tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3472432574729293751.post1920368295225011897..comments2023-07-07T01:30:15.363-06:00Comments on bringing back the glory: End Timesshepsohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01630724826854481046noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3472432574729293751.post-81492556371585302232010-04-11T13:36:17.819-06:002010-04-11T13:36:17.819-06:00Nice Shepso, nice.
I got a problem with this line...Nice Shepso, nice.<br /><br />I got a problem with this line of thought my friend, however. First I find that a "plurality of a 'we' without making the 'we' a singular identity" to be confusing and slightly disturbing. If 'we' is not singular, but it is an expanding multiple, what does this do to the notion of 'other'? Is there even an 'other' if 'we' is not singular. Hegel defines other as the real opposite of being (not in terms of nothing, nor not-being) but as determined being: or not something and nothing, but something and its other. If the something is a plurality that can included all 'others' in to the community is there a being or an 'other' anymore? Or do we just have nothing (as not the opposite of being, but the lack of being)?<br /><br />Furthermore, I question the distaste of violence or the 'death of the other'. I understand that pre-planned definition of civil society (or in my words the social) can lead to violence, this is what they are suppose to do! I mean it is great to say that we would accept Nazis into our community, but was they start acting like Nazis we don't want them. I want a community without fascist, bosses, or politicians; to create a community without these I will have to use violence. I know your pacifist heart doesn't like this shepso, but I think we have to accept that community means politics and politics means violence.<br />Saying this another way: My community, of being Oiler's fans, is depended on the death of the other too. We, as a collective singularity, cheered and loved it, when the Flames missed the playoffs. This (symbolic) death helps create us as a community each time it has happened. We are a community as a result of production: we produced ourselves as Oiler fans (by staying up late to watch games in Atlantic Canada, by wearing our jersey on the C-Train, writing blogs that few individuals read, or by telling each other stories of the Oiler's past and our own lives). Shepso, if this is not production who do we create ourselves as the Oildiasporia? The production of ourselves as a singular (in Hegelese the Absolute) and the notion of the Other (the Negative) is created as well. A may not equal A, but wearing the flaming C does not equal the being experienced by being an Oilers fan.<br /><br />Love the post Shepso, I'll get a gooder up soon. Thanks for everything my friend.B.C.B.https://www.blogger.com/profile/10155683434536762565noreply@blogger.com