#but i articulated as best i could about my thoughts re: capitalism and wealth for this dungeon

[grim-echoes]

Any thoughts on what's up with the Accelerated Dynamics nightmare dungeon? The obvious surface is about corporate greed, but how does that relate directly to Jimmy's life like the other nightmare dungeons do?

i've been slacking on the analysis posts a hell of a lot but this is one of the dungeons i've been looking for an opportunity to talk about because it's another one of those inclusions in jatpm that i think gets overlooked because it doesn't have an immediately obvious interpretation like some others do (or, as obvious as is possible for your average jimmy fan). i've done a lot of thinking about it, and a while back had this realization (slight tw for very very brief suicide mention, also obvious spoilers ahead):

kasey definitely put a lot of his own personal grievances with capitalism into accelerated dynamics, but in my opinion it's an incomplete picture without taking megatropolis as a whole into consideration. terminal illness is extremely costly to treat and particularly in the US, it's (in my experience) much more terrifying to imagine being unable to afford the cost of healthcare than it is to actually fall ill and require treatment. even with insurance covering the cost of medical supplies and bills most people continue to struggle to feed, clothe, and house themselves, and that's assuming they do have health insurance that covers the right necessities to begin with.

i say this because i doubt jimmy's cancer treatment was at all affordable given that he's already been through chemotherapy once before, and has spent the entirety of his second battle comatose while his family continues to work not just to support themselves, but to try and save his life. this isn't to argue that money troubles were absolutely a factor in his family's life because of his illness because we don't know much at all about their financial situation--more that this is a terrifying reality for many, many families fighting illnesses, and megatropolis is representative of something that jimmy and his family don't have the luxury of anymore: leisure.

accelerated dynamics is set in a sprawling city landmarked by arcades, shopping malls, theaters, toy company headquarters, and a massive school campus, all adjacent to a high-class beach resort. it's a stark contrast in atmosphere that was likely very intentional--accelerated dynamics is devoid of personality and wonder in comparison to bonita vista or even shinryu and features workplace ambience as its area theme and visuals of skeletal employees hanged outside the office windows. i think a lot of people were incredibly disappointed in mr grouse as a character to see that his humble beginnings had led him to this point, but i think the commentary runs a lot deeper and touches on this incredibly grave aspect of illness and thus jimmy's personal life that can be easy to miss for the trees; mr grouse tells jimmy before the fight that he used to dream of his banking business growing bigger and bigger and that now, with the advent of it having grown so big that it's now expanded into an entire enterprise, he understands the power and influence that money can buy him, but more than anything he now conceptualizes how terrifying it is to lose that wealth.

his dialogue after the fight is an admission that wealth completely and utterly eroded his morals and that jimmy should enjoy his innocence while he can--this is the incomprehensible, horrifying world of adulthood that he couldn't possibly understand at this age--and it's very clear that this is (one of) the intended angle(s) of this dungeon's theme where jimmy will never live long enough to understand the complications of growing older and losing his innocence to concepts like late stage capitalism, but mr grouse phrases his dialogue like an earnest request for reflection, something for jimmy to consider in a way that his brain can more easily deconstruct--think of all the things you could do if you had practically infinite wealth, and the only thing you had to worry about was not having money.

if jimmy and his family had infinite wealth, then maybe they'd be able to afford luxury resorts and theme parks and theaters and shopping trips again. if jimmy and his family had infinite wealth, maybe they wouldn't need to work themselves into an early grave over their child's deathbed.

[bambamramfan]

V_MP_R_’S C_STL_

@jadagul linked this post on the Vampire's Castle by Mark Fisher that was half "thorough description of how fear and status intertwine to defang political movements" and half "very specific kvetching about a particular time and place that is neither useful nor appealing."

So I’m going to excerpt the one out of two paragraphs I found useful, and encourage people to read them as a coherent post in itself.

Inside the Vampires’ Castle

The first configuration is what I came to call the Vampires’ Castle. The Vampires’ Castle specialises in propagating guilt. It is driven by a priest’s desire to excommunicate and condemn, an academic-pedant’s desire to be the first to be seen to spot a mistake, and a hipster’s desire to be one of the in-crowd. The danger in attacking the Vampires’ Castle is that it can look as if – and it will do everything it can to reinforce this thought – that one is also attacking the struggles against racism, sexism, heterosexism. But, far from being the only legitimate expression of such struggles, the Vampires’ Castle is best understood as a bourgeois-liberal perversion and appropriation of the energy of these movements. The Vampires’ Castle was born the moment when the struggle not to be defined by identitarian categories became the quest to have ‘identities’ recognised by a bourgeois big Other.

The privilege I certainly enjoy as a white male consists in part in my not being aware of my ethnicity and my gender, and it is a sobering and revelatory experience to occasionally be made aware of these blind-spots. But, rather than seeking a world in which everyone achieves freedom from identitarian classification, the Vampires’ Castle seeks to corral people back into identi-camps, where they are forever defined in the terms set by dominant power, crippled by self-consciousness and isolated by a logic of solipsism which insists that we cannot understand one another unless we belong to the same identity group.

I’ve noticed a fascinating magical inversion projection-disavowal mechanism whereby the sheer mention of class is now automatically treated as if that means one is trying to downgrade the importance of race and gender. In fact, the exact opposite is the case, as the Vampires’ Castle uses an ultimately liberal understanding of race and gender to obfuscate class.  In all of the absurd and traumatic twitterstorms about privilege earlier this year it was noticeable that the discussion of class privilege was entirely absent.  The task, as ever, remains the articulation of class, gender and race  – but the founding move of the Vampires’ Castle is the dis-articulation of class from other categories.

The problem that the Vampires’ Castle was set up to solve is this: how do you hold immense wealth and power while also appearing as a victim, marginal and oppositional? The solution was already there – in the Christian Church. So the VC has recourse to all the infernal strategies, dark pathologies and psychological torture instruments Christianity invented, and which Nietzsche described in The Genealogy of Morals. This priesthood of bad conscience, this nest of pious guilt-mongers, is exactly what Nietzsche predicted when he said that something worse than Christianity was already on the way. Now, here it is …

The Vampires’ Castle feeds on the energy and anxieties and vulnerabilities of young students, but most of all it lives by converting the suffering of particular groups – the more ‘marginal’ the better – into academic capital. The most lauded figures in the Vampires’ Castle are those who have spotted a new market in suffering – those who can find a group more oppressed and subjugated than any previously exploited will find themselves promoted through the ranks very quickly.

The first law of the Vampires’ Castle is: individualise and privatise everything. While in theory it claims to be in favour of structural critique, in practice it never focuses on anything except individual behaviour. Some of these working class types are not terribly well brought up, and can be very rude at times. Remember: condemning individuals is always more important than paying attention to impersonal structures. The actual ruling class propagates ideologies of individualism, while tending to act as a class. (Many of what we call ‘conspiracies’ are the ruling class showing class solidarity.) The VC, as dupe-servants of the ruling class, does the opposite: it pays lip service to ‘solidarity’ and ‘collectivity’, while always acting as if the individualist categories imposed by power really hold. Because they are petit-bourgeois to the core, the members of the Vampires’ Castle are intensely competitive, but this is repressed in the passive aggressive manner typical of the bourgeoisie. What holds them together is not solidarity, but mutual fear – the fear that they will be the next one to be outed, exposed, condemned.

The second law of the Vampires’ Castle is: make thought and action appear very, very difficult. There must be no lightness, and certainly no humour. Humour isn’t serious, by definition, right? Thought is hard work, for people with posh voices and furrowed brows. Where there is confidence, introduce scepticism. Say: don’t be hasty, we have to think more deeply about this. Remember: having convictions is oppressive, and might lead to gulags.

The third law of the Vampires’ Castle is: propagate as much guilt as you can. The more guilt the better. People must feel bad: it is a sign that they understand the gravity of things. It’s OK to be class-privileged if you feel guilty about privilege and make others in a subordinate class position to you feel guilty too. You do some good works for the poor, too, right?

The fourth law of the Vampires’ Castle is: essentialize. While fluidity of identity, pluarity and multiplicity are always claimed on behalf of the VC members – partly to cover up their own invariably wealthy, privileged or bourgeois-assimilationist background – the enemy is always to be essentialized. Since the desires animating the VC are in large part priests’ desires to excommunicate and condemn, there has to be a strong distinction between Good and Evil, with the latter essentialized. Notice the tactics. X has made a remark/ has behaved in a particular way – these remarks/ this behaviour might be construed as transphobic/ sexist etc. So far, OK. But it’s the next move which is the kicker. X then becomes defined as a transphobe/ sexist etc. Their whole identity becomes defined by one ill-judged remark or behavioural slip. Once the VC has mustered its witch-hunt, the victim (often from a working class background, and not schooled in the passive aggressive etiquette of the bourgeoisie) can reliably be goaded into losing their temper, further securing their position as pariah/ latest to be consumed in feeding frenzy.

...

It’s not surprising, then, that so many neo-anarchists come across as depressed. This depression is no doubt reinforced by the anxieties of postgraduate life, since, like the Vampires’ Castle, neo-anarchism has its natural home in universities, and is usually propagated by those studying for postgraduate qualifications, or those who have recently graduated from such study.

What is to be done?

Why have these two configurations come to the fore?  The first reason is that they have been allowed to prosper by capital because they serve its interests. Capital subdued the organised working class by decomposing class consciousness, viciously subjugating trade unions while seducing ‘hard working families’ into identifying with their own narrowly defined interests instead of the interests of the wider class; but why would capital be concerned about a ‘left’ that replaces class politics with a moralising individualism, and that, far from building solidarity, spreads fear and insecurity?

The second reason is what Jodi Dean has called communicative capitalism. It might have been possible to ignore the Vampires’ Castle and the neo-anarchists if it weren’t for capitalist cyberspace. The VC’s pious moralising has been a feature of a certain ‘left’ for many years – but, if one wasn’t a member of this particular church, its sermons could be avoided. Social media means that this is no longer the case, and there is little protection from the  psychic pathologies propagated by these discourses.

So what can we do now? First of all, it is imperative to reject identitarianism, and to recognise that there are no identities, only desires, interests and identifications. Part of the importance of the British Cultural Studies project – as revealed so powerfully and so movingly in John Akomfrah’s installation The Unfinished Conversation (currently in Tate Britain) and his film The Stuart Hall Project – was to have resisted identitarian essentialism. Instead of freezing people into chains of already-existing equivalences, the point was to treat any articulation as provisional and plastic. New articulations can always be created. No-one is essentially anything. Sadly, the right act on this insight more effectively than the left does.  The bourgeois-identitarian left knows how to propagate guilt and conduct a witch hunt, but it doesn’t know how to make converts. But that, after all, is not the point. The aim is not to popularise a leftist position, or to win people over to it, but to remain in a position of elite superiority, but now with class superiority redoubled by moral superiority too. ‘How dare you talk – it’s we who speak for those who suffer!’

But the rejection of identitarianism can only be achieved by the re-assertion of class. A left that does not have class at its core can only be a liberal pressure group.