Schizoposting # 3: The Ultimo Schizopost.

MagsJ · December 27, 2020, 7:27am

I see… a more scientific document, than a book.

Phoneutria has her panties probably in a bunch because she defended my getting banned off of social media and affirmed the opinion of Youtube staff that my calling some guy a “dingus” constituted a violation worthy of permabanning, for which I insinuated that she was a “cunt”. I know you’re supposed to, in accordance to Youtube’s own policies, be given a warning and then TWO more chances before a permanent banning is incurred, however I guess they skipped all of that for me because, fuck it. Given the fact that I had no previous violations or suspensions of their purposefully vague terms of service. They banned me off social media for saying I thought the whole covid thing was a bit of an over-reaction, and also retarded, and that Biden lost if you took out the borderline unconstitutional “mail in votes”, so I might be more active on this forum now. I don’t know, I guess I forgot that Big Tech social media corporate monopolies are the arbiters of Truth now and get to decide who gets to have an opinion or not. That’s half the reason I proxy myself behind so many layers of irony, I am just future-proofing my texts against the rising censorship on the horizon, given the fact that they can’t ban me if they don’t know what the fuck I’m talking about.

Well… the Google/YouTube censoring-purge that had been going on for many weeks, seems to be now over, and you made history by being a part of it. Crazy times…

Everyone knows what irony is. Doesn’t mean any of you could actually define the word if I asked, but still, you know what it is, as you’ve seen it before. It’s Bob Dylan jamming shitily on an electric guitar, it’s a Latin poetry quoting philosophical dick like me voting for Donald Trump, it’s King Midas fucking up by turning everything he touches into gold, it’s hipsters wearing out-of-fashion clothing to make an ambiguous cultural statement. But “second-order irony” is where it gets interesting. Most refer to this second level as post-irony; D. F. Wallace is famous for employing it. Succinctly, it is “a return to sincerity through irony.” That captures the second level of irony present in my own text as well. At the first level, I employ inhumanly exaggerated academia and bizarre overflowing language and megajargon, as if parodying the high-falootin’ philosopher trope, as if joking,- easy enough to understand,- but then… whereas a typical parody would just make up words that have no meaning, the language used in my parody is actually purposeful, it’s not a joke, e.g. 'diplocyclonic zygosporoidal cryptopoetics", while sounding like a parody I made up to be deliberately as convoluted as possible, is actually loaded with purposeful meaning, recalling the ‘cyclonic creative process’ of Bataille, the CCRU’s diplozygotic spiral, etc. So at irony level one it’s a joke, but at irony level two it’s deeply serious. But then, within this second level, the serious level, the actual text is deconstructing the very institutional programmes whose language is utilized within the first level of irony, like the language of psychoanalysis, capital, etc. etc. So… now we’re at irony level three and it’s back to being non-serious. But then there’s a fourth level of irony, because the conceptual tools used in that deconstruction (within the third level of irony) involve what I call ‘chiasmatic reversal’, which is the actual mechanism of irony itself, at its deepest structural-semantic core- the very mechanism through which I am producing the text, and a concept at the forefront of my overall philosophy … So it’s back to being serious, as this chiasmatic structure is proposed as a genuine philosophical insight, which re-affirms irony level 1 (the serious) at this higher irony level 4. (the nonserious)

Sounds like it would make for an interesting read… I’m a huge fan of irony, of both wit and wrath.

But then, we have a fifth level of irony. It’s getting very complex at this point but in essence: the concept of philosophical negativity is integral to the actual functioning of the chiasmus as a linguistic construct, that is, to the notion of chiasmatic-predicative reversal, however a philosophical, ethical, literary, and political turn was made in the 20th-21st century toward a privileging of the Negative over Presence- by the Lacanians, by critical theory, deconstructionists, etc… Yet these groups of people are heavily argued against in all my texts,- those who would subvert the ‘heteronormative’, ‘racist’, ‘colonialist’ monolith of Western morality as the morality of Presence, of the Singular, of the One Truth. So I am emphasizing the Negative while… arguing against all the guys who emphasized the Negative in the face of metaphysical presence… So what gives? (The irony at this level is basically, while emphasizing metaphysical negativity over metaphysical presence, I argue most vehemently against those who… emphasized metaphysical negativity.) You see, the Hegelian concept of the Negative is the one these disparate groups have decided to ennoble in the face of Affirmation, Presence, etc. But the Hegelian dichotomy of the Negative and Presence is, as indicated in the beginning of the essay, the result of a misinterpretation of Platonic metaphysics. Plato is despised by the camps I mentioned because he was read as exalting Presence over Negativity, Being over Nonbeing, etc. when in fact, the “Negative” was always the essential thesis of the Forms, that is, the ‘aporetic scissure’. And this is, in short, the fifth level of irony, upon which the Negative I am emphasizing is an esoteric resurrection of a forgotten metaphysical subtext going all the way back to Plato,- the guy those other camps despise most of all for instituting the privileging of presence over absence in the Western philosophical tradition, which was always only a misinterpretation of the nature of ‘aporia’ and ‘logos’. But then there’s a sixth level of irony, because this whole “layers/levels of irony” thing is a fucking meme … But then there’s a seventh level because the spreading, activation, and function of memes are tied into the metaleptic discourse and the ‘crossing of the symbolic gap’, by which entirely disconnected subjects or ideas get re-inscribed by an ‘intrinsic operational semiotic’, (that’s what a meme is, a conglomeration of two disconnected things, be it a magic Frog and Donald Trump or anything else) which again feeds back into the nature of the chiasmus, so the meme is actually being serious, but then there’s an eighth level of irony because … fuck it, you get the point. Besides, why spoil the fun? How many levels of irony exactly am I on? … Is the eighth level, which I have declined specifying, the end of it? Is there another 3, 4, 5? Is there 100 more levels? 1000? Is it… infinite? Am I actually a god-mind capable of recursively embedding my concepts in themselves ad infinitum, writing from a parallel reality outside of time? Because unless you can identify what level of irony something I wrote is taking place within, you cannot identify my sincerity or insincerity, that is, my actual position, politically, economically, etc.; and, unless you can identify how many recursive levels I have attained, you can’t prove I’m not coasting on an infinite number of them.

A variety of evolutionary paradigms have been used to analyze memetics and the viral activation/spread of ‘memes’ on the Internet, like the original Darwinian formula, the Lamarckian and Neo-Lamarckian formula, etc. But I would note: the alternative SOC model of evolution I was talking about, you could just as easily apply that to the ‘genetic’ evolution of memes. In fact, I did do that. It’s part of my thought process in realizing the idea of free-mimesis.

Parenthetically, I didn’t lose my password this time. I just don’t get down with the self-affirming dopamine-spiral of social media and internet forums, and I spend months at a time actually working, non-ironically, to the extent that I take months-long hiatuses from all forms of communication with the outside world.

8 levels of irony, or infinite irony? where everything said is ironic, so irony, after irony, after irony, after irony.

Reminds me of a soirée I was at (at mine… though I wasn’t the host) where the talk was in nothing but double-entendre innuendo speak… was highly amusing, when we realised that we had fallen into it.