Immediatism episode: What Does the World Desire? by Bellamy Fitzpatrick

From http://immediatism.com/2020/02/01/e41-what-does-the-world-desire-by-bell...

Immediatism Episode 41, reading for you today What Does the World Desire? The case for panpsychism. By Bellamy Fitzpatrick. Originally appeared in Backwoods 2 A Journal of Autochthonous Anarchy, available from LittleBlackCart.com.

There are 32 Comments

I think I only understood about half the words in that description of the episode

Bellamy keeps decorating the academic cage with nice, colorful BIG concepts pretty nicely. Also artsy fartsy cover art make it better. Forget '80s style trashy punk monochrome distro artwork... here's the style to make SoHo artists drool, and offer their submission to Bel-Ami. Lookin forward to buy his books from MIT publications! Or maybe not buy.

Incredibly boring take. This makes me think too hard and the art is artsy.

I think green anarchism is unique in that it finds importance in seeking out some form of spiritual connection. Whereas much of anarchism falls into hard atheist materialism. The panpsychism seems to be a good departure point that seems close to animism in that it presents a world teeming with light. While also being maybe less appropriateable and corny. I think there are a lot of great sources for developing a spiritual base that I think is so important in having an anarchism that is informed by deeper connection. I am thinking of Gary Snyder and his Zen Buddhist studies or Leguin who was inspired by Taoism. I feel less drawn to the spiritual practices of witchy people like starhawk but there’s a lot of cool anti civ oriented traditional witchcraft in the works of peter gray.

So much of anarchism is straight corny. If you feel genuinely into something and it makes your life better who cares. Haters will say it’s corny and then recite some shit about being a bad ass nihilist in all seriousness.

damn right! give me that corn floating in cheese sauce, terrible for my cholesterol

Unlimited more appeals to intellectual authorities, coming from "anarchists". Even spiritual culture becomes a thing when they are practiced, of course ritualized and thus become part of the imaginary.

Luminaries publishing books are only interested in your money and subservience, not in making spirituality to become lived practices (and experiences). Petulant liberals with soft, malleable, impressionable minds like the lady hosting this show are exactly the inversion of anarchy.

Poetry, as well as misinformed references to science and history (materialism did not begin with Abrahamic religions, you fucking tool) play as mystifying forces upon their minds therefore creating openings for intellectual domination ("sophists" look it up), the author becoming a master to the slave, turning them into "biomechanical puppets" (indeed) that serve as their mouthpieces, if not more.

Also let's observe the root word "author" in "authority".

This is of course not directly specifically at Bellamy or even his biomechanical puppets. It's a relationship, that some of you still aren't apparently perceiving. Problematic for people that pretend an interest or relation to anarchism or anarchy.

From the Zerzan cult... to the Bellamy cult...

Just imagine when someone asks you the big question:

"What are you into in life?"

Then all you can answer is:

"After what that guy told me. It's AWESOME. But also I'm dead inside!"

"Petulant liberals with soft, malleable, impressionable minds like the lady hosting this show "

so it seems YOUR strategy to convince readers of YOUR argument is instead: throwing insults at folks you know little to nothing about in attempt to discredit those interested in ideas you are not, and unsurprisingly not backing up any of these claims.. yawn.

How is knowing those individuals has got to do with anything? I'm only talking about what they DO... it's not the author as a person here that matters, but their author-ship, and their relation with the readers and cheerleaders.

then how does the individual you specifically denounced as "petulant liberal" DO the liberalism youre inferring? or am I supposed to, ya know, just take your word for it?

your argument seems to be: a person has a blog where they read texts they find compelling enough to be turned into audiobooks, and the text they chose I dont like, therefore, they must be of soft malleable mind worshiping the cult of authorship.

The question should be--- What do I desire of the world?
The cosmos does not impart any control over my unique being, I am the master of my own destiny, I shall take the potentiality of the Creative Nothing, and laugh and weep at the comedy of life and existence!!!

Okay we get it you like Stirner. Not all forms of spirituality revolve around the cosmos controlling you or some divine destiny. You seem to be stuck on abrahamic religion.

“ I shall take the potentiality of the Creative Nothing, and laugh and weep at the comedy of life and existence!!!”

LOL you must be really fun larping Stirner in 2020.

I stand alone at the bar sober and pondering and smoking an e-cigarette whilst everyone around me gets drunk and rants and raves about ŕevolution.

"Let's get out of this place..." flips table, spilling drinks and ashtrays on the ground, and then opens fire at raving crowd
"...or at least you, while you can."

*a work of fiction. no anons, real or imagined, were harmed in the making of this comment.
this satirical remark is a humorous (due to context) play on the brinksmanship of misanthropic and nihilistic posturing, such as found in the comment section.

"The cosmos does not impart any control over my unique being,"

that's just delusional. severe weather, volcanoes, earthquakes, all kinds of "natural" disasters - i'm guessing your uniqueness doesn't prevent you from having to respond to such cosmological events.

My uniqueness accepts these events, which you call disasters and natural phenomena etc, but they do not send me into a handflapping fear, or a condition of sorrow over loss of property or life. Amor fati, I say laugh at what life thŕows at you. There is no delusion in accepting conditions that are unavoidable, rather, it would be deĺusional to curse and weep at an earthquake that destroyed your home, or blame it on an angry god or devil, spooks. Yes, so the cosmos does not impart any change upon my psychology and being really.
To the other poster, I am the iconoclast here, and that is why I am always deleted.

feeling the need to tell the internet what he thinks and feels? Attention Seeker? It does appear he cannot exist for long in total anonymity? I find people like him quite scary as they never go away; they are relentless in having their ideas broadcast! when he decided to grow his food, I thought that was it. He was settled, so to speak. But oh no. He couldn't just get on with anonymously, he had to get back on line. He will burn out again, disappear and re-appear preaching again...sadly.

allow me to introduce the internet. here you will find things called podcasts, blogs, twitters accounts... even comments sections below articles.

Selling books and elevating yourself in the academic hierarchy (yeeessss... it's a hierarchy) goes hand in hand. It's even a necessary symbiosis, as you'll end up like some loser clerk or second-rate professor at the faculty if you can't manage to get a lot of pages published, radiate through always more peer publications, and of course... quote quote quote sources!

Bellamy knows just like Graeber, Chomsky and co. how this pathetic paper economy works; that involves profiting on a sub-market readership (i.e. anarchists... eco-anarchists... nihilists... or YOU?). Where it's so easy to get stonewalled in the more mainstream academic circles, you'll need alternative writer and reader bases, not too detached from academia, with official publications that can be found either in bookshops or online, so that this serves as leverage for potential further academic recognition. They've just been pushing academia's Overton window for a few decades, so that we can have "anarchist" academics.

Of course anarchist discourse might end up being trapped in a frame on a wall... but the individuals making themselves careers out of this, just like artists, are okay with that. How could they not be... it's their source of capital accumulation!

No one should say anything ever. Unless they are a dead old anarchist. Nothing new can ever be said lest ye be an attention seeker!

hey, it's probably true that most writers are seeking validation but you quickly end up disparaging all art with this line of reasoning.

If some blathering jackass writer needs a reminder that they're just a mere mortal like the rest of us, it's usually obvious. You know who really sucks tho? MUSICIANS. Look at me, I sit around making whiny noises until some dumbass gives me a bed to sleep in!

j/k art is cool or whatever.

my point was actually that some of those living ones, like Bellamy, are not saying much, behind these sophisticated text walls. Layla, Zerzan.... nothing too substantial neither. Or at least nothing original. Ria has brought something original as theory, tho it appears so absurd that I can't agree. I I'd take someone like James C. Scott or Bob Black as examples of authors who say something worthy. Even Aragorn! tends to make some good points or at least brings some important aspects to light (like his recent assertion that there's nothing much going on in NA, in the field of anarchist theory, which is true).

And yes I want MORE living authors to say something... especially something meaningful and perhaps even useful. An author doesn't have to mean an academic opportunist, or strictly at least.

I agree that not a ton of newness has come out of the anti civ milieu. I’d argue Bellamy did a great job of articulating an egoist non primitivism perspective when he wrote corrosive consciousness. What is interesting to me is where he’ll go from here. Zerzan hasn’t budged in decades. At least with Bellamy I see him always at least trying to critically think about these things and change with it. Aragorn is another who I think continues to keep an open mind and be critical. I don’t know if I’d say the same about Black but I still enjoy his works. I’m less interested in these cults of personality though. I understand why Bellamy rubs people the wrong way. He does sound like a haughty academic when he speaks. I don’t know if that is who he is in real life but I appreciate the large efforts he’s taken in his life to live his version of anarchy. I don’t know how many of us actually put much effort or thought into it.

Ahha, that explains the homegrown vegie garden, to push academia's Green Overton window, and dispell the appearance of intellectuals as being unfit pale indoor types who lack all real life experience, which isn't really true, myself being a very rare outdoorsy intellectual, one of a kind.
I stand wisely in the library, pondering and smoking my e-cìgarette, whilst all the intellectuals frantically scan monitors and leaf through books looking for revolutionary data.

Aragorn! could NEVER live a simple life. They would be bored stiff. They are all mentally stimulated to such a point anything less would end in anxiety. It is said it is wise to judge a person by their actions not their words. Each of the above are all addicted to thinking thinking thinking. I hear Kevin Tucker is the same? These would be last people to live an anarcho-primitivist's life, be that vegan or not! That is the one trait they all have in common ;-)

Put them in the 'celebrity' jungle and they would be the first to say: 'I'm a thinker, get me out of here'!

spread the frequency of love and connectedness. Take that you shape-shifting fuckwits. I'm looking for a Bellamy poster for my shrine. I'm definitely feeling Bellamy's vibe. It's big!

Add new comment