babyfinland posted:

Today, at a distance of nearly seventy years, it is clear for anyone who is not in absolutely bad faith that there are no longer historical tasks that can be taken on by, or even simply assigned to, men. It was in some ways already evident starting with the end of the First World War that the European nation-states were no longer capable of taking on historical tasks and that peoples themselves were bound to disappear. We completely misunderstand the nature of the great totalitarian experiments of the twentieth century if we see them only as a carrying out of the nineteenth-century nation-states' last great tasks: nationalism and imperialism. The stakes are now different and much higher, for it is a question of taking on as a task the very factical existence of peoples, that is, in the last analysis, their bare life. Seen in this light, the totalitarianisms of the twentieth century truly constitute the other face of the Hegelo-Kojevian idea of the end of history: man has now reached his historical telos and, for a humanity that has become animal again, there is nothing left but the depoliticization of human societies by means of the unconditioned unfolding of the oikonomia, or the taking on of biological life itself as the supreme political (or rather impolitical) task.

It is likely that the times in which we live have not emerged from this aporia. Do we not see around and among us men and peoples who no longer have any essence or identity-who are delivered over, so to speak, to their inessentiality and their inactivity {inoperosita}-and who grope everywhere, and at the cost of gross falsifications, for an inheritance and a task, an inheritance as task? Even the pure and simple relinquishment of all historical tasks (reduced to simple functions of internal or international policing) in the name of the triumph of the economy, often today takes on an emphasis in which natural life itself and its well-being seem to appear as humanity's last historical task-if indeed it makes sense here to speak of a "task."

The traditional historical potentialities-poetry, religion, philosophy-which from both the Hegelo-Kojevian and Heidegger-ian perspectives kept the historico-political destiny of peoples awake, have long since been transformed into cultural spectacles and private experiences, and have lost all historical efficacy. Faced with this eclipse, the only task that still seems to retain some seriousness is the assumption of the burden-and the "total man- agement"-of biological life, that is, of the very animality of man. Genome, global economy, and humanitarian ideology are the three united faces of this process in which posthistorical humanity seems to take on its own physiology as its last, impolitical mandate.

I like that, I like that

gyrofry posted:

Teach me about Kojève in small words

all i know are agamben's astonished quotations of his epic trolls:

At this point the note articulates a series of theses on the end of history and on the present state of the world, in which it is impossible to distinguish between absolute seriousness and an equally absolute irony. We thus learn that in the years immediately following the writing of the first note (1946), the author understood that the "Hegelo-Marxist end of history" was not a future event but something already completed. After the battle of Jena, the vanguard of humanity virtually reached the end of man's historical evolution. Everything that followed-including two world wars, Nazism, and the sovietization of Russia-represented nothing but a process of accelerated alignment of the rest of the world with the position of the most advanced European countries. Yet now, repeated trips to the United States and Russia, taken between 1948 and 1958 (by which time Kojeve had become a high functionary in the French government), convinced him that, on the road toward reaching the posthistorical condition, "the Russians and the Chinese are only Americans who are still poor but are rapidly proceeding to become richer," while the United States has already reached the "final stage of Marxist 'communism. 1112 This then led him to the conclusion that the "American way of life" was the type of life proper to the post-historical period, the current presence of the United States in the World prefiguring the future "eternal present" of all humanity. Thus, man's return to animality appeared no longer as a possibility that was yet to come, but as a certainty that was already present.'

In 1959, however, a trip to Japan brought about a further shift in perspective. In Japan, Kojeve was able to see with his own eyes a society which, though living in a condition of posthistory, had nevertheless not ceased to be "human." "Post-historical" Japanese civilization undertook ways diametrically opposed to the "American way." No doubt, there were no longer in Japan any Religion, Morals, or Politics in the "European" or "historical" sense of these words. But Snobbery in its pure state created disciplines negating the "natural" or "animal" given which in effectiveness far surpassed those that arose, in Japan or elsewhere, from "historical" Action-that is, from warlike and revolutionary Struggles or from forced Work. To be sure, the peaks (equalled nowhere else) of specifically Japanese snobbery-the Noh theatre, the ceremony of tea, and the art of bouquets of flowers-were and still remain the exclusive prerogative of the nobles and the rich. But in spite of persistent economic and social inequalities, all Japanese without exception are currently in a position to live according to totally formalized values-that is, values completely empty of all "human" content in the "historical" sense. Thus, in the extreme, every Japanese is in principle capable of committing, from pure snobbery, a perfectly "gratuitous" suicide (the classical sword of the samurai can be replaced with an airplane or a torpedo), which has nothing to do with the risk of life in a Struggle waged for the sake of "historical" values that have social or political content. This seems to allow one to believe that the recently begun interaction between Japan and the Western World will finally lead not to a rebarbarization of the Japanese but to a "Japanization" of the Westerners (including the Russians). Now, since no animal can be a snob, every "Japanized" post-historical period would be specifically human. Hence there would be no "definitive annihilation of Man properly so called," as long as there were animals of the species Homo sapiens that could serve as the "natural" support for what is human in men.'

he is the god of trolling

Ironicwarcriminal posted:

Actually it’s a bit simplistic to say it was a “dead end”, it just combined with raw capitalism to become social democracy. You’ll find this whole process personified and on a shorter time scale by looking at the frontbench of any governing Labour party around the world.

mean “from each according to their ability to each according to their need” is a pretty solid description of progressive taxation and the welfare/health state no?

kojevean ultrahistory is different from fukuyaman ultrahistory. for kojeve, the category Man concludes simultaneously with the end of History

Kojève’s disposition to the culmination of universal history is radically ambivalent. On the one hand, he follows Marx by seeing in idyllic terms the post-historical world, one of universal freedom, emancipation from war and want, leaving space for “art, love, play, and so forth; in short, everything that makes Man happy”. However, Kojève is simultaneously beset by pessimism. In his philosophical anthropology, man is defined by his negating activity, by his struggle to overcome himself and nature through struggle and contestation. This is the ontological definition of man, his raison d’etre. Yet the end of history marks the end of this struggle, thereby exhausting man of the activity which has defined his essence. The end of history ushers-in the ‘death of man’; paradoxically, man is robbed of the definitional core of his existence precisely at the moment of his triumph. Post-historical man will no longer be ‘man’ as we understand him, but will be ‘reanimalized’, such that the end of history marks the ‘definitive annihilation of Man properly so-called‘.

Ironicwarcriminal posted:

The traditional historical potentialities-poetry, religion, philosophy-which from both the Hegelo-Kojevian and Heidegger-ian perspectives kept the historico-political destiny of peoples awake, have long since been transformed into cultural spectacles and private experiences, and have lost all historical efficacy. Faced with this eclipse, the only task that still seems to retain some seriousness is the assumption of the burden-and the "total man- agement"-of biological life, that is, of the very animality of man. Genome, global economy, and humanitarian ideology are the three united faces of this process in which posthistorical humanity seems to take on its own physiology as its last, impolitical mandate.

what's this from bf? what's some good ambagen to read?

Although based on my own culture there is one other thing I would add to that list of genome, economy and humanitarianism and that’s “lifestyle”: It’s nebulous but it seems to me the overriding preoccupation of my countrymen whether it’s sport, home renovations, music festivals etc.

John Howard was asked near the end of his 11 year rule how he wanted Australians to feel or think and his words were “relaxed and comfortable” which I think is very telling.

I can’t imagine Ivan the terrible or Andrew Jackson or Queen Victoria saying that.

I read Homo Sacer and i'm reading the coming community, and it's all very dry but it's very enlightening stuff

Impper posted:

i really don't care, maybe it's just because it's babyfinland doing it but those block quotes of agamben bore the loving sh*te out of me

I think you fundamentally agree with him so i've rejigged it to appeal to you

Today, at a distance of nearly seventy years, he glowed with passion as his cock gorged itself on lustful blood. It is clear for anyone who is not in absolutely bad faith that there are no longer historical tasks that can be taken on by Britney, much like the many cocks she would come across everyday, feeling their flesh and hardness penetrate the very depths of her body, or even simply assigned to, men. It was in some ways already evident starting with the end of the First World War that the European nation-states were no longer capable of taking on the giant throbbing cocks of historical tasks and that peoples themselves were bound to disappear. We completely misunderstand the sexy nature of the great totalitarian experiments of rape in the twentieth century if we see them only as a carrying out of the nineteenth-century nation-states' last great tasks: nationalism and imperialism, fucking and destroying. The stakes are now different and much higher, for it is a question of taking on as a task the very penile existence of peoples, that is, in the last anal fucking, their bare skin which glowed with a seeming lightness and purity as she lay next to him. Seen in this light, the totalitarianisms of the twentieth century truly constitute the other face of the Hegelo-Kojevian idea of the end of history: man has now reached his historical telos and, for a humanity that has become animal again, there is nothing left but the rawdogging of human societies by means of the unconditioned unfolding of the condom in his trembling hands, or the taking on of biological life itself as the supreme political (or rather impolitical) task, much like the semen as it arced across her elfin features before resting gently on her chin: beauty in vulgarity, like the mona lisa attacked by an acid-weilding madman.

Impper posted:

lol. still couldn't read it. also agamben is the first guy they list on the european graduate school's website which is infinitely funny to me

but its in alphabetical order. Are you striking at the ossified hierarchy of the english alphabet

babyfinland posted:

if khamsek gets a job in swissland i wanna see about going to EGS and slobbing that gamben knob for reals.

switzerland is the most expensive and ugly-faced place i've ever been

babyfinland posted:

Impper posted:

actually though i don't like when people talk about the philosophical-existential conditions of the modern world in any capacity that engages with ideas like humanitarianism, global economy, etc. in a context that isn't utter condemnation, and even that is a waste of time.

you are really so ignorant of everything aren't you. what do you think agamben does

there's less than a thousand words on this web page that are exactly that and yet you are too stupid to read. you are just too stupid to know things. why do you keep talking

i really dont know or care what he does. i just took some key words from that boringpost you made, almost none of which i read, and wrote some nonsense about it that i can't even read. but you post so boringly. painfully boringly. boringly boringly, and it's pain