philosophy

i really like philosophy! i mostly view philosophy through an aesthetic and post-structuralist lens. my favorite philosophers are: foucault, bataille and cioran. my roots were nietzschean but i've evolved since. nowadays i'm a moral nihilist, epistemological nihilist, aesthetic existentialist, cosmopsychist, post-left fella. i tend to explore power, aesthetics, politics and culture. if any of these interest you i would recommend reading something below. i would like to say that i am returning to philosophy as i haven't thought about philosophical problems in a while due to more pressing thoughts i've had in recent times.

modesty as censorship

if one were to go outside naked, it would be deemed indecent and unmodest. if a cis man were to go outside with his penis out, that would be deemed innapropriate and not modest. if a cis woman were to go outside with her left boob showing in certain contexts, that would yet again be deemed as not appropriate and that woman would be shamed. beyond shame and being looked down upon, they might even be imprisoned, punished that is. whether enforcing modesty through law should be done is a much less interesting question than how parts of the body are deemed modest and not modest and how these norms are perpetuated.

to arrive at an answer as to why boobs are now deemed innapropriate in most contexts and women's shoulders not anymore, we must identify what shapes what is covered, or in other words what is worn in western societies. this is the domain of historical fashion trends which have alternated between revealing and more conservative clothes. i'd like to point out how less revealing means conservative in english, presenting revealing clothing as radical by comparison. historical trends (pre 20th century) were majoritarily defined by improvements in textile technology, economic circumstances, what the burgeosie wore and religion. note how most of these factors are consequences of what people in power do, say and wear. a big factor is what the burgeosie wore. why does this fashion become popular? one could speculate that it is because of an admiration of status and wealth, then the question becomes why would status and wealth be admired?

wip

rapidly evolving culture

the internet has vastly accelerated culture and created many subcultures not present in physical space. i see this as great: culture must evolve as culture is shared identity. this shared identity if not challenged by other shared identities will eventually become the status quo. this is when a culture is enforced. the way this happens is that dispersed power unifies and then limits total power exchange. limiting total power exchange is negative since it makes a constructed limited subjective unique temporary set of ideas into one that's general and pretends it is timeless and objective. definitionly culture is a subjective decentralized reality and any enforcement of culture centralizes and attemts to objectify it, such attempt is foolish as it is impossible.

extending on limiting power exchange being undesireable, practical consequences of less power exchange can be observed: reinforcement of hierarchies through inaction, permitting opression, individuals feel weak since they may not be able to change or act on their circumstances, political and social disinterest, etc. if power is truly everywhere and less power exchange is negative, then we can make the conclusion, more power exchange is positive. more power exchange practically means a constant battle of status quo, since culture remains decentralized and conflicts with each other to give rise to new temporary sets of ideas.

coming back to my original claim, the internet is a decentralized haven of subjective and temporary cultures and identities, a free internet is essencially an instrument that maximizes power exchange. the internet has not reached a maximum power exchange as with less than suficient netters participate in its culture and platforms that shut down or reinforce certain communities it is still very far from it. ideally we should strive to reach a decentralized society that always moves toward change for sake of change.

similarly to some post-leftist strands, i believe that society should become a matter of aesthetics, culture that is. to achieve such society, aesthetic and cultural focused people should be the population as a whole, disinterest in politics, culture, ideas, aesthetics, art, expression and the spirit of revolution / change should be erradicated. what this means in practice is that i am anti-state (imposed supposed national identity, centralized power), anti-apolitical, anti-centrist, anti-insert any conservative ideal (anti-feminism, anti-queer, pseudo-anti-racist, neo-imperialism, zionism, neo-conservative geopolitics, anti-illegalism, anti-egoism, etc), anti-equality, anti-abolition of social constructs for the sake of abolition of social constructs, etc.

godspeed, i don't know how ya didn't get bored of all this!