation is not important). _______________________________________ *Daniel Dennett’s treatise “Darwin’s Dangerous Idea” I read after I was lucky to meet Dennett in person at the Philosophy department of the Lomonosov Moscow State University where he first gave a lecture and then was greeted at our division (of the History of the Western Philosophy). He was there in all the shine of his white beard.His crisp ideas are generally well-known. In his ardent atheism, Daniel Dennett goes as far as to use a metaphor of humans being robots of sorts, while the true subjects of evolution are genes. Being a consistent evolutionist, the philosopher nevertheless uses the expression “Mother Nature,” which shows, despite the intended irony, how difficult it is to change the language practice (linguistic ideology) even when one tries to repudiate ideas behind said practice. Dennett very well might be a deist after all. I perceived him as a part of that front of atheism which includes Richard Dawkins. Admittedly, new atheists “can’t be sure that god doesn’t exist.” It is evidently as difficult to be a consecutive atheist as it is difficult to be a theist in our times. And why? Because the very nature of “God” (as a term) is a linguistic fallacy. Another reason of why everyone is merely lukewarm, is that humanity inhabits the post-human era. Human is at least two centuries outdated, and there is no one coming to take on their place. **On the February 9th, 2017, the website functioning as opening space for questions and answers, Quora, “collapsed” (made invisible) my answer to the question formulated as follows: “Is the story about Hitler and the piano wire hangings a myth? I'm aware these hanging occurred but I've read that Hitler asked that the hangings be recorded for viewing. This seems to clash with what I've read about Hitler and his tendencies to witness atrocities authorized by him; that Hitler had a very weak stomach for actually wanting to see brutality.” My answer was: “No, Hitler was a nice weak-stomached kitten, everything too harsh that is said of him is but propaganda. I hope I answered this question in the mood of the times and can be a Standartenfürer of tomorrow.” (To clarify, it is a historic fact that Hitler watched the executions conducted through hanging, on video. Plenty of sources there are to support this. But for the shift of the linguistic framing the actual fact is not important. It suffices to say that the repetitive expression of the disbelieving doubt--no matter how irrational such doubt is, after everything that had been conducted under the orders of Hitler--is enough to signal the change in the atmosphere, the change difficult to catch, and these doubts--well-meaning and seeking the historical truth, ostensibly, doubts coming from the good Samaritans--will reoccur time and again, until they will reach their halt, which is also their climax. And the notched wheel will skip a bit: the perception of historical figure will shift undeniably. Intelligent people will ask: but what proofs do you have? Just as my friend, a literary critic and a writer, asked me once: “But what proofs do you, you yourself, have?” when we spoke about Stalin and his atrocities. And I did have plenty. But this is not the beginning of the conversation. This is the end of it. After this type of question, no amount of proofs could possibly doubt the doubt. Cogito ergo sum? No. Cogito ergo non cogito. He did not express doubt--he stood for the new order, in which Stalin was the great leader of the great country. His cogito was non cogito, for non cogito ergo sum in such a world’s (re)ordering.)