betterorbetter

[betterorbetter]

ali ismaili

[betterorbetter]

[betterorbetter]

Forest creature | moners

[betterorbetter]

people really do talk too much

[betterorbetter]

If it's not here, then where the fuck? If it's not me, then who the fuck? I've been chasing my ghosts for so long I may have tripped on my shadow. And I mean, I don't trust her, she never watched my back anyway. Though most shit came from straight ahead, so who is really to blame anyway? My life has spiralled in and our of control and I feel nowhere near where I should be. Nor am I where I was before. No amount of planning could have steered me the right way, but I don't think I even tried to steer anyway. These are not my people, yet no one has really ever been. Always just on the fringes. Outlier. Always an outlier. And trying to change that has left me barren of joy. Can't love the things I once lived for. Can't really love anything, or anyone. The idea of seeking help seems ludicrous, because there is no stone left unturned in my search for peace of mind. Nothing seems to help. Can't really get out of my head so what could? Death is my only north. But I don't think I'm there yet.

[betterorbetter]

[betterorbetter]

I've been thinking a lot about what to say to you. I understand your confusion and anger towards me right now. I'm sorry I've been so vague and absent but I'm trying to figure out what it is I'm feeling. I understand if that doesn't make sense to you. But I was very drunk this weekend and now that I'm sober all of it is very confusing. A lot of things happened and I felt a lot of shit and because of alcohol it's hard for me to know what I really think about any of it since as you know I am much more emotional and irrational when I'm drunk. I understand you were going through a lot of shit during this whole weekend, Maca. I get it. I know this isn't at all something you need right now. It's why I've decided to step away for a bit. Because it's not fair to either of us. I am still trying to figure out what I really want to say to you and what it is I'm feeling so I think it's best if I have some space. I think about you every second of every day, don't think I want this. But because I think about you all the fucking time I can't run away from this whole internal bullshit I have going on, and that's why I need some space and time to think. It is just not healthy for me, and I have to think of me right now. I need to worry about myself, too. However I don't want to keep overthinking this shit because I am honestly exhausted. It's been a shit couple of days and all I want to do right now in this fucking train is curl into a fucking ball and cry. I have band practice on Thursdays as you know, so I want to come on Wednesday if that's okay. I need to get my vacuum cleaner and I'll talk to you then. I'll try to explain myself the best I can weather or not I know what I feel at that point so that you at least understand a bit of why I'm distancing myself. Let me know if that works. I'm sorry I'm putting this shit on you on top of everything else. Believe me when I say this was never my intention. I adore you. I know that much. I hope you do too.

[betterorbetter]

LIQUOR

Makers

Grand marnier

D.O.M.

Conquistador

Jack

Rittenhouse

Macallan

Bayleys

Beefeater

Jameson

WINE

Martinoles (pino) llll

Torremoron

Chateaux De Arras

[betterorbetter]

[betterorbetter]

Panela

Papayuela

Mora

Tomillo

Limon

Agave (miel)

[betterorbetter]

Botas

Abril:

Sole

Open

Mayo:

Cucha

Lagarto

Cesar

Lina

Lina

Loly

Juanchirri

[betterorbetter]

hi tumblr

[betterorbetter]

Greased pig brigade

[betterorbetter]

[betterorbetter]

Nowhere is the dictum "every history is a history of the present" more true than in the case of the French Revolution: its historiographic reception always closely mirrored the twists and turns of political struggles. The identifying mark of all kinds of conservatives is its flat rejection: the French Revolution was a catastrophe from its very beginning, the product of the godless modern mind, it is to be interpreted as God's punishment for the humanity's wicked ways, so its traces should be undone as thoroughly as possible. The typical liberal attitude is a differentiated one: its formula is "1789 without 1793." In short, what the sensitive liberals want is a decaffeinated revolution, a revolution which doesn't smell of a revolution. Francois Furet and others thus try to deprive the French Revolution of its status as the founding event of modern democracy, relegating it to a historical anomaly: there was a historical necessity to assert the modern principles of personal freedom, etc., but, as the English example demonstrates, the same could have been much more efficiently achieved in a more peaceful way... Radicals are, on the contrary, possessed by what Alain Badiou called the "passion of the Real": if you say A - equality, human rights and freedoms - you should not shirk from its consequences and gather the courage to say B - the terror needed to really defend and assert the A. [1] However, it is all too easy to say that today's Left should simply continue along this path. Something, some kind of historical cut, effectively took place in 1990: everyone, today's "radical Left" included, is somehow ashamed of the Jacobin legacy of revolutionary terror with its state-centralized character, so that the commonly accepted motto is that the Left, if it is to regain political efficiency, should thoroughly reinvent itself, finally abandoning the so-called "Jacobin paradigm." In our post-modern era of "emerging properties," chaotic interaction of multiple subjectivities, of free interaction instead of centralized hierarchy, of a multitude of opinions instead of one Truth, the Jacobin dictatorship is fundamentally "not for our taste" (free the term "taste" should be given all its historical weight, as the name for a basic ideological disposition). Can one imagine something more foreign to our universe of the freedom of opinions, of market competition, of nomadic pluralist interaction, etc., than Robespierre's politics of Truth (with a capital T, of course), whose proclaimed goal is "to return the destiny of liberty into the hands of the truth"? Such a Truth can only be enforced in a terrorist way: If the mainspring of popular government in peacetime is virtue, amid revolution it is at the same time virtue and terror: virtue, without which terror is fatal; terror, without which virtue is impotent. Terror is nothing but prompt, severe, inflexible justice; it is therefore an emanation of virtue. It is less a special principle than a consequence of the general principle of democracy applied to our country's most pressing needs. This Robespierre's line of argumentation reaches its climax in the paradoxical identification of the opposites: revolutionary terror "sublates" the opposition between punishment and clemency - the just and severe punishment of the enemies IS the highest form of clemency, so that, in it, rigor and charity coincide: To punish the oppressors of humanity is clemency; to pardon them is barbarity. The rigor of tyrants has only rigor for a principle; the rigor of the republican government comes from charity. What, then, should those who remain faithful to the legacy of the radical Left do with all these? Two things, at least. First, the terrorist past has to be accepted as OURS, even - or precisely because - it is critically rejected. The only alternative to the half-hearted defensive position of feeling guilty in front of our liberal or Rightist critics is: we have to do the critical job better than our opponents. This, however, is not the entire story: one should also not allow our opponents to determine the field and topic of the struggle. What this means is that the ruthless self-critique should go hand in hand with a fearless admission of what, to paraphrase Marx's judgment on Hegel's dialectics, one is tempted to call the "rational kernel" of the Jacobin Terror: "Materialist dialectics assumes, without particular joy, that, till now, no political subject was able to arrive at the eternity of the truth it was deploying without moments of terror. Since, as Saint-Just asked: "What do those who want neither Virtue nor Terror want?" His answer is well-known: they want corruption - another name for the subject's defeat. [2] Or, as Saint-Just put it succinctly: "That which produces the general good is always terrible." [3] These words should not be interpreted as a warning against the temptation to impose violently the general good onto a society, but, on the contrary, as a bitter truth to be fully endorsed. - The further crucial point to bear in mind is that, for Robespierre, revolutionary terror is the very opposite of war: Robespierre was a pacifist, not out of hypocrisy or humanitarian sensitivity, but because he was well aware that war among nations as a rule serves as the means to obfuscate revolutionary struggle within each nation. Robespierre's speech "On war" is of special importance today: it shows him as a true pacifist who ruthlessly denounces the patriotic call to war, even if the war is formulated as the defense of the Revolution, as the attempt of those who want "revolution without revolution" to divert the radicalization of the revolutionary process. His stance is thus the exact opposite of those who need war to militarize social life and take dictatorial control over it. [4] Which is why Robespierre also denounced the temptation to export revolution to other countries, forcefully "liberating" them: "The French are not afflicted with a mania for rendering any nation happy and free against its will. All the kings could have vegetated or died unpunished on their blood-spattered thrones, if they had been able to respect the French people's independence." - Zizek

[betterorbetter]

[betterorbetter]