"Fighting Futurority"

  • Posted on: 31 October 2019
  • By: anon (not verified)

Exert Chapter from the recently released text "Let. Me. Die"- Pandas Technology and the End of The World- Down & Out Distro: other chapters/the text in its entirety are available at https://downandoutdistro.noblogs.org/post/2019/10/12/let-me-die/

1. Futurority is the promise of civilization that the human species will continue.

2. Moreover, it is the promise that the 'right' human species will continue.

3. Beyond the promise, it is also the force that it MUST continue.

4. It is white, cis, and hetro; it is the nuclear family and 2.5 children- the house in the suburbs, and the promise of university educated grandchildren to blast into space.

5. Futurority is another way in which we are forced to live forever.

6. It is the legacy of humanity, but also it is the legacy of individual beings, therefore it involves applying force not only to societies reproduction but also to the reproductive capacities of individuals.

7. The force to reproduce civilization and its disciples is applied differently to different individuals but wherever it exists, it is always forced.

8. Sometimes reproducing civilization implies sterilization (for undesirables such as drug addicts, trans people etc), and other times it implies forced reproduction (denial of abortion, heterosexual indoctrination in schools, assimilation of queer sexualities into reproductive logics etc).

9. Historically and currently, this force is disproportionately applied to women and gender non conforming people; placing responsibility of reproduction and maintenance of life squarely in their hands, or wombs.

10. The program of severing women from the knowledge of herbal abortives[6], the rape and forced impregnation of black women during chattel slavery[7] (in order to produce more slaves), and the extraction of genetic materials and then sterilization of trans "patients" are all examples of this force.

11. Abortion is still illegal in many countries worldwide, and even when it is accessible rigid state guidelines are applied and the possibility to abort outside of the medical industrial complex is almost universally illegal; likewise infanticide is universally criminalized.

12. Individuals are separated from their own bodies, from the right to self determine their reproduction (or especially their non reproduction). Sexual organs capable of reproducing, are ultimately the property of the state- whether or not it chooses to exercise its ownership in a given moment.

13. The negative connotations imbued in such desperate characters as the lonely childless old women, the evil solitary gay men, and the pathetic street transsexual are all folklore troupes which (re)enforce the psychic pressure to reproduce rather than die alone or in shame.

14. A perhaps esoteric though none the less real example of the application of this force can be seen in the numerous Reddit threads and National Geographic 'exposes' on "natures worst mothers". Panda infanticide, for example, occurs in an extremely high number of pregnancies (Panda mothers regularly produce 2 infants during a pregnancy and in this case will kill or abandon at least one[8]), yet we are constantly bombarded with the idea that conserving Panda life is a worthwhile cause- the 'cute' panda bastion of conservationists worldwide, bestower of great revenue to domesticators and zoo keepers alike may also provide a shining light in exposing the application of force inherent in futurority; after all whoever heard of a forced breeding program for the Lichen Weevil[9]?

15. Civilization reproduces that which is of value to it and destroys all life which is not.

16. The continuum of futurority always implies the absorption of each new life into the horrors of domination, every new individual born is the property and product of domination, the new recipient of safety, the next candidate for immortality- the latest lamb to the slaughter.

17. Perhaps dominations cleverest tactic, has been to deny simultaneously self determination, and selectively prevent the reproduction of specific communities/groups- making reproduction appear (and in some cases genuinely be) an act of resistance- this paradigm continues to provide civilization with all the bio and necro political material it needs for its own manifestation.

18. When standing on the edge of a precipice between the seeming certainty of the collapse of the current epochs form and the horrific new world which may rise in its ashes- it is sometimes incomprehensible as to why individuals reproduce at all.

19. In the spiraling collapse, the decomposition, the apocalypse (however you choose to name the moment humanity currently finds itself at the center of) the potential for lines of fractious conflictuality to appear in the sphere of reproductive futurority seem infinite and alluring.

20. Yet thus far, the discursive and practical possibilities contained within world ending are ignored in favor of clinging to the idea of survival (and by extension reproduction).

21. The technophiles and modern day prophets of climate change denial dream of emergent colonies on mars, humanist expansion with technological aid, new life born off planet but inside the same civilization[10]; whilst a haphazard brigade of similarly dreamy ideologues on the so called left[11] fight an increasingly meaningless discursive battle against extinction- preaching moderation and 'ecology' in the name of continuing the species.

22. In the end both sides, though they may posture and present themselves endlessly in conflict are merely two sides of the same civilized coin.

23. Whether Eco-fascism or Techno-fascism will rule the next phase of decomposition changes little, the force of reproduction will inevitably remain under either condition though perhaps with mildly different parameters (the Eco-facists for example will likely place restrictions on the number of beings one can (re)produce especially on those inhabiting the 'global south'[12], whilst the Techno-fascists will likely see greater benefit in having those same persons (re)produce an endless supply of workers for Martian extractivism or other dangerous and brutal off planet projects[13]).

24. Though these realties may sound far off, extreme, or polarized, signs of there becoming already appear in the here and now and are far from 'extreme' when one considers the whole history of civilization in all its horror.

25. These gruesome yet moderate/modest continuations of 'business as usual' under new flags or ideologies will prove little more meaningful than rearranging chairs on the titanic- and ultimately both exist within the same sinking ship of 'civilized' humanity.

26. Of course, reducing all the future possibilities of domination to a dichotomy between Eco and Techno fascism is a somewhat reductive and lazy analysis- there are perhaps myriad other ways futurority may choose to articulate itself in the order of the civilized, though in this moment the two aforementioned incarnations of terror seem the most dominant of those vying for a position in or after the ashes.

27. The desire to analyse the future trajectories of terror, does not negate the fact that the present is also terrifying and horrific.

28. Even if it were possible to imagine that the future could be better, freer, or without domination; the terror of the present still presents adequate reason to reject futurority, to reject (re)production where and when possible.

29. To knowingly inflict the suffering of the now onto new life is a choice, a choice to domesticate another life inside the furnaces of civilization, a choice for which on must ultimately take responsibility if he is in a position to choose it.

30. At the same time, and paradoxically; the (re)production of those lives undesirable to futurority may be a form of resistance to domination- a resistance which carries great violence, pain, and suffering, but a resistance none the less.
31. When faced with this brutal double bind one is forced to choose between a resistance and an ending.

32. The unspoken blasphemy for those wishing to live beyond the walls lies in the total refusal of futurority (personal or societical).

33. The (re)production of society at large may be inescapable (since it is also non consensual) except in moments of direct conflict with it (society), but the personal refusal of futurority is perhaps, in moments, more likely achievable.

34. Staring extinction squarely in the face, perhaps even welcoming it; refusing reproductive futurority, accepting that there is No Future.

35. A mass 'die off' is likely approaching the human species; the task for radicals in this epoch lies in communizing this die off to include the insides of western civilization instead of merely allowing its unchecked continuation outside of it- to communize the 'die off' is to deny futurority.

36. To face and embrace a reality in which one is amongst the final generations of 'humanity' may be the closest thing to hope those struggling against the existent can expect.

37. If futurority falls civilization may crumble.

38. The end of futurority is the end of humanity, but not necessarily the end of individual projectualities.

39. The human being and it's reproduction are the social constructs and material realities of civilization, but the existence of wild beings and their proliferation outside the walls are something yet to be known.

40. Against ideologues who claim the future.

41. And tyrants who enforce tomorrows.

42. Against state ownership of reproductive capacity.

43. And the brutal taming of wild life.

44. Towards the fall of civilization.

45. And the death of futurority.

Comments

all in all, the panda zine was a good show

well done

got tired of somber gloomy vibes tho.
don’t want any more of that.
if i’m gonna embrace the no future,
i want some fucking sincere cheerfulness and glee.
im gonna start a fucking cotton candy cuddles glitter rainbow sunshine fucking edgy distro.
fucking battalion of jolly skipping fairies.
fucking sunshine out our asses...handing out lollipops at our table and dollar bills inside our zines...fuckin...

yeaaaa but still only ageist sex in private groups, yawn. No future, or a future for your fucking, and your fucking babies too!? Checkmate.

… what was that last part?

Or were you asking about making fucking babies?

egh...
i changed my mind...i look at some pics. not my vibe either. i was only considering that to spite ya’ll.

i’m gonna start a retirement account just to spite ya’ll.
and floss every day.
and plant seeds.
and...bury time capsules.
and have a weekly calendar, a 4 year plan...
...and pospone, delay, procrastinate, re-schedule

at least if yer still on schedule in your postponing that's fine. What matters is to be on schedule right? Oh wait...

no, what matters is that these concepts hinge on futurity.

i hope it irks someone.

between futurity and futurority? is futurority just an error? reading this is way hard because that word is so distracting.

all words derived from the etymological root of the word future are banned and forbidden

expunge thought of the notion of time

but but but future =/= futurity =/= futurority

well, you're not radical enough

radical means looking at roots of words and cancelling everything at the root

i had to mentally find/replace futurority with futurity in my head... otherwise i'd surely be lost in the lexisnexis-as-source academic abyss

rfa do you think it is Ok for radicals (self-described nihilists) to stop using the phrase "eco-fascist" since "eco" is chaotic and "fascism" is ordered? it is really off-putting to hear nihilists subscribe to the same leftist moralism that ITS are "bad", therefore "fascist". They are misanthropic sure, and Ok with collateral damage which means you gotta watch out for their sneaky lil devices being on a bus you happen to ride that day. But fascist? No. Can "anarchists" just accept the reality that they can not guilt away misanthropic people, conflict will be around before and long after civ collapse, and miscategorizing these people as "fascists" only creates confusion? rfa, what do you think? i am only asking you because someone mentioned you have contributed to down and out writing.

People who throw the eco-fascism term around are a lot of times offendable histrionic humanists(someone like William Gillis comes to mind). In actuality there really is no serious radical tendency called eco-fascism outside of some Jack Donovan types.

SirEinziggy someone should write an essay about this. because it seems to be the hip new term and I think all people really have to do is kick out that lil cop in their head to see that calling the wild "fascism" isn't going to cage us animals like a zoo. and even if it did just for a lil, we will find a way to break out. so, these leftists are just creating confusion and wasting time.

and this is why i like that lbc tables its stuff. and i hope lbc is tabling the seattle anarchist bookfair coming up. be brave lbc. be brave.

I'm still not convinced that this small group of dorks like ARR even matter, regardless of whether they hurt your big bad nihilist feelings with the whole eco-extremism thing.

It's just semantics. The important thing is how people become that alienated and how vulnerable they are to manipulative power fantasies when they're that deep in a pit of despair.

But I agree it's annoying how those people use the F word to oversimplify.

it's a nonsense term used by moralistic leftoids (some who laughably call themselves nihilists or anarchists)--desperately trying to create big monsters out of everything that does not fit within their narrow authoritarian ideology--to rally the sleeping herd into their righteous embrace for great mass unified glorious winning...dollars...self-worth. ... that said, i have equally dismissive thoughts about the moralistic misanthropic feral "eco fascists" (who are neither)... both groups larping through life exerting control over others... as if their very important (!) thoughts and actions are at all meaningful in any significant way...
specs of dust.
i have not knowingly contributed to down and out. perhaps i'll send a poem.

seems like blue box wants rfa to validate them so that they can keep do (???). So much is put upon rfa's shoudlers... geez. What did he do to get such expertise points? Oh yeah, must be the clap trap.

Or someone someone is looking for authority figures to put them at their place...

well, because, i knew rfa would deliver a response nothing less than satisfactory. oh...*sighs* how i wish there were no "experts" when it comes to dismantling the idea of "eco-fascism" but... shhhh...the left still dominates everything around us. it is not expertise as much as it is bravery. i, myself, did not see lbc on the tabling list for the upcoming seattle bookfair. i can only assume it is because lbc had the courage to table literature that my oh my upset the leftists something fierce!

in response to you rfa...yeah, you get it. i knew that. when you write, i see lightning bolts crack open the sky-painted canvas.

all in all, leftism is so boring. including the nihilist, greenies who call themselves anarchists, but are only foot-soldiers of their own enemies of domesticated moralism.

but that's an other story that's not very complicated.

Let's say, as a hint, that the best circle jerk is one that involves only one jerker.

First, tho i agree eco might mean chaos in its lets say 'natural' form- there is also 'eco' as in a shortening for ecologist i.e. ppl who in one form or another want to 'preserve' nature/the environment and that this act is not chaotic but in fact a form of management/domination even if the eco itself is chaotic there is nothing chaotic about those who want to manage 'natural' habitats create nature reserves etc.

secondly i have the feeling when ppl especially self described nihilists refer to Eco-fascism not all of them are referring solely to ITS; and i think in the case of this text, it is very much not referring to this trajectory or reverting to a simplistic moralism that bad=Fascism. In the footnotes the writer explicitly refers to Extinction Rebellion and their ilk as an example of the 'Eco-Fascists' they refer to; the argument I personally see here, and am more inclined to agree with than the ITS are bad therefore fascist, is that this group and others like it explicitly demand a state response to climate disaster, work with and heavily support the police, and lobby for restrictive curtails on personal freedom in the name of saving the environment. Although it is perhaps a stretch to say at this stage they are fascist the end point of such ideologies seems to be increased state power, social control, force and heavy restrictions on personal choice/freedoms which perhaps one can see as move towards a more fascistic approach; also many of these groups adopt racialisng arguments referring to the idea that the problem lies in over population in Africa etc. Also there mode of organizing tends to be heavily hierarchical with strong leadership structure, desire to seize power etc.

Tho i agree Its are not fascists, fucking shitty ppl who need a few kicks to the face, and total fucking losers who think they are the glorious enlightened and everyone else is fair game for a bullet, but they haven't shown any interest in seizing state power/ the will of 'the people' unlike XR etc

"35. A mass 'die off' is likely approaching the human species; the task for radicals in this epoch lies in communizing this die off to include the insides of western civilization instead of merely allowing its unchecked continuation outside of it- to communize the 'die off' is to deny futurority."

no u

Do these retards even read what they are writing?

Nice to be able to frame these retrograde lefties trying to actualize themselves through the current eco movement. Not so nice to see they're still alive.

exert- 1. to bring to bear; exert influence. 2. To put oneself to strenuous effort.

excerpt- a passage or segment taken from a longer work...

troupe(s)- a company or group, esp. of touring performers.

trope- a figure of speech using words in nonliteral ways.

Is it "X-tian morality" if I cut my name in your face? lets unpack that,,,,

Add new comment