Linebaugh

Well-known member
@constant escape
Yes an no. Your right to call it energy accumulation. Thats effectively how they understand money, among other things. But your wrong to say there are more and more ways to for the magma to reach surface. They say the opposite is true, because of that energy (desire) accumulation. So look at the primitive society, pre money. Energy is immediately released into the social system, creating new alliances and debts. When energy is accumulated in the oedipilizied society, its robbed of that productive capability. Rather than affecting change, this productive capacity sits inert, accumulated in cash. (This is not to say that desire=money or they are arguing for some anarcho primitivism though, I'm just trying to be concise).
They refer to the pre Oedipal society as the bush and the oedipilized the desert. Think about the complexity of the bush, all the interactions of plants and animals compared to the barren desert. Oedipilization is a turn away from complexity. This is right in line with our societies of control/discipline conversation in the mark fisher thread (which I think you were a part of?)

As for the last question Im not sure. What do you mean?
 

constant escape

winter withered, warm
@constant escape
Yes an no. Your right to call it energy accumulation. Thats effectively how they understand money, among other things. But your wrong to say there are more and more ways to for the magma to reach surface. They say the opposite is true, because of that energy (desire) accumulation.
I meant that the manner of reaching the surface becomes more and more elaborate, circuitious, complex. More bureaucratized, systematized, automated, etc.

I think i would agree, that it doesn't seem like there are more and more ways.

As for the last question, I'm just thinking about how a higher order can form as a result of mass repression. What kind of higher order (tentative to say) assemblages form as a product/byproduct of ever more civilized/repressed/technical expressions of basic urges?
 

vimothy

yurp
I think @vimothy might be the authority on the subject here though
not at all, my understanding of delueze and guattari is heavily influenced by delanda's reading, for whom this is all relatively unimportant. however, I think you can easily guess, or infer - that oedipus is that figure who desires his own repression, who desires to sit in his parent's throne, to overthrow his father and become him. hence a "manual of antifascism" is necessarily the work of an "anti-oedipus". it locates the family as the organising principle of society, the site of a kind of proto-coloniamism, which perverts an honest desire into the production of civilisation, and rejects it as such.
 
Top