Our society lives in a world of message bombardment. We are continually and viciously inundated with language/image/media which supports a singular narrative. Other contrasting or oppositional narratives are suppressed under the guise of private property. However, even more troubling, this inhibits the ability for change within a society. Much like in an Orwellian nightmare, the metanarrative defining structure is centralized and controlled by our Aristocratic Class: IMF, World Bank, WTO, G8, G20, etc. Anything which does not maintain or support the metanarrative they structure is quickly demeaned and discounted by all pundits and economic elites. The masses, through a cacophony of pleasure, instituted apathy, centralization, homogenization and destruction of the commons, have entered into, and maintain, their own enslavement within this superstructure. In other words, society has descended into a Foucaultian panoptic nightmare. Reality itself has been hijacked, through the bombardment of a singular narrative, and we are trapped within an ecocidal relationship with the planet. Thus we must deconstruct our reality in order to save ourselves and current biodiversity. The Ecological Collectivist Union is here to challenge all dominant metanarratives, including itself, through what Nietzsche defined as the transvaluation of all values. Within our context this means that we must transvaluate how we define value. Currently, within our capitalist neo-liberal nightmare, the only thing of value is Capital. The Ecological Collectivist Union challenges Capitalist assumptions; The Union desires to integrate an ecological concept of value which includes our environment/ecology, locality, community, family, art/music/culture, diversity, multiculturalism, language and science rather than the narcissistic, homogenized and antisocial Capital. Thus the Ecological Collectivist Union’s purpose is to deconstruct society’s reality so that we can reconstruct a true ecology.
Our society needs to transvaluate their core ideas about humanity and nature. Firstly we need to redefine the signifier “nature”. In other words we need to reconstruct the signified’s relationship to the signifier: Nature. Currently, within the popular conscience of society, this word is meaningless and is usually seen to be in opposition to humanity; specifically within Abrahamic based religion where nature is conceived of as “evil” or “worldly”. Sadly this conception of nature is, to use a Nietzschean term, hostile to life. Rather, in The Union’s view, nature is the asomatous interdependency of all beings, it extends from the beginning of time toward the evolutionary future and incorporates the smallest of particles, like the Higgs Boson, to the immense conception of the multiverse. Nature is within us and we are within nature. Such a definition invariably brings us into connection with the infinite. I do not mean this in any theological way; rather, we are forced into incomprehensibility, into the infinite. Far from demeaning humanity, this concept of an evolutionary interdependence of nature reaffirms that we are one of natures great achievements. Within this boundlessness, this measureless darkness, spins a blue planet in which nature has birthed biological “AI” . Moreover, within this conception there is no reason not to believe that biological units are strewn throughout the universe/multiverse. Our collective existence, and I say this in the broadest of senses, are all connected to the same quantum fluctuations which nature created in the Big Bang. To be true this view of nature at times degenerates into pantheism, yet I do not believe it is incompatible with atheism or agnosticism. One might argue that this definition of “nature” is inherently religious or spiritual. Although I would disagree on the characterization of religious, it would be harder for me to disagree with the spiritual. This definition is not religious in that it does not impose any dogmatic and metaphysically based precepts. Hence this explication of nature finds its root in the sciences and is subject to changes within scientific discovery. Within regards to the spiritual I would argue that there is no difference between the supernatural and the natural. Our platonic conceptions of this division between natural and supernatural should give way to more primal/indigenous understandings of holistic integration. For more on redefining the concept of nature please read our page: A Conceptual Evolution of our All Too Human Species.
The Ecological Collectivist Union endeavours to deconstruct society’s dominant reality through guerilla action and subversive language/images which kill the old god (metanarrative) and create free spirits who are fearless.
“Indeed, we philosophers and ‘free spirits’ feel, when we hear the news that ‘the old god is dead,’ as if a new dawn shone on us; our heart overflows with gratitude, amazement, premonitions, expectations. At long last the horizon appears free to us again, even if it should not be bright; at long last our ships may venture out again, venture out to face any danger; all the daring of the lover of knowledge is permitted again; the sea, our sea, lies open again; perhaps there has never yet been such an ‘open sea’” (Nietzsche, The Gay Science).
We must overcome our fear to write that which deconstructs!
Each time I write,
it feels ___ I’m advancing ___ new territory,
haven’t been before,
this type → advances ++++ demanding certain gestures ——
can be taken: aggressive
regarding other thinkers / colleagues —
I’m not naturely polemical but:
true deconstructive gestures: destabilizecauseanxietyorhurt —
so, every time
this gesture is made:
there are moments of feAr!
Not during writing.
Actually, I write _ a feeling _ necessity,
stronger ___ myself,
demands I write – write.
never renounced anything
because → certain consequences.
I say into said.
That is to say,
when not writing,
a strange moment: going ↔ asleep.
When I have a nap → fall asleep.
At that moment – With Half Sleep,
suddenly I’m terrified __ what am I doing?
“You’re crazy to write this!”
“You’re crazy to attack such a thing!”
“You’re crazy to criticize such and such a person.”
“You’re crazy to contest such an authority, be it textual, institutional or personal.”
Panic of subconscious
If … comparing it to? …
Imagine singular child doing: horrible.
Freud → childhood dreams: nakedness
terrified exposure: naked.
Here with Half Sleep: impressions ↔
Actions into criminal, disgraceful, unavowable,
I shouldn’t do.
Half Sleep telling me:
“But you’re mad to have done that.”
Half Sleep … Convincing.
“Stop everything! Take it back! Burn your papers!”
“What you are doing is inadmissible!”
But I ascend from Half Sleep.
Meaning, or interpret: in supposed awake, conscious, working –
I’m certainly more unconscious than with Half Sleep.
When Half Sleep is there: in vigilance –
telling me “truth”,
Telling me: I’m doing → very serious!
In awakeness and working:
Vigilance is sleeping.
Vigilance is not stronger than Awakness.
And so I do what must be done.