Makes no Difference

From Mask Magazine

A Letter from the Editors

They say our generation is the one for which the current global regime is so all-pervasive and dominant that we lack entirely the ability to imagine alternatives to this world. We, the generation who grew up being told to follow our dreams, choose a career we were passionate about, go out and make a difference. We could even choose to do for a living what we enjoyed doing in our free time, or be paid to change what we also passionately protest.

But it didn't take us long to realize that this injunction to live meaningful lives functioned to shield our contempt. "You don't like it here? So what do you suggest we do instead?" (Nothing! I suggest we do nothing. There is no solution that is not also terrible.) Having the freedom to go out and change the world made no sense once we realized that the iterations of possible worlds produced not the opposite, but more of the same. "Making a difference" was just endless, empty, meaningless work — pushing the same papers and sprockets of our parents — only we're supposed to feel passionate about it, supposed to enjoy small-talking at dinner parties about it, with no boss to despise, no policies to reject.

Most of the people in our generation that we meet have agreed that the era of freelancers and "do what you love" evangelists is one which conceals the precariousness of labor, putting the burden (and risk of the market) onto individuals. We talk about recuperation: it is for real, and every "radical" initiative we struggle for eventually dies in the shop window of some pedestrian mall, in a fashion magazine, in an advertisement for jeans.

And yet, we've heard again and again that our generation is the evil incarnate, too busy drinking lattés and snapping selfies to build the revolution. "Theory is great, and I'm all for critique, but only up to a certain point! If it crushes hope, disperses movements, or legitimizes the "sellout" ... count me out!"

We're wary of this work ethic in activism. To refuse to measure and calculate and criticize the moment it threatens our own spirit and will is to refuse to criticize at all.

We are terrified by this assumption: "the world is falling apart and needs alternatives. It might even need to be saved."

Under this assumption, we could contribute to solving the world's problems. We could work to destroy the world, to put an end to all this. We could strike all together, and do (be) nothing. These are the choices which face the protagonists of history. The "good guys".

We aren't interested in finding the most effective way to be the good guys. We want a different assumption: "the myth of a better future is a procedure of modern capitalism. A symptom (and prerequisite) of a constantly expanding economy and knowledge."

Our point isn't that nihilism is "the answer". The point is that trying to fix the world is not being recognized for what it is: an endless pursuit that follows the same logic as the accumulation of capital.

One way to explain this is through what Slavoj Zizek calls "ideological anamorphosis". That is, we use a word to describe an idea, and the idea is simply the sum of the things that are described using that word.

Democracy is everything that people have called democracy. Woman is everyone who has been called a woman. Terror is everything that has been called terror. Likewise, democracy is also defined by the things it is not: "this isn't a democratic process!". "Woman" is a person who isn't "not a woman". Terror, something that happens instead of "freedom" and "stability". Similarly, the "world" never exists by itself, it remains "the world that needs to be saved". And yet, in the incomprehensible words of Zizek, the "world" as a concept is

perceived as a point of extreme saturation of Meaning, as the point which 'gives meaning' to all the others and thus totalizes the field of (ideological) meaning.
Slavoj Zizek, The Sublime Object of Ideology

Let us be clear: we don't disagree when they say our generation is hopeless. It's just ... we just don't think hopelessness is bad.

Or maybe bad in a good kind of way

Depression can’t be reduced to the psychological field. It questions the very foundation of being.
Franco Berardi, After the Future

There are few things more frightening than realizing it's time to change course. (That's why we shell out to Corina for those horoscopes). But what do you do with your life when none of the things left to enjoy silence the existential dread of utter meaninglessness and tragedy? If you're anything like us, you find solace in finding other people who can no longer muster the trite injunction to be "good" and make a difference.

Mask Magazine is not a political project — neither is it a literary or a philosophical one. We want to conduct an experiment — what happens when we support each other materially for the cultural production we'd otherwise be trapped into producing for free?

The Demo Tape Issue is the first iteration of Mask Magazine, wherein we capitalize on ourselves as commodities, get dressed in the morning, have sex with strangers for money, work other shit jobs, push things over on our way home from the bar, eat animals, gaze up at the stars and wonder: what the fuck am I now?

We're launching softly, with the invitation to send us your work. We will continue to develop the software which publishes this magazine, refining it both in appearance and functionality. We will publish your most intensely sobering works, and your most superficially trashy, and we will pay you for your work so long as subscriptions provide the means.

Thanks to Roxanne, Chloe, Randy, Gregg, Moxie, Lucius, all of the artists and contributors, and the people around us who have put up with our mania these last few months. Special thanks to Amanda Dandeneau for her work on the cover photo and support as we get to know New York City.

From our depraved corner of the Internet,
we salute the coming shitstorm.

— the editors



More Zizek whoring...

"The word represents the idea that is the sum of all the words contained withing the idea that represents the word "World", that is the referent permeating its contained ideas, that are..." Typical Zizek sophistic.

One day some university liberal Zizek fan will realize that this stalinist mascot with a huge stupid head made his trademark SOLELY out of his poor knowledge of English.

You've successfully demonstrated your critical perspective.

There is no nature. We must cut ourselves off from our roots. How we have roots, but there is no nature---give me more speed and i will bullshit you an answer that is like the Real where the shape-shifter in the second Terminator film reconstitutes its subjectivity at will, much like the shadow of Darth Vader behind a young Anakin Skywalker's head in the newer episode, I forget which. And thus we come to the central necessity which is marxist-leninism.

Plus I'm disgusting so thank you for castrating me and so on.

I'd troll this, but I'm already working on my first article for them.


Amen, brother or sister or non-binary-identified comrade.

Ok, bu what about those singularities unisolated out of the confines of the relational space/plenum!?

The concept of a sovereign state is a ‘secularized theological concept’. People who support this ‘secularized theological concept’ are the source of the God-like powers vested in the State, its justice system and in its police.

Untouchable police brutality derives from ‘secularized religious belief’ that is the foundation of the sovereigntist state;

“Western political thinking itself is grounded in theological concepts of “Christian nationalism.” The notion of “absolute, unlimited power held permanently in a single person or source, inalienable, indivisible, and original” is a definition of the Judeo-Christian-Islamic God. This “God died around the time of Machiavelli…. Sovereignty was … His earthly replacement.” —R. B. J. Walker and Saul H. Mendlovitz, “Interrogating State Sovereignty.”
”State sovereignty “is a ‘religion’ and a faith.” —Mark Owen Lombardi, “Third-World Problem-Solving and the ‘Religion’ of Sovereignty: Trends and Prospects.”
“All significant concepts of the modern theory of the state are secularized theological concepts, not only because of their historical development … but also because of their systematic structure.” — Jens Bartelson, ‘A Genealogy of Sovereignty.’

The retributive justice of the sovereign state employs the Enlightenment European archetype of man, organism and organization [including 'the state'] as ‘independent reason-driven system’ that is fully and solely responsible for its own behaviour. As Nietzsche says, bestowing this God-like jumpstarting power on an activity, A RELATIONAL FORM IN A RELATIONALLY TRANSFORMING WORLD (A RELATIONAL ACTIVITY CONTINUUM), is the work of ‘grammar’.

“I am afraid that we have not god rid of God because we still have faith in grammar”

our sensory experience informs us that the global, social dynamic is an unbounded relational continuum that is not, in physical reality, chopped up by the centuries and/or by the imaginary-line boundaries that exist only in our language-conditioned minds. If we had a flow-based language, we would say; ... ‘the world, a continually transforming relational spatial plenum, is nation-izing’, just as flow-based languages would say that the atmosphere is hurricanizing or the terrain is riverizing. It is noun-and-verb European/Scientific language-and-grammar that, by implication, imposes an absolute space and absolute time reference frame to RE-CAST an activity within the activity continuum, as a notional independently-existing thing-in-itself. We give it a name; e.g. ‘sovereign state X’, and then we use the name as a subject that will inflect a verb; ‘Sovereign state X invades sovereign state Y’.

What happened physically to substantiate the division of the Middle East, by Britain and France, into Syria, Iraq, Jordan etc? If we examine the physical region the day before and the day after the creation of these sovereign states (colonies) there is no physical substantiation of their 'coming into existence'. The existence of these sovereign states is ‘all talk’, and the talk of humans doesn't ‘take’ on the animals, birds, insects, rivers and winds that make up 'the real physical world'. The creation of sovereign states is another ‘Creation myth’, a secularized theological conception and delivery. This religious myth,the belief in the creation and existence of ‘independently-existing’ sovereign states has been spread over and around the world [thanks to the military force, backing it up].

“The emergence of the sovereign state was ... the necessary instrument of Europe's colonial expansion.” – Joseph A. Camilleri, "Rethinking Sovereignty in a Shrinking, Fragmented World."

Of course a lot of effort is required to sustain the secularized theological belief in the existence of sovereign states; there are flags and anthems, state symbols, parades, swearing of oaths, bearing of arms, wars etc. Babies are born into all of this and absolutely saturated with repetitive and consistent brain-washing, to the point that it is like water to fish and few question it, ... initially, at least. And as these children grow to adults, they make their nest in it and feather it to make it a comfortable place for raising their children, filling it with belief-sustaining symbols and rituals. But regardless, if one looks, one finds that it all boils down to ‘talk’, noun-and-verb European/Scientific language-and-grammar, and the unbounded relational physical continuum is still the unbounded relational physical continuum and it will continue on in its unbounded relational spatial transforming, out-lasting the secularized religious myth and the frenetic chatter, gossip and politicking that goes with it that is the basis for a notional plurality of individual sovereign states.

A key supporting pillar of these secularized religious belief based ‘sovereign states’ is ‘retributive justice’. The justice system is the instrument of this “absolute, unlimited power held permanently in a single person or source”
The ‘moral highground’, as in most religious systems, is automatically grounded in the notional supremely powerful central authority. No matter how oppressive the state, ... even if the state has to shoot 200 protestors each day, ... the justice system, the instrument of the state, will stay automatically grounded to the moral highground, putting the protestors on the moral lowground and criminalizing them for 'threatening the security of the people' and 'failing to obey the supremely powerful central authority of the beneficent sovereign state, ... failing to disperse when told to do so and thus failing to desist in disturbing the smooth and efficient functioning of the state.

Can you imagine indigenous anarchists EVER accepting this absolutist kind of ‘justice system’ anchored to the ersatz ‘reality’ of a supreme central authority fabricated by the 'talk' of political-military hucksters? Indigenous anarchism employs ‘restorative justice’ where the enforcers and the offenders are the community itself, ... hitters-and-fielders in a relational unum.

The police are the right hand (increasingly often, 'fist') of this moral absolutist justice system, and just as supreme central authority owns the justice system, the justice system passes on through this power to it's 'right hand', police enforcers, giving them, depending on their psychological make-up, messianic egos.

The trial of the police officers who killed Kelly Thomas is not being undertaken in a community circle as in the restorative justice of indigenous anarchism. The trial is being conducted by the justice system; i.e. the justice system is the muscular God, vested with absolute supreme powers and grounded in moral righteousness that is being asked to look at its own right fist, its instrument of enforcement and asking; ‘my fist, my fist’, did you strike justly or unjustly. If the crowd gets too noisy, I may have to sacrifice you to keep my automatic grounding on the moral high-ground sustaining its look of legitimacy, but in any case, I have an unlimited supply of fists.

To accept the legitimacy of the trial; i.e. to accept the legitimacy of the state’s supreme enforcer, the justice system, deliberating as to whether to punish his policing fist, is nothing more than pro-sovereigntist reformism. 'Listen up now, You, mister supreme enforcer - retributive justice system, ... you need to manage your fists better. That is all we ask, we ‘the families’ of those who have been mistreated or killed by the overshoot of your messianic fists'.

But surely, it is the justice system that is speaking through its fists; i.e. the more oppressive the regime, the more work for its justice system and its enforcing fists.

The attitude of ‘the families’ recalls the narrative wherein the ventriloquist is telling blonde jokes and an angry blonde in the audience gets up and condemns him so effectively that he stammers and begins to apologize, at which point she says; ‘shut up mister . I’m not talking to you, I’m talking to that little bastard sitting on your knee’.

To accept the legitimacy of the trial is the first mistake; i.e. to accept the legitimacy of the supreme authority of the state and its justice system [which claims the right to automatically ground itself in the moral highground] is the first mistake. The second mistake is to focus all of one’s attention on the little bastard in the blue uniform sitting on Justice’s knee.

IGTT 6.5/10

Now, let's hear how well you imitate your self.

the continually transforming relational space of the atmosphere [activity within a relational spatial activity continuum] can be ‘morphed’ by non-local, non-visible, non-material influence such as variations in solar irradiance. what manifests as local, visible, material dynamics; e.g. storm-cells are like ‘shadows’ of the primary, purely relational spatial influences. gravity, thermal energy fields, e/m fields are not directly visible, but their influence can be inferred by local, visible material dynamics. if we spread iron filings on a sheet of paper and pass a magnet beneath it, we can see the iron filing move, not due to themselves, but as if their individual and collective movements are being orchestrated by some ‘invisible’, ‘outside’ [non-local], ‘non-material’ influence. this non-local, non-visible, non-material ‘relational space’ is an influence that engenders relational forms and which orchestrates and shapes their individual and collective actions.

words and language orient to that which is visible and tangible. the iron filings are visible and tangible as is their movement. they infer the existence of something deeper than themselves that is making them dance around like puppets on strings, ... a ‘deeper physical reality’; i.e. a non-local, non-visible, non-material relational spatial influence. modern physics affirms this deeper physical reality as the primary physical reality and contends that the local, visible, material phenomena are ‘appearances’; i.e. that the ‘relational space influence’ [which is non-local, non-visible and non-material] not only orchestrates and shapes the individual and collective behaviours of material things, it engenders them.

our words orient to ‘relational forms’ in the continually transforming relational spatial plenum, and ‘what they do’; i.e. we use words to psychologically convert the relational forms in the relational flow-plenum over to ‘independently-existing things-in-themselves’ and we use verbs to notionally (psychologically) animate these ‘things-in-themselves’. as Mach, Poincaré and others have noted, ‘science’ is built on ‘language conventions’ that keep these notions of ‘independent things’ and ‘their movement’ ‘hanging together logically’ [thanks to absolute space and absolute time reference frames]. science, therefore, starts with ‘appearances’ and uses them to construct a logically self-consistent ‘world’ in terms of ‘independent things’ [subjectized relational forms] and ‘what they do’ [dynamics attributed, by verb inflection, to the ‘things-in-themselves], a world that many confuse for the world of our relation-spatial experiences, which it is not.

if one get’s too caught up in ‘thinking’ in the synthetic, scientific terms of ‘the activities of things’ as if in an absolute space and absolute time ‘operating theatre’, one will begin to believe that this synthetic world is ‘the real physical world’ and to craft their behaviours as if it were [leaving their relational spatial experience in a tail-wags the dog situation].

When millions of people confuse the scientific language constructed word-world as ‘the real physical world of our relational spatial experience’ [confuse the finger pointing to the moon as the moon] we get what is called Western ‘civilization’.

that is, we can talk about a relational space that is beyond words using words that we apply to the shadows of the primary relational spatial dynamics. if solar irradiance intensifies or if the relational spatial thermal energy field morphs, we see the atmosphere coming towards the boil and many hurricanes forming. The relational forms lend themselves to our pasting word-labels on them and talking about them. We can talk about Katrina and Rita as if they were independently-existing things, and we can talk about ‘what they do’, and we can talk about humans in this same manner without ever mentioning the relational spatial influence, the universe-as-energy-charged-plenum, that is engendering relational forms and orchestrating their individual and collective behaviours.

we use words/language to talk about a diversity of local things and their activities, but the world is one thing. language is good for talking about local things and what they are doing, but we can’t use language to move upstream from itself, to swallow and integrate all the little words and come up with one big word that includes everything in the universe so that it is a word with beginning or ending, a pregnant-with-telling supra-word to convey the unifying substrate of the world, the relational spatial plenum.

it is up to us to psychologically make the inference upstream from talk about all the little local activities, to the activity unum/continuum that includes them all and us. this word that is upstream from everything that happens that we can talk about, is like the Buddhist or Hindu ‘Om’, how we would use language to capture everything; i.e. to put words to ‘relational space’;

The syllable "om" is first described as all-encompassing mystical entity in the Upanishads. ... Hindus believe that as creation began, the divine, all-encompassing consciousness took the form of the first and original vibration manifesting as sound "OM". Before creation began it was "Shunyākāsha", the emptiness or the void. Shunyākāsha, meaning literally "no sky", is more than nothingness, because everything then existed in a latent state of potentiality. The vibration of "OM" symbolises the manifestation of God in form ("sāguna brahman"). "OM" is the reflection of the absolute reality, it is said to be "Adi Anadi", without beginning or the end and embracing all that exists.”

one doesn’t have to be buddhist or hindu to acknowledge the inadequacy of words in expressing ‘relational space’ . this is a problem recognized in the indigenous aboriginal tradition, as well; i.e. the medicine wheel symbolizes renewal [continual spatial relational transformation] wherein everything is continually coming from no-thing. it is not possible to speak directly about ‘no-thing’ [relational space] from whence ‘every-thing’ comes’, but it is possible to speak about ‘things’, the shadowy secondary ‘appearances’, like the storm-cells in the continually transforming relational spatial plenum and ‘what the storm-cells do’; this talk of ‘independent things’ and ‘what independent things do’, this language game that is ‘science’ [mainstream] is finger-pointing to the moon, which should not be confused for physical reality. the primary physical reality is the continually transforming relational spatial plenum which is itself ‘beyond words’.

“The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao.
The name that can be named is not the eternal name.
The nameless is the beginning of heaven and earth.
The named is the mother of ten thousand things.
Ever desireless, one can see the mystery.
Ever desiring, one can see the manifestations.
These two spring from the same source but differ in name” – Lao Tzu

Suck my cock, dude.

—emile (indian name Hippy Storm)

"He who has followed the history of an individual science will find in its evolution a clue to the comprehension of the oldest and most common processes of all `knowledge and understanding': in both cases it is the premature hypotheses, the fictions, the good stupid will to `believe', the lack of mistrust and patience which are evolved first it is only late, and then imperfectly, that our senses learn to be subtle, faithful, cautious organs of understanding. It is more comfortable for our eye to react to a particular object by producing again an image it has often produced before than by retaining what is new and different in an impression: the latter requires more strength, more `morality'. To hear something new is hard and painful for the ear; we hear the music of foreigners badly. When we hear a foreign language we involuntarily attempt to form the sounds we hear into words which have a more familiar and homely ring: thus the Germans, for example, once heard arcubalista and adapted it into Armbrust. The novel finds our senses, too, hostile and reluctant; and even in the case of the `simplest' processes of the senses, the emotions, such as fear, love, hatred, and the passive emotions of laziness, dominate. - As little as a reader today reads all the individual words (not to speak of the syllables) of a page he rather takes about five words in twenty haphazardly and `conjectures' their probable meaning just as little do we see a tree exactly and entire with regard to its leaves, branches, colour, shape; it is so much easier for us to put together an approximation of a tree. Even when we are involved in the most uncommon experiences we still do the same thing: we fabricate the greater pan of the experience and can hardly be compelled not to contemplate some event as its `inventor'. All this means: we are from the very heart and from the very first accustomed to lying. Or, to express it more virtuously and hypocritically, in short more pleasantly: one is much more of an artist than one realizes."

-- Nietzsche, Beyond Good And Evil, Part Five : On the Natural History of Morals

Cool. What program you're using for this? Semantic Web?

p.s. re knowledge and understanding;

as nietzsche says, and as emerson said before him, what we know seems to come into view through us and be visible out in front of us, as if we are a lens in the continually transforming relational spatial plenum through which our ‘material’ view of the world is forming in front of us.

this outside-inward sourced evolution of knowledge is ‘understanding’. it is always available so long as we don’t get mesmerized by the concreteness of the material landscape we see in front of us [so long as we remain like 'babes'] here’s a few examples;

“To use a comparison, we could say that creating a new theory is not like destroying an old barn and erecting a skyscraper in its place. It is rather like climbing a mountain, gaining new and wider views, discovering unexpected connections between our starting point and its rich environment. But the point from which we started out still exists and can be seen, although it appears smaller and forms a tiny part of our broad view gained by the mastery of the obstacles of our adventurous way up.” -- Einstein and Infeld, ‘The Evolution of Physics’

the following excerpt from Emerson’s ‘The Method of Nature’ underscores our choice to (a) lock-in to ‘knowledge’, which makes us into a knowledge-driven doer-of-deeds, or (b) to let knowledge evolve continuously [be in understanding mode] by becoming the transmitter/channeler of influences from the vast and universal; i.e. to be open to letting our knowledge be continually evolved by the continually transforming relational spatial plenum we are situationally included in [can you imagine a fractal view of the landscape forming before us as in Einstein and Infeld's description wherein the world we saw yesterday is sort of still there but receding from us as our continually updating view enrichens].

this is our nietzschean ‘uebermensch’ mode wherein we let the transforming world we are each uniquely situationally included in, continually transform us, rather than reaching a point where we ‘know it all’ and flip things around to become an ‘independent knowledge-driven machine’ or ‘doer-of-deeds’ as in the Enlightenment European archetype for man, organism and organization.

i.e. which 'self' do we want to give priority to; (1.) ‘agent of transformation’ [grounding ourselves FIRSTLY in understanding which puts us in yin/yang mode] or, (2.) ‘doer of deeds’ [ground ourselves FIRSTLY in knowledge which puts us in yang-only mode]

“Whilst a necessity so great caused the man to exist, his health and erectness consist in the fidelity with which he transmits influences from the vast and universal to the point on which his genius can act. The ends are momentary: they are vents for the current of inward life which increases as it is spent. A man's wisdom is to know that all ends are momentary, that the best end must be superseded by a better. But there is a mischievous tendency in him to transfer his thought from the life to the ends, to quit his agency and rest in his acts: the tools run away with the workman, the human with the divine. I conceive a man as always spoken to from behind, and unable to turn his head and see the speaker. In all the millions who have heard the voice, none ever saw the face. As children in their play run behind each other, and seize one by the ears and make him walk before them, so is the spirit our unseen pilot. That well-known voice speaks in all languages, governs all men, and none ever caught a glimpse of its form. If the man will exactly obey it, it will adopt him, so that he shall not any longer separate it from himself in his thought, he shall seem to be it, he shall be it. If he listen with insatiable ears, richer and greater wisdom is taught him, the sound swells to a ravishing music, he is borne away as with a flood, he becomes careless of his food and of his house, he is the fool of ideas, and leads a heavenly life. But if his eye is set on the things to be done, and not on the truth that is still taught, and for the sake of which the things are to be done, then the voice grows faint, and at last is but a humming in his ears. His health and greatness consist in his being the channel through which heaven flows to earth, in short, in the fulness in which an ecstatical state takes place in him. It is pitiful to be an artist, when, by forbearing to be artists, we might be vessels filled with the divine overflowings, enriched by the circulations of omniscience and omnipresence. Are there not moments in the history of heaven when the human race was not counted by individuals, but was only the Influenced, was God in distribution, God rushing into multiform benefit? It is sublime to receive, sublime to love, but this lust of imparting as from _us_, this desire to be loved, the wish to be recognized as individuals, — is finite, comes of a lower strain.”

Like Nietzsche said, and Nietzsche was in a deep resonance with the views of Emerson, “to hear something new is hard and painful for the ear”

for anyone interested in ‘symmetries’, the competing symmetries for ‘evolution’; i.e. ‘evolution in general’ and ‘evolution of knowing = the process of understanding’ are;

1. yin/yang, ... as with emerson, nietzsche, mach, poincaré, bohm, vygotsky, schroedinger; i.e. “outside-inward orchestrating influence shapes inside-outward asserting actions” ... hitting-fielding as one dynamic [relational transformation aka evolution], epigenesis-genesis as one dynamic aka ‘evolution’, ‘receptors-effectors’ as one dynamic [evolution], ‘endosmosis-exosmosis’ as one dynamic [evolution], ‘les fluides incontenables – les fluides contenables’ as one dynamic [Lamarckian evolution], ‘spontaneous concept formation – scientific concept formation’ as one dynamic [Vygotsky idea evolution] etc.

2. yang-only, ... as with the vast majority of philosophers, scientists, experts and the institutions of Western civilization (government, commerce and justice); i.e. inside-outward asserting actions are ‘all there is’ and they originate from ‘independently-existing material things-in-themselves that move about and interact in a notional absolute space and absolute time reference-frame-come-‘operating-theatre’” ... hitting performance is due fully and solely to the hitter [doer of the deed, causal agent], evolution is fully and solely inside-outward driven and where that can’t explain complex development, is salted with enough ‘random chance’ to cover the shortfall [Darwinian evolution], ‘genes/effectors’ driven by the absolute jumpstart authority of the cell nucleus reduces ‘receptor-effector couple’ to one-sided genetics, ... i.e. all yin/yang views can be reduced to yang-only by imputing an absolute [God-like or God-of-Grammar] jumpstart sourcing of dynamics to concretized/subjectized versions of the ‘relational forms’ of yin/yang (relational space) dynamics, RE-CASTING the relational forms as ‘independent yang things-in-themselves that move about in a notional absolute space and absolute time reference-frame-come-‘operating-theatre’.

That is, ‘reason’ [knowledge-drive] as in yang doers-of-deeds takes over as the sourcing influence of development and behaviour from ‘understanding’ or 'consciousness' as the sourcing in yin/yang agents of transformation. Katrina as yin/yang relational form in a continually transforming relational spatial unum is reduced to a yang independent yang thing-in-itself that, with the help of verbs that a noun/subject can inflect [i.e. the God of Grammar] and becomes a yang doer-of-deeds ['see Katrina ravage New Orleans', 'see Spot run' etc.].

take your pick for your 'priority' view of self, ... (1.) an understanding based yin/yang agent of transformation, ... or (2.) a knowledge based yang doer-of-deeds. Of course, (2.) can ‘fit inside (1.) as a polynomial of degree two [non-euclidian relational space] can be reduced to a polynomial of degree one [euclidian absolute space] but the converse is impossible. if you start with (2.) you may end up being a know-it-all doer of deeds who stops listening and/or evolving; i.e. who shifts down out of understanding mode into knowledge-driven yang mode. we have all seen those that get excited over a piece of theory and then impose it on each and every dataset that comes up for discussion, never bothering to really listen and allow new experience to transform oneself and to let one's 'knowledge base evolve'. the Nietzschean uebermensch, like Emerson’s self-reliant individualist, is yin/yang in that he lets his receptors orchestrate his effectors; i.e. he lets himself be transformed by the relational dynamics he is uniquely, situationally included in. The yang choice, on the other hand, is to put one’s self fully and single-mindedly in the service of working towards ‘who one wants to be’ and constructing desired futures etc. etc. [one can do both if one puts yin/yang in priority, just like a sailboater who orients to a balanced and harmonious voyage while letting his destination orientation follow, rather than like a powerboater who puts destination orientation first no matter how bumpy and unpleasant the voyage for himself and others].

these are symmetries that everyone has access to and can choose between, even though we live in a world in which the ‘yang’ choice has been extensively and intensively institutionalized.

"We're wary of this work ethic in activism. To refuse to measure and calculate and criticize the moment it threatens our own spirit and will is to refuse to criticize at all.

We are terrified by this assumption: "the world is falling apart and needs alternatives. It might even need to be saved."

Under this assumption, we could contribute to solving the world's problems. We could work to destroy the world, to put an end to all this. We could strike all together, and do (be) nothing. These are the choices which face the protagonists of history. The "good guys".

We aren't interested in finding the most effective way to be the good guys. We want a different assumption: "the myth of a better future is a procedure of modern capitalism. A symptom (and prerequisite) of a constantly expanding economy and knowledge."

Our point isn't that nihilism is "the answer". The point is that trying to fix the world is not being recognized for what it is: an endless pursuit that follows the same logic as the accumulation of capital."

I really like this part. Anarchists never want to criticize their own actions as long as those actions are conducted in an anarchist way, regardless of whether it was totally useless it was.

"The point is that trying to fix the world is not being recognized for what it is: an endless pursuit that follows the same logic as the accumulation of capital.""

Actually, that's really a stupid thought. A lot of things are "endless pursuits" but that does not mean they follow the same logic as capitalist accumulation. At all. The most fundamental logic of capitalism is simply to transform money into commodities to produce even more money ad infinitum. How the commodities produce more money is through 1) the extraction of surplus value at the point of production (the exploitation of human labor/activity) and 2) commodity fetishism.

But I don't see how trying to "fix the world" is the same as that. I do not consider myself someone who is trying to fix the world, let it be said. I do and I don't. I wouldn't use that language because it sounds so liberal but essentially I engage in an active insurrectional struggle against capitalism because I believe that human relations can be organized differently and better (namely, anarchic and communist relations).

I'd like to know how "nihilism" is not the same logic as the accumulation of capital, how sharing logical principles implicates absolute failure, and how literal self-valorization doesn't somehow fall into this same trap.

I like Mask Magazine. It's cool. But I know that it is turning a certain anarchist subculture into a recognizable positivity and that, because of that, these images will seem lame and embarrassing in like 10 years when they are used everywhere.

But that's the idea with Zizek's confused and confusing languag, aimed at creating semantic loopholes and blackholes, while consolidating his domination through the bedazzlement of the readers created by these open ends.

I'm not super into his political opinions, but his books on continental philosophy make sense to me. What is so confusing about it?

The fact he's using a very elitist academic language used in itself as a smokescreen to hide completely unoriginal ideas, and being an anti-vulgarizing vulgarizer.

Also, philosophy is a discipline for the privileged petty-bourgeoisie, and it's been like that since ancient Greece. Effective for getting laid with beautiful university or college liberals, but hardly insurgent or anarchistic.

mask magazine, a vehicle to reify social capital as real capital and to liberate social capital from the confines of a subculture aligned (for good reasons) against authorship, is the logical outgrowth of a certain too-hip-to-care tendency within the anarchist mileu. they know secrets are cool and have gone to lengths to transfigure innocuous banalities, rendering common stones as secrets, and in the process squeezing cool from them. as we tend to take our pactices to, this practice was taken to its limit. everything is a secret. now the practice is inverted. names are signed and struggle is excised as an inessential variable in an equation that must always result in cool.

all the more tasteful anarchists have been doing something like this for years on their way to dropping out of active enmity. pizza shops and academic careers and illegalist party promotion and designing for street wear brands and working for twitter. there is a certain audacity and foolishness in targeting the venture at anarchists. the demographic is too small, too irrelevant. or maybe targeting anarchists is just a way to court the conscious youth nihilists and using them as a beachhead onward towards the unconscious nihilist masses and an eventual acquihire buyout by Vice.

They're targeting hipsters, and you're just conflating anarchists with hipsters because there is no meaningful distinction. Nothing in this text says anything about anarchists. Whatever lead you to believe this was an anarchist project was just these shitbirds trying to swindle you.

"I'd like to know how "nihilism" is not the same logic as the accumulation of capital" ... it is! How is that inconsistent with this text?

this quote confuses me.

"what happens when we support each other materially for the cultural production we'd otherwise be trapped into producing for free?"

Don't we (anarchists) see this experiment happen all the time? With distros that charge money for their zines, book publishers like LBC, anarcho-punk bands, etc? I just don't really see anything new about anarchists materially supporting each other for the "cultural production(s).

To me, what this project really seems like is an anarchist version of tabloid/seventeen/cosmo magazine, which I'm not necessarily against, I'm just confused why it's being framed as some new experiment where anarchists try to support each other materially, because thats an experiment I already feel like has happened/ is happening all the time.

I do think that this *type* of cultural production has not yet been experimented, but the idea of supporting each other materially is nothing new, so I don't why the editors are painting it as such.

"cultural production" is a hip way of saying capitalizing on the re-production of a sub-culture.

"anarchist version of tabloid/seventeen/cosmo magazine"...maybe, but I was thinking more Vice/@news/ad-busters.

Also, I know most of us acknowledge the hipstordom in anarchy but I thought it was typically with disdain. Are we now just going to own it, kind of like this project has on its about page or have they only done so because this project is out of Brooklyn?

I'm only asking not to shit on a new project that I know many will dig, but simply because I'm approaching my 30's and still want to be on top of the trends.

I think they're saying that the disdain is more self-serving than we tend to want to believe, and so we should embrace being "the bad guys" instead of trying to defend some "good" way, but i'm not sure.

Yeah, that line got me too. I guess maybe they're not proposing something new to anarchists, but a new way for others to see anarchist projects within capitalism.

Sounds like the marketing department is at it again!


What the fuck is this bullshit? Some shitty web 5.0 site full of hipster shit that charges you for reading some shitty writings?

``Or maybe bad in a good kind of way''?! ``[writers] wrote this just for you''?! ``Zizek''?!

``We will publish your most intensely sobering works, and your most superficially trashy, and we will pay you for your work so long as subscriptions provide the means.'', or, ``We will publish your trash as long as you pay''

``what happens when we support each other materially for the cultural production we'd otherwise be trapped into producing for free?'' Ahahahahaha, what a piece of shit

``Ahahahahaha", or, ``will someone please tell me what is going on?", or, ``shitty shitty shit", or, ``wait, hold up you guys! where is everyone going?" ..... what a piece of shit.

"We talk about recuperation: it is for real, and every "radical" initiative we struggle for eventually dies in the shop window of some pedestrian mall"

some quicker than others!:

But they're making the argument that we should abandon initiative in favor of cultural production, so you're just advancing their point.

get fucked shitmagazine dev

"I'm so angry! I'm so angry! Shit Shit Shit!"

"fuck shit fuck!"

Get fucked shit fuck!


Fuck u I meant get fucked shitmagazine dev ur obviously the shitmagazine dev so get fucked ok?


care to elaborate?


You're doing it wrong, it's pronounced salmon fucker. like almond. salmon. salmon fucker.

I don't understand your point, are you saying that a shit magazine should get fucked, or that a dev should get shitmagazine fucked? Please clarify. I have urban dictionary open in a tab, so just use whatever comes naturally.

the trolls tonight, omg

oh god. an internet startup by nihilists. instead of asking us for subscriptions for an anarchist Medium why not go get some VC funding? wouldn't that be a swindle?

They are probably asking for subscriptions just to keep people like you out.

I know Franco!
>>> Depression can’t be reduced to the psychological field. It questions the very foundation of being. <<<
This was my idea a long time ago when I was into Gestalt, the holistic approach to being. The era of narcissistic self-indulgence and the subsequent loss of humility has really created misogynist sociopaths or else sexist lover-boys with big guns. Very sobering details have been flowing in, odd little reports of psychological damage from modern education and the media, a type of subliminal brainwashing which produces unnatural acts of rage and destruction, most prevalent within western societies. I wait with baited breath for the immanent screaming from the front entrance and a sleepiness night picking up the pieces from the wreckage of capitalist society.

i think the real question is: how can i steal this.

(how can i read their content for free)

steal two bucks a month from someone else.

the ILF will surely liberate the contents to pastebin and post the links here. but then, we won't be getting all that design that has been being done for free for years.

tired of not getting paid to be an anarchist? a simple solution: reduce everything to an "antagonistic" target market (like, you know, hipsters), adopt the logic of advertising and appeal to said market, post some witchy shit/graffiti/runway photos/dead-eyed skinny people on tumblr/twitter/instagram, foster a cult of personality around you and your friends, sacrifice any dignity you may have left, and you're well on your way to profiting from struggle and the wonderful world of life-as-commodity.

Uh, i do all that stuff you said already.

"post some witchy shit/graffiti/runway photos/dead-eyed skinny people on tumblr/twitter/instagram"
"a cult around you and your friends"

half of the people who read anews.

"Fuck everyone here! Am I right everyone?!"

Or move to L.A. and do some music. Make big money out of smashy smashy music vids. With graphic sex of course.

the sad thing is this fails to even reach its mark of degenerate hipster, or good design, or anything that would appeal at all to "antagonistic youth". so far reading the free stuff, its mostly populated by near hippy positivity, generic graphic tropes, and a kind of feel good justification for itself. perhaps this is what happens when not giving a fuck starts to give a self conscious fuck, nothing but try-hards. as the ever self selecting and dwindling insiders barricade themselves behind a pay-wall and patting each other on the back for empty style, their irrelevance reaches an ugly acceleration of not really being in the know at all. then this reflexive ignorance enters a feedback loop, witness the laughable groping of those jettisoned from the gravity of cool, once held there by the actuality of antagonism, now just an image of an image. don't you get it, the cool kids would never participate in something like this, cause they'd rather spend their time breaking it, pissing on it, stealing it whatever. there is nothing to celebrate about ourselves, there is nothing we like.

by so far, you mean in the 72 hours they've been available? You're saying "the cool kids" like you know. ha.

How many hours should I wait? Is there hope yet? Are they going to try harder? You are right, small business deserves my patience and support, its like buying local or something right? I can't wait to join their street team in my city, so much integrity! Can I spend my bonus on a snap-back or arcteryx with their logo, or are those not cool anymore? I haven't been so excited since I went shopping at the co-op. You're saying cool kids like I don't know, unfortunately I do. Of course I will be reading this shit as soon as somebody gives me a login, just like I go from the coffee shop to the whole foods to the bar, another sad development which gives me reason to hate everything. Hey, can you get me in on the internet promotion team?


can't or won't? was I too earnest?

"Building the party one sellout at a time." I'm pretty sure that's the history of capitalism not a tiqqunist manifesto.
Good luck with the new Adbusters.
Worker--I don't see any reason to continue approving posts from "mask magazine" IMHO....

worker is the one who posted them

parent doesn't know worker is the consumate nihilist

Go get real jobs and stop trying to sell your mediocre garbage to anarchists, you'll never make enough money to survive. And you're embarrassing yourselves.


trust faaaaaaaaaaaaahnds.

Adbusters meets Crimethinc!

It's dumb, like everything.

It also might get people to do stuff, depending on if people write for it or not, and how.

Also, at least it's a self-conscious commodity. Lots of anarcho-commodities aren't

The question is whether this is the format that is most likely to "get people to do stuff" that actually confronts capitalism and the state. Based on the particular breed of nihilism described above, that seems . . . uncertain. Being honest about making commodities, by itself, doesn't distinguish this project from your average capitalist marketing project.

Yeah, nevermind, wtf, there's a review for some TV show on it? I don't want to hear about that or even a critical analysis.

I thought it was going to be Hip Anarchist Nihilism, like Politics Is Not A Banana, but this is...boring hipster magazine.

I don't even have a bank account anyways. Fuck this shit. The intro spoke to me. The rest...meh...

Does anyone even know these asshats?

well...yes. and you know of their anarchy and various projects, too, even if you don't know the persons. all that design work that was being done for *free*, etc. you would know them, too, if only you were cooler and/or had stomped more hearts/broken more cops.

a good portion of active and conflictual antagonists know these "asshats". that's the reason for the lack of vitriol directed at the venture. for the worse, (worse is better? not always. not this time.), these "asshats" are ones that do, make, and other verbs that rhyme with make.

this recent activity of these "asshats" make a good argument for thinking and not just doing. like, if they had directed their previous thinkings otherwise maybe they wouldn't have used identity politics to defer inchoate insurrectionist potentials and then lament the continuation of an unbearable routine. just a hypothetical but maybe it fits?

this is what professionalization of anarchy looks like when sisters camelot and other charities/NGOs are too boring and academia is out of reach. this is what affinity looks like when our affinities were aligned for a youthful urban aesthetism and not the destruction of the existent.

if only they had a sex vlog as entertaining as Vice's Slutever i'd fork over $2/mo no problem.

oh those asshats. i will just chalk this up as a failure of friendship. did none of their friends think to tell them they were heading down a path equivalent to the christian rock of hipster media? and the lack of vitriol is just a continuation of that failure of friends-are-all-there-is. and fuck yr em dashes

All of my friends were wearing crucifixes like 4 years ago, bro. We moved on.

Maybe stylistically, but the awkward overly-wrought subcultural feinting lives on, perhaps christian hip-hop is a better analogy.

yeah- sorry guys- this is terrible.

"for-pay online content" that is as hit or miss as anything this millieu generates is an idea that reinforces the absolute worst of all tendencies. sometimes raising funds to run projects is important but there is nothing necessary or essential about glossy @ cultural analysis. (i know it may seem like you're finally getting use of that expensive liberal arts degree but knock it off.)

continue applying your admirable skills to worthwhile political projects and pay for it the way the rest of us do... by working shitty jobs and occasionally putting out a call-out when bail is more than could have been reasonably anticipated.

please don't make nihilist art hipster a "sustainable" identity or project model. art/writing are important coping mechanisms and we should be comparing notes--- but damn it- that's what zines are for. anyway what you are trying to distribute/get across can't feel all that essential to communicate if you expect people to pay for it--- (as opposed to chipping in for the basic printing or mailing costs to break even.... oh wait- there are no printing or mailing costs--- its online.)

and please don't pretend website hosting overhead requires outside funding- it costs what? $5-7 a month to be hosted. you basically want people to pay for the extra time you put into producing the cultural and graphic content...but it is too ironic, too self-aggrandizing to a tendency within the scene that shouldn't be encouraged, and too fake. i probably don't understand the full scope of what its like to live in Brooklyn---- but there has to be about 10 million actually politically meaningful things you could be doing with you time.

anyway most (touching) art and writing that helps with this shitty world we live in has some sense of genuineness- an expression of pain, deeply held beliefs, desires, conflict. and while some of your contributors (of what free content is readable)- seem to be genuine enough- the parameters of the project itself just seem really cynical, and overly concerned with a self absorbed politically irrelevant scene.

what i am trying to say is---- i don't know you but (i hope) you're better than this project.
also i don't know why this is so upsetting... sorry- it just struck a chord- a depressing one.

oh--- my bad. this isn't an anarchist or political project in any way. for some reason i thought it was- what with some contributors being anarchists... and posting it on the @ news. no point in being upset about how recuperative (of a certain feeling of resistance?) this is--- because well- you've no interest in that. how silly of me.

you know (younger) people will actually engage in serious political debate without flashy trappings...

"pay for it the way the rest of us do... by working shitty jobs"

"what you are trying to distribute/get across can't feel all that essential to communicate ... "

"... that's what zines are for."

"there has to be about 10 million actually politically meaningful things you could be doing with you time"

"anyway most (touching) art ... "

"writing that helps with this shitty world we live in has some sense of genuineness"

"overly concerned with a self absorbed politically irrelevant scene"

"i don't know why this is so upsetting"

(sarcasm:) "... no point in being upset about how recuperative ..."

"(younger) people will actually engage in serious political debate without flashy trappings..."

... I may seem like a troll, but I'm being serious: If you really mean all of the things you said, looking around at the context of youth culture and the global political situation, I think you're running out of time to do anything important. Honestly, best of luck. Looking forward to your zine.

According to the text available on the site, Mask Magazine charges money so that it can pay contributors, I'm sure the people behind this are also working shitty jobs.

p.s. I don't think anyone besides worker posts anything to @ news anymore, but I'm not sure.

"Nothing New" Appendix I:

Why should contributos get paid? Those other projects charge money to cover costs of printing so people off the internet can access their ideas. Many of the articles published on those other sites are available for free. That's the difference.

I'm glad all of the trolls have heeded my advice:

"Free business advice to youngsters is part of every American's debt to society."

Read more about me here:


The people behind this apparently have the ability to do this sort of thing. That is to say, they seem to know how to do web design, artwork, get contributors, etc. So why do they feel the need to couch this in post-modern nihilist (or whatever) language, and attempt to create a market out of the flatbrim set? There's no money in that. The allusions to it going out of fashion in a few years, or looking embarrassing in hindsight, or getting bought out by Vice, seem accurate. So instead, why not just pander to that? Just make it a more extreme version of Vice or whatever the fuck hipsters are into. Separate idiots from their money, and use it to forward a relevant project. Anyone who would pay money for this type of style-chasing, nihilist aesthetic is an idiot whose money should be your money. Why cultivate your current or potential comrades into a tiny market share, when there are plenty of clueless idiots just waiting to buy whatever you tell them is cool. And with the abilities this project seems to possess, you should be able to tell people what is cool soon enough.

Unfortunately, the interests of the "idiots" already seem to overlap in the way you're suggesting.

I don't follow you. What do you mean by overlap?

lol "flatbrim" ... Thanks for your opinion, gramps.

I appear to have dated myself. Substitute "flatbrim" for whatever is cool nowadays. Your comment makes my criticism all the more relevant. The cultivation of real relationships and comradeships, or the funding of antagonistic projects, is always going to be more useful and valuable than what the cool kids with the social capital wear to impress each other.

I won't judge your "flatbrim" comment, if you stop being a crotchety old "back in the day". Ain't no such thing as real. Deal?

I don't understand what you mean by "back in the day." I probably phrased things too much in the direction of making it sound like I thought fashion or aesthetics were somehow better at some point in the past. There have always been style chasers. I'm just a bit out of touch with what they currently look like.

since this is a fashion thread:

what do (anarchists) wear now days? what do hipsters wear now days. lets get in depth, break it down; fashion party!!!

are insurrectionaries/anarchists still in the prepster skinny tie phase or soft-grunge (legging and loose, floopy beanies with maybe some flannel GROCE*) or casual emo phase?; are nihilists still in the soft-ghetto phase (possbily sexy when not too soft); are alt-bros still wearing colorful tanktops and bright colored sunglasses (goofty and cute and annoying)?

*sriously so irriating and cliche

an example of "good" ghetto style: deathcore kids generally got it down, hoodies and caps and tats, generally everyone else in the scene does it too soft for it to be cool. (tho sometimes deathcore kids have colorful chest piece tatoos and wear v necks and black blazers lol) it makes sense since deathcore is the contemporary form of of punk , so...

i won't even break down traveler/street kid fashion since you all are pussies, but theres this cool fad invovling hawaian shirts and yes there's a difference between crust punks and gutter punks, tho both can be street kids and travelers (crust punks are bourgie, and i use that term asthetically)

it's sad septum rings are all haute couture now :( :(

tho sometimes crust punks kind of incline to the more rural spectrum of things, and in that case, even if they're kind of equipmentcore, i don't think they look too bourgie, but once they get to that point, i think it make more sense to just call em country punks or punk-hicks.


I wear Levi's jeans, Victoria's Secret bras & panties (hey, when you have boobs like mine, you buy what fits), softsole moccasins (every deer season I think about learning to make my own, but for now I buy Minnetonka), free t-shirts from businesses and colleges, plus my dad's flannel shirts and his puffy coat from Eddie Bauer and generic black Wal Mart socks because it's coooold lately.

...Wrong answer?

no, flannel shirts are okay, grunge is okay as long as it's not haute grunge or soft grunge you're all good keep on keeping on maybe live it up a little some times that's all i could recommend but it depends on what you want not trying to force anything nothing wrong per se with swag or decandence or hipsterness or fancyness

Ok. so i was gonna not, but now i am.

whoever on this comment board wrote "this is like the christian rock of hipster nihilism" or whatever, hit the nail on the fucking head. Im not saying that to shittalk -- im actually saying it cus i prolly know the folks doing this project, and actually want to express my sincere concern that this is going to totally and embarassingly tank.

I got no problem with some @s getting together who got some skills and tryna make some money. Whatever. But a) even remotely directing a project specifically like this one at anarchists, either for contributions/submissions or as subscribers, is a bad strategy. For all the talk about anarchist hipsters on this comment board, anarchists are really the fucking dweebs of the party. Really. Theyre just not very cool. I love them, i have lots of anarchist friends, ill take a bullet for many of them. But theyre fucking geeky. Even the "cool" ones are typically cool in a 5 years out of fashion (music, clothes and otherwise) kind of way. Whats more we tend to be pretty one dimensional, ghettoized, etc. Not very cool. Thats just the damn truth. So getting @s to do their writing and design and to subscribe, makes NO sense. Its just a bad marketing strategy. Hell - the only people i even know who use the word "hipster" like this magazine's website are really geeky anarchist types. It sends a red flag right away.

and 2) the bigger problem here is this truly is the christian rock of hipster crap. Its trying to be hip and flashy, its trying to look the look, but its....a little off. You know, like when youre at a church and you hear a "rock" band when youre 12 and you think, oh, cool, "alternative" or something. And then you listen a little closer, and youre like....wait, something is wrong. And you leave quickly out the sidedoor before anyone has a chance to talk to you. Thats what this looks and feels like to me. The aesthetic, the fashion, etc....

Again - i have NO problem hawking style and aesthetics at some motherfuckers. I think fashion is fun and great. I think many anarchists' attitudes towards these things are prudish and simplistically dismissive. I wouldnt mind having a magazine type place to find out about new music that isnt utterly terrible and isn punk. But as things stand, i dont go to anarchists for these things, cus THEY HAVE NO FUCKING CLUE. Unfortunately this project doesnt have me convinced otherwise, which sucks, cus i d actually like to see my friends make bank and get that money flowing to cool shit. Above all, if youre gonna do a little capitalism, you gotta do it well. I wish yall the best, i hope im wrong - but this just isnt gonna work yall.

You stop doing stuff after it fails, not before. Live a little.

This mag is so intellectually clichéd, on the other hand the rebels wait and wait, unspoilt by media and marketing, WE MUTATE OUR OWN AB-ORIGINALITY INTO OUR OWN COSMOS WITHOUT COMPROMISE!! It may take years, but when the time comes, IT IS PURE REVOLUTION!

They are mostly going to charge for the parts about sex...

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
Enter the code without spaces.
Subscribe to Comments for "Makes no Difference "