The dilemna of human exsistence

[Revenant]

[The Comrade]

the former is entirely linked, and a result of, the latter

[Revenant]

[The Comrade]

i didn't disagree, i was just saying that suburbs are a natural result of what happens in a city.

[Boris Johnson]

[broken robot]

...

[JDHURF]

Jesus, well, I guess that's what you get when you start going on about Deleuze. Fitting that you end with "...bullshit."

I'm not sure I am able to untangle a coherent thread from that post, but with the first subject cited, post-Enlightenment/anti-Enlightenment, both premises are on the face too absurd to credit with attention. Human beings cannot change "whatever the hell we want" and there is no such thing as "some form of supreme reason" and there never will be. Reason, to get poetic about it, is, as Robert G Ingersoll observed, but "a small and feeble flame, a flickering torch by stumblers carried in the star-less night, -- blown and flared by passion's storm, -- and yet, it is the only light. Extinguish that, and nought remains."

Projects for social transformation have brought about every single positive social development in history, from the civil rights movement to the LGBT movement. I'm not really aware of any anti-Enlightenment position unless your talking about the sort of critical Dialectic of Enlightenment associated with the Frankfurt School. I wonder whether you are referring to the likes of Althusser and others, the anti-humanist position, which is equally absurd.

I really can't be much bothered with the rest of the post that reads to me as unscientific, Deleuzian gibberish. I don't want to be condescending, but, I can't really help it. When you go on about humanitarianism being an "assemblage" rather than the "cultural logic of imperialism" I want to stab my eyes out.

[broken robot]

[JDHURF]