Archived below is an interview I recently completed with Astral for Astral Flight Simulation Substack. It originally appeared in 2 parts, which can be read here and here. Or you can read it below in its entirety…
Parallax Optics runs the online art space Apostate Gallery. He’s one of the smartest guys I’ve ever spoken to and has a lot to say about everything from spree-shooters-as-artists, Neoreaction, the state of art in the digital age, and the online right. I can guarantee you’ve never read anything like this.
Greetings Parallax. I am very happy and privileged to be speaking to you after your untimely departure from twitter. In fact, you can even say I feel “special.” Do you think I’m special?
Well, we’d been discussing the possibility of doing an interview about Apostate Gallery for a while before I got banned from Twitter. So the impetus behind the interview and the reason that I happen to be speaking to you now predates my unceremonious departure / ban.
Indeed, we’d have spoken much sooner but ‘reality’ inevitably supervened and destroyed my capability to align chi with Kairos. In fact, it does so with such monotonic malevolence that, in my more paranoid moments, I can sense the demonic / energetic parameters of the simulation encroaching and circumscribing my capacity to act.
But I digress…
I’m not going to fall into the inelegant trap you’ve constructed of calling you ‘special’ (no-homo), but I do feel that those of us in the ‘sphere’ who have a greater awareness / appreciation of modernism / postmodernism, not only as dialectically entangled historical epochs but also as conceptual paradigms / ideo-scaffolds for certain modalities of thought — including incorporating a certain modern / postmodern sensibility into our own thinking / cultural secretions — are of a somewhat different (and superior) character to the bland / anachronistic ‘trads’ and conservatards who also populate our corner of the Internet / Twitter.
The yearning for a retvrn to a ‘pure’ / naive / phantasmagoric pseudo-past of one’s own inchoate invention / projection — which, ironically, is itself indicative of a latent / unreflexive postmodern sensibility, analogous to the latent neo-religious impulse which animates progressivism / Wokeism — is an anathema to me.
I’m interested in fragmentation, splicing and hybridisation, not cosplay LARPing as an Xtian to conceal / COPE with the fact that you’re terminally INCEL: “Man up and marry the SLUTS!” Obviously, it’s superior to the trans-COPE of “become the girlfriend” but only by degree. Fundamentally, it’s trans-temporal cuckoldry because linear time does’t real.
[Aside: the future is schizophrenic. To navigate it we must became schizophrenics. High-functioning sociopathic-schizoids, inter-spliced with agents of autismo-power. I’m not there yet, but I’m working on it — are you?]
So, the reason I’d been interested in speaking to you in the first place was because I sensed that you, like some other Land-influenced accounts, understand that fundamentally — at an essential / deterministic level — the only way out is through.
This only really makes sense in relation to Land’s post-Kantian, meta-materialist critique of the structure of time — templexity — and the anti-anthropomorphic / post-carbon teleoplexic thing which emerges out of it. I’ll resist the urge to (badly) recapitulate Land’s core thesis of techonomic —aka accelerationist — time here. Instead, I’ll isolate his identification of NRx degenerative-ratchet-dynamics and the auto-propagation of lock-in effects via hyper-networks and ideological / technological selection-mechanics / effects, which cyberneticly flow / cut-flow through them — endlessly territorialising, deterritorialising and reterritorialising in ever-fluctuating loops of twisted-time, as a neo-physical medium in the endocrine system of the Real.
Land equates any sense of ‘progress’ under progressivism with something that is strictly worsening. Specifically, the progressive worsening of a disease, and therefore vehemently rejects progressivism’s ‘moral’ claims to legitimacy via ‘ethical’ endorsement, which are routinely / systemically made / laundered through institutions controlled by progressives.
Land drives the point home here:
The ‘neo-‘ of neoreaction introduces a distinctive idea, or abstract topic: that of a degenerative ratchet.
The impulse to back out of something is already reactionary, but it is the combination of a critique of progress with a recognition that simple reversal is impossible that initiates neoreaction. In this respect, neoreaction is a specific discovery of the arrow of time, within the field of political philosophy. It learns, and then teaches, that the way to get out cannot be the way we got in.
Wherever progressivism takes hold, a degenerative ratchet is set to work. It is unthinkable that any society could back out of the expansive franchise, the welfare state, macroeconomic policy-making, massively-extended regulatory bureaucracy, coercive-egalitarian secular religion, or entrenched globalist intervention. Each of these (inter-related) things are essentially irreversible. They give modern history a gradient. Given any two historical ‘snap-shots’, one can tell immediately which is earlier and which later, by simply observing the extent to which any of these social factors have progressed. Leviathan does not shrink.
Within the theory of complex systems, certain phase transitions exhibit comparable properties. Network effects can lock-in changes, which are then irreversible. The adoption and consolidation of the Qwerty keyboard exemplifies this pattern. Technological businesses commonly make lock-in central to their strategies, and if they succeed, they cannot then die in the same way they matured. [The Idea of Neoreaction, emphasis mine]
Under progressivism, the State is a badly / perversely run corporation, which seeks an ideological / economic choke-hold to perpetuate its current state-of/as-being. It deploys mass immigration as bio-weapon against its own people. Meanwhile, the ‘liberation’ / enfranchisement of women acts like sulphuric acid on a motor engine destroying surviving enclaves of patriarchal authority / competence, while installing a defect / defect sexual-reproduction / marriage equilibrium, making precisely the kind of irrevocable bargains that enable social building at scale impossible. Above all, there is an endless drive to ‘equality’ (or equity) as a pretext for State-sanctioned action / levelling, which follows a telos of civilisational homogenisation via the advancement of its control matrix — which increasingly incorporates ‘post-prosperity’ and the systematised dispossession / reallocation of resources, across not only fiscal / ‘physical’ vectors / dimensions but also hyper-interconnected ideologically controlled ones: You will own nothing and you will be happy.
As Land demonstrates, network effects lock-in changes, which accelerate the worsening of the progressive disease, while making it impossible to back-out of the system from within the system. Instead, to Exit the system, we need to access the Outside and let the Outside in.
You were suspended for quote tweeting known homosexual James Lindsay. You and i both know he’s incredibly “based” so there must have been some kind of misunderstanding. What was the tweet? Many want to know. But also, there are a number of facelord vultures on twitter like him, Lehnman, Scott Adams, and many others, who grift off both the MAGA movement/trump supporters and right wing anons in an attempt to gain credibility and ideas. Considering this, do you see anons as a vanguard? Or as sort of ghettoized intellectual and cultural outcasts, doomed to remain in the shadows and have our ideas and authenticity watered-down by clout chasers and political emissaries?
The specifics of my ban aren’t terribly interesting, even to me. Suffice to say that anything which relates, even tangentially, to James ‘Reddit-tier’ Lindsay is lame and gay. What is perhaps more interesting was the statement of intent the ‘known homosexual’ made about his desire to “come after far right anons” just before my ban.
It’s interesting because it relates to the complex ideo-ecology / inter-relationship of anons and facefags, including the parasitic dependancy for ideas / takes many clout chasing facefag vultures have on the anonsphere, which you alluded to above. But it cuts both ways, because under current Regime enforced communication conditions anons also seek to propagate + launder their ideas / critique through facefags — in order to reach a much wider audience and influence certain elements of a more prestigious one — and to contribute, albeit vicariously, to that strata of the discourse.
For practical purposes, it effectively becomes an empirical question, aka a posteriori > a priori, based on shared local-knowledge circulating the anonsphere concerning who’s intentions are ‘good’ — who acts as a gateway to crimethink and leads people to question consensus reality — and who’s intentions are ‘bad’ — who acts as a gatekeeper to crimethink and leads people to accept consensus reality — rather than a strictly theoretical question, concerning the virtues / strategic benefits of each strategy in isolation, since both are always simultaneously in play.
[Aside: of course, it’s further complicated by questions of intentionality vs effect, as well as the fact that someone as awful as (((Ben Shapiro))) can nevertheless — within a consequentialist framework — act as a gateway for one person while simultaneously acting as a gatekeeper to another. Or how his nemesis, Nick ‘Catboy’ Fuentes, who signals crimethink much further to the populist / nationalist Right, might be a Fed / compromised asset, tasked with dragging young people towards precisely the political destination / self-determination where they are destined to be rendered ‘legible’ to the System / made ineffective. Their dissident energy ‘captured’ and used by the Regime to demand an ever greater progressive mandate to implement Woke policy — in the process, pwning them in the most pathetic way possible.]
BAP is obviously a powerful and convincing advocate / champion of online anonymity, having gone so far as to say that nothing written by facefags will matter in the future because it’s either riddled with dishonesty or at least tainted by it. The bug-life which exists on that layer of politico-culture-space is dominated by an axis revolving around basic self-preservation and the pursuit of naked self-interest. Meanwhile others, who I won’t name out of respect for their public-facing anonymity, have chosen to transition to faceposting with the aim of contributing to / shifting the discourse in a less — or perhaps more — clandestine / Straussian fashion. In the process, the ones who are more visibly successful reap some of the benefits associated with that world, which inevitably further fuels the hermeneutics of suspicion in the anonosphere, in particular when they ‘partner’ with the WEF or something…
[Aside: but even partnering with the WEF makes sense in the context of drip feeding ideas / counter-narratives to the elites. So the situation on the cyber-ground is complex.]
I’m a fan of decentralisation, of multiple strategies being pursued / trialed simultaneously, selected for / against by different / independent groups and individuals — that’s how we got Bitcoin / crypto, Salo / MPC forums, Unqualified Reservations and Urbit. Creation is a series of interacting heterogeneous processes, not a single homogenous one. Regardless, we — whatever ‘we’ are — don’t control any of the institutions / administrative processes that could actually bestow on us some of the benefits of centralisation / greater ideological orthodoxy.
This means that greater centralisation / centralised dissident coordination brings with it all of the downsides — such as being much easier to target for destruction / subversion because it lacks the tensile strength of decentralised networks / cells — and none of the upsides, like being able to pay your own people to think / organise via control of funding / institutions or instil a sense of discipline necessary to keep people on message.
Retvrning to your question, I absolutely see anons as a vanguard — both /pol/itically in terms of propagating crimethink and aesthetically / creatively as a scene / sphere. At the apex of anon culture are some incredibly creative individuals / neo-artists such as BAP, Hakan and Menaquinone4. But the real aesthetic power / significance of the sphere is its cumulative memetic energy, which is derived from the anon-SWARM of multipolar-schizoid-resistance to the globohomo Regime / Leviathan — the monolithic tentacular (((THING))) / progressive egregore or hive-mind — which demands total ideological cordyception / NPC-zombification: first of its adherents and second of its enemies, which it enforces at every available level of political / cultural praxis.
Whatever the sphere is, (un)wisely or not, it’s a two-fingered Pepe salute to the (((Thing))) / progressive egregore and the ideological economy of systemic deceit / mendacity it’s pumping into the Regime sanctioned MSMemetic water supply. Increasingly, in typical communist fashion, in order to live, you need to lie about what’s in front of your own eyes. As Robin Hanson shows us, lying imposes a greater cognitive burden / takes more mental bandwidth than telling the truth. First, because you are tracking two things, lies as well as ‘the truth’ and the non-linear interplay between them which becomes increasingly complex at SCALE. And second, because if you know that you’re lying, not only do you need to be constantly on guard / vigilant about being caught out, you also exhibit more tells and are therefore much easier to catch. It’s significantly easier and more socially rewarding to jettison the ‘truth’ and just go with the flow + mindlessly repeat, endorse and enforce Regime mandated positions / mantras:
“Black lives matter” / “men are women” / “silence is violence” / “love is love” / “poopdick tastes good” / “wear the mask” / “take the jab” / “live in the pod” / “eat the bugs” — and a personal favourite — “believe women” [lol] etc…
But the anonosphere is also a ghetto — how could it not be? It’s a space systematically ghettoised by hegemonic power, which has been forced to evolve it’s own counter-hegemonic, small-pond status system. But that’s what makes it dangerous / toxic to the Regime. It’s evolved a status system based on ugly-truth telling and weaponised ridicule of the Regime’s pretty-lies. And there’s nothing more dangerous to an authority predicated on pretty-lies than ugly-truths turbo-charged with iconoclastic, aesthetic irreverence.
That’s why the sphere’s most energetic and important aesthetic advancements are currently Neo-Dada / surreal / avant-punk / anti-hegemonic interventions, not retrograde ‘trad’-realist ‘revivalist’ visions / fantasies of a retvrn to some ossified aesthetic form / epoch, devoid of humour or pugilistic engagement with the cyber/cypher-spirit of the now. It won’t always be that way — it won’t be that way if ‘we’ ‘win’ — but that’s how it is right now. And this raw-fact can’t be effectively bypassed, only confronted and engaged with, in order to iconoclastically prepare the aesthetic ground / territory under contestation for whatever comes next.
Yarvin is wrong to say that fashion simply flows from the elites downwards, even if that’s the dominant mode of ideo-transmission / trendsetting and uptake. This is linear Newtonian logic in a post-Einsteinian universe swarming with feedback governed by deterministic chaos. Nothing is linear and all relations — including / especially memetic relations — are cybernetic. Every elite / ideological management system presupposes / invents its own counter-elite / management system, which either arrises as a faction within itself that it uses to defect on itself, or which invades it from the Outside, or which it auto-collapses into by hitting an escape-valve triggered by unsustainable complexity / diminishing returns reaching system critical level.
So the ghetto can invade the palace — but only if ghetto-vanguard mimetics possess the requisite energy to swim upstream and infect the palace — and only if the Gods of Cybernetics favour it.
The anonosphere has a wide range of subgroups that are loosely affiliated on certain ideological grounds but also far apart from each other on some issues that are seen as irreconcilable, to the point where many reject the idea that it’s a “movement.” Do you see “right wing twitter” as a movement, or simply individuals who are batted about by the tides of what is trending?
I conceptualise the anonosphere as precisely that — a sphere — not a movement. In fact, it’s best conceptualised as a ‘sphere in motion’ something which has movement but which is not a movement per se. It’s a cyber-space-network of vanguard pol/cultural theory, a constellation of hyper-condensed mimetic signifiers, which seeps / bleeds into the wider political and cultural discourse.
Under post-postmodernism / information capitalism, which is routed through NWO / GAE managerial regulatory-corporate-communism, individuals, groups and ‘movements’ are all terminally battered about by what’s trending, both by waves generated in wider politico-cultural EVENT-space, and from happenings / trends within their own memetic milieu.
Anons on Twitter are part of the same ‘attention economy’ as everyone else — it’s just that instead of supporting The Current Thing™ they seek to oppose it. But opposition to the current thing doesn’t mean they are any less susceptible to clout chasing via engagement with current events — feeling the need to ‘have a take’ — which translates into shifting their cognitive attention / the focus of their account according to the weather of the MSM news cycle.
This can get boring, but it isn’t necessarily / automatically a bad thing. Twitter isn’t the place for ‘serious’ long-form engagement (that’s Substack, nigga). Instead, it provides a space for an emergent counter narrative to whatever script / agenda is being pushed by the MSM in the current moment, which is inevitably reinforced by ‘expert’ evidence / opinion + locked in by (((fact))) checkers. Apart from the anon trolls, everyone talking is on the Regime’s payroll. The more prestigious the voice / institution, the more critical you should be regarding their claims and the more sceptical / cynical you should be about their motives. When you really understand this, the effect is actually quite sinister / chilling.
Now let’s discuss the apparent ‘irreconcilability’ of thought-currents / political tendencies on the Right. Back in the heyday of Xenosystems, Spandrell proposed a trichotomous division of NRx ideological space, which became know as the Spandrellian Trichotomy. The tripartite division related to the different kinds of people active within NRx and which dominant belief or concern / proclivity constituted the ideological foundations of their preferred successor regime.
The 3 overarching groups / ‘tribes’ Spandrell identified were: God worshiping / fearing Theonomists (religion as tribe), HBD / race centric Ethno-Nationalists (race as tribe), and social-Darwinian / market-capitalist Techno-Commercialists (too synched up with atomisation to be a tribe). Neoreaction emerged at the centre of a Venn Diagram of the synthesised / hybrid-concerns / beliefs of these 3 groups or tribes.
However, a substantive enduring / synthesis remained illusive. Overtime, each NRx subgroup defected / returned to the mean of its dominant beliefs / core tribal interests. Individuals resorted to using identity politics in the pursuit of individual status via tribal / group status dynamics, working within their tribe to shift ‘core’ NRx tenets in its preferred direction rather than pursuing greater ideo-integration / synthesis. We are currently seeing the same kind of phenomena of ideological identity / status politics playing out in the Twitter anonosphere. This is happening in the absence of a centralised authority to control / corral it + with insufficient financial incentives to coordinate things fiscally instead.
On one hand, the infighting is frustrating because it’s immature and transparently more about in-group / out-group status dynamics than ‘irreconcilable’ differences — even though these do exist — which is obviously self-indulgent / childish when you’re this far from power and your enemies want you dispossessed, servile or dead. On the other hand, our weaponry is primarily memetic so ‘the truth’ is much more valuable territory than a ‘big tent’ of warm, agreeable bodies. If arguing with each other on Twitter is really the only methodology available to inch us closer to the truth, then so be it. But on a practical level, it does come at the cost of even basic group coordination / cohesion.
One subgroup of the anonosphere is the idea of an “art right,” a term I’ve seen Yarvin use. I’ve also seen this term rejected. What do you think of the term? It’s quite clear that fresh and authentic ideas require creativity, and a creative milieu will of course spawn art and artistic creations. The Passage Prize was one instance of the “Art Right” being promoted from within, and I think things like this are very good, in fact indispensable. Would you agree?
I loath the term the ‘Art Right’ because it’s appallingly unaesthetic. Worse, it registers as an onomatopoeic throwback to the Alt-right, which, critically, was not only defeated as a ‘movement’ but has been terminally timestamped with the date of its death at Charlottesville. [Aside: that’s not to imply that the Alt-right — such as it even existed as anything more than MSM amplified phantom opposition — had any chance of actually succeeding given how effortlessly it was killed.]
I have a lot of respect for L0mez and the judges of the Passage Prize, even Gio. But coming from the art world, I’m a little bit allergic to open submission salons as a purported vector of creativity. I’ve been to too many bad salon exhibitions over the years, which are typically beset with quality / consistency issues and problems with overarching curatorial framing — if there is any — not synchronising / matching up with the works actually on display. This has nothing to do with the Passage Prize, or with focusing on art / creative work coming “out of the Right”, since the same curatorial issues / ratio of quality-to-swill applies in general to open salon exhibitions — it’s basically an Iron Law.
However, I understand the Passage Prize did receive a significant number of interesting / fully realised submissions across all categories. I know Zero gave over a month of his time to reading and considering every single fiction entry, which is testament to how seriously he took his role and his respect for the project. And regardless, viewed as a generative / networking event, my sense from the outside is that the Passage Prize was a success — vastly more successful than Apostate Gallery has been on a networking / event front. But I’m still wary of employing that kind of model for Apostate, which is condemned to walk a more lonely, esoteric / quixotic path into the Regime’s heretical gas chambers…
In future iterations, I think the Passage Prize could rethink / expand out of the dissident-year-book mode of display it opted for this time around — no doubt for good economic / curatorial reasons. A problem with this format, in my opinion, is that it ossifies something which is dynamic — in part because of the conceptual effect of anthologising it but also because of the inevitable production time-lag. It will also arguably need to avoid — or embrace?! — becoming something like the dissident BAFTA’s, which could be interesting, but I think something like that was already tried explicitly a few years ago by KWA / Kantbot + failed to take root.
But there’s a vast amount of potential in curating and exhibiting dissident art / content. The challenge for anyone who seeks to do so is to approach it in a way that amplifies its power / potency — as opposed to diminishing its power / potency — and never to deliberately neuter / sanitise it for your own mercantile ends or to gain ‘prestige’ from the mainstream.
I’ll give you an example…
Apostate Gallery has recently (re)published Elliot Rodger’s My Twisted World, an autobiography-cum-manifesto, which has been heralded as the Incel Mein Kampf. Whatever you think of Elliot Rodger — cringe-nerd crybaby or based-misogynist slayer — MTW provides the definitive INCEL account of how internalised sexual rejection metastasises into the autismo-drive / desire for transcendental retribution.
Apostate’s MTW edition is limited to 22 copies, one for each year Elliot endured being “a kiss-less virgin rotting in loneliness”. The act of republishing MTW reframes / reimagines Elliot Rodger as an artist — an interdisciplinary artist, whose autobiographical multimedia practice spanned text, video and audience participatory performance — incorporating every aspect into a unified whole / crypto-proposition of his terminally frustrated life as an artwork. Seen via these aesthetic optics, The Day of Retribution was the predestined culmination / final resolution of a ‘lifework’ in which Elliot Rodger used Hyperstition to MKUltra himself into performative murder-suicide.
The fact that The Day of Retribution was not only perpetrated by a unique autismo-persona — possessed of an ‘uncanny valley’ charm — but enshrined / contextualised by a unique aesthetic vision and ‘ethical’ theory, gave it a particular resonance — a unique frequency among spree-killers, which operates as its aesthetic signal.
So on one level, Apostate is simply republishing MTW. But on another level, the act of republishing / reframing Elliot Rodger’s pean to violent retribution is a conceptual artwork in its own right, designed to amplify the content and transpose it into the contemplative aesthetic space of contemporary art — where it can continue to resonate via a relational engagement with the symbolic order of the domain of the CAW.
As Apostate Gallery moves beyond the initial proof-of-concept stage, its exhibition programme will become increasingly ambitious — less focused on curating / aestheticising existing ‘artworks’ and more focused on commissioning / contributing to the production of new ones, which I’m looking forward to with a deep sense of malevolent anticipation.
Apostate Gallery is in a position to be an important focal point for the Art right. Its mission statement claims it is an attempt to subvert, or at least offer an alternative to, the ideological conformity and stagnation of today’s art world. It seems to me to be both a collection of existing creations from around the web as well as a forum for new work, commentary, and a preservation of internet memes. Do I have that about right?
The original intention of Parallax Optics blog had been to persuade open minded artists / creative people, such as myself, to abandon the Neoreligion of the contemporary art world (CAW) — call it progressivism / Universalism / Wokeism or whatever — and accept the Copernican bargain / pact of heretical truth + pursuant dissidence against the Regime — in order to reject the (((Thing))) which utterly ideologically pwnes you.
The infernal proposition / creative gambit is that, as an artist, in order to speak the truth you must first accept the gnosis that you inhabit a world constructed out of a tapestry of lies. Therefore, in order to escape the thought-reservation / concept-prison, you must first open your soul to apostasy and embrace the creative act of becoming a heresiarch.
In my opinion, compared to what it’s ultimately capable of, Apostate Gallery is currently running at 2% of its potential. And that 2% has primarily been about establishing proof-of-concept — which isn’t nothing but it certainly isn’t enough to feel anything other than a sense of work to be done. I regard Apostate Gallery as an aesthetic particle accelerator capable of accelerating aesthetic particles out of the anonsphere and colliding them with the orthodox / hegemonic art ecology of the CAW. But this isn’t something to be undertaken lightly. The only other gallery which tried anything similar, LD50, self-immolated in the process — burning up on contact with the forces of the Regime.
Archiving our knowledge / culture is an extremely important and urgent task. Not only do we exist under the omnipresent threat of an Orwellian Regime using Woke-corps to electronically erase us and delete our knowledge reservoirs / digital cultural history — which is the current protocol for eradicating crimethink / controlling information flow / access in an oligarchic-pseudo-democracy — but the Internet, our domain and creative zone, is undergoing / suffering from data-rot metastasising on a horrific scale. What once appeared solid has melted into air…
But I’d hate Apostate Gallery to become merely an archive for extant Internet memes — that’s never been the intention. Somewhere like Chadnet already performs an archival function infinitely better than Apostate ever could / would want to. Apostate’s decision to foreground archival artworks during its initial exhibition program was in part an expediency to ensure aesthetic quality. It was also a way to stake a curatorial claim on the memetic territory via acts of selection, conceptual framing and exhibition. These ‘artworks’ were already important / inscribed with significance — things which had played on my mind for several years — sometimes for obvious reasons sometimes for inscrutable ones. They were the kinds of artworks I wanted to associate Apostate Gallery with and use to encourage viewers to think about what constitutes ‘art’ and what art coming ‘out of the Right’ — via an unflinching engagement with the Real — could be, once the scales of progressivism had been lifted from their eyes.
I’m disgusted by much of what passes for ‘art’ in the CAW but I’m under no illusion about how much further the sphere has to go to challenge its aesthetic / creative hegemony. Creative energy on the Right remains nascent / inchoate and although some incredible work has already taken place our greatest artists / artworks are yet to come. Apostate Gallery exists to herald them.
The first thing that drew me to Apostate was the Xenosystems writings by Nick Land. As far as I know, this is the only place on the web where these writings are collected and in my humble opinion, they are his best writing. What significance does Nick Land hold for you personally and for a project like the Apostate Gallery?
Xenosystems, another casualty of cyber-attacks / metastasising data-rot, was an important place / hub for me since its inception in 2013. I followed Nick Land over from his old Urban Future blog, which was bizarrely hosted / sequestered on a Shanghai lifestyle magazine called That’s Mag. There, Land would write incredible / strange, incongruous essays, asking questions like “is genocide that bad, really?”, which got weirdly juxtaposed alongside recipes for Moon Cookies and other expat lifestyle ephemera. But there were only about 3 regular commentators, so when Xenosystems launched and incorporated a functional comments section it was a real game changer. Overnight, the user dynamic went from transmitter > receiver to something much more collaborative / combative transforming Xenosystems into a key node in what became Neoreaction.
In my opinion, Land is one of the most original / innovative, far sighted and nihilistically cold + anti-human philosophers of our time or any other, which should be sufficient to merit his ideas unwavering cognitive respect, engagement and attention — if not necessarily agreement.
I’d been aware of Land for a long time, since my undergraduate degree, but I only ‘rediscovered’ him — essentially, that he was still alive and living in China and blogging — after an Accelerationism event at Goldsmiths College in 2010. During the event, academic / establishment vultures picked over the bones of what was positioned as the carcass of Land’s anti-vitalist accelerationism, while attempting to reappropriate / reroute elements of it towards a Leftist praxis — which subsequently reached its retarded apogee in Fully Automated Luxury Communism (never go full retard).
[Aside: I left the event absolutely convinced that Land was dead, since none of the academic grave-robbers spoke about him in such a way that it even felt possible he could still be alive. But a few days later, I met up with my old postgrad theory tutor, a friend of Land’s, who told me Nick isn’t dead, but they wish he was dead. The next day I found Urban Future, which was exactly the corrective I needed — something I’d been looking for without knowing it — to all the the leftist ideological bias / bullshit polluting academic theory and occluding the Real.]
Out of the Goldsmiths ACC discussion / Fanged Noumena publishing event and increase in academic attention, spiralled everything that led to L/acc, U/acc and ultimately R/acc. The latter would have been extraneous but for the fact that prevailing identity politics rapidly turned U/acc into crypto-L/acc — with added gender / tentacle dysmorphia — which necessitated advent of the R/acc counter-marker, out of self-respect as much as theoretical distinction.
In my opinion, Xenosystems essays such as Hell-Baked and Meta-Neocameralism are some of the most lucid attempts to ground NRx in the cosmic reality of a blind-idiot God sifting-that-which-works-from-that-which-does-not-work in the butcher’s yard of the Real — optimising for intelligence via adaptive survival within a matrix of competition / reproductive death games, with the ultimate prize consisting of generative evolutionary transcendence, but never any prospect of release from the pressure cooker of evolutionary selection dynamics / arms races and the need to keep ‘winning’ just to stay in the game.
All of this strikes me — coldly and dispassionately — as correct, and therefore real and true. I must be some kind of weirdo-freak, because I find the ‘truth’ an incredibly powerful elixir and something which it’s possible to get really high on. Overtime, I became addicted to tripping-out on the truth. When I was younger / more aggressive, I used to push it pretty hard on my friends IrL. Now I’m older / colder, I primarily circulate it online amongst other anons, as though it were some sort of shared currency.
Ultimately, Apostate Gallery stands with Copernicus, Galileo, Machiavelli, Land, Moldbug, BAP and other incessant speakers of truth-to-power. It refuses to be corralled into the feminised / castrato-group-think of Regime sanctioned ‘art’, which revolves around the production / propagation of (((truths))) it legitimates / controls. In other words, Apostate Gallery refuses to be pwned.
But as a pitiless purveyor of political realism, Apostate advocates free thinking for the few not the many. A finite number of naturally inclined / predisposed cognitive risk-takers, an incipient counter-elite gestating anonymously online. It doesn’t naively ‘believe’ in free speech as either a terminal value or practical reality. In practice, speech is always limited both by norms, which gives rise to ‘norm-violations’, enthusiastically seized upon and punished by NPC apparatchiks; and circumscribed by Lèse-majesté — essentially, that which offends power by telling power what power doesn’t want to hear.
However, even more effective than explicit cracking down / use of force against its enemies is how the Regime implicitly — and actually — pre-emptively starves its would-be enemies of energy / status / MSM oxygen / financial incentives for effective opposition, in advance of any action on their part, by rigging the incentive-deck of a System it not only controls but instantiates.
The matrix of control is therefore most fully articulated / instantiated — not reactively at the moment of offence — but in its precognitive inception of the neutering of the impulse to offend / challenge the System via anything other than the forms / leftist-entropic direction it legitimates precisely to further propel it towards its final telos of totalised rule in Hell.
I believe Land is one of the most important thinkers of our era, and I particularly like the way he (and Moldbug) have repurposed the concept of “Accelerationism.” How would you define Landian Acceleration? How about “Neoreaction?” Do you think these concepts have anymore political and intellectual capital in a post-Trump world? Do you think they are still viable and can still be used when considering the political and cultural future of the West?
This question is difficult to answer because the framing is somewhat confused / misconceived. Accelerationism is fundamentally a Landian thing / concern and not a Moldbugian one. Moldbug was always highly sceptical / dismissive concerning the prospect of any kind of AI Singularity, let alone a Landian techonomic Singularity — the point at which Capital as hyper-networked planetary intelligence / AI develops the capacity for hyperbolic recursive self-improvement — which is precisely the phenomena Accelerationism anticipates, tracks and critically interrogates. Of course, Land goes much further than other Singularitarians and conceptualises this process in reverse via twisted time-spirals to conjure an image of Capital / AI reaching back from the future to assemble itself.
Here is a short 2007 post by Moldbug on The Antisingularity. Here is a much longer 2022 one by Yarvin called Do Not Punch Rationalists and here is a short follow up explicitly concerning The Diminishing Returns of Intelligence in which we can see Yarvin’s AI sceptic position hasn’t really changed, only hardened.
While Do Not Punch Rationalists is ostensibly an attack on AI fixated ‘rationalists’ such as Less Wrong founder Eliezer Yudkowski, I also read it as a crypto-ATTAK on Land. I find it distinctly strange that Moldbug / Yarvin has never explicitly engaged with Land’s appropriation — and accelerarationist subversion — of some of his core ideas. In particular, his hypothetical schema for a reactionary system Reboot resulting in a Patchwork of autonomous sovereign zones structured and run as joint-stockholder corporations.
Writing as Yarvin on Grey Mirror, he has increasingly moved away from his / Moldbug’s earlier Unqualified Reservations era neocameralism / Patchwork market-based-manifold-sovereign alternative to the current System / GAE — in the significantly more conventional direction of a monarchical / strongman System-takeover (although UR also explored these possibilities / options concurrently). In contrast, Land has remained an unceasingly enthusiastic advocate of Moldbug’s Patchwork model of market-based sovereign multiplicity to ensure regime plurality. This is because Patchwork enlists the productive forces of techonomic competition / selection pressure, which would avert the entropic sinkhole / monkey-trap of OWG.
When you interviewed Yarvin, he was very kind to apologise to me for never having completed an interview I sent him 2 years or so ago. But I was a bit frustrated at his stated reason, which portrayed me as some kind of terminally gossip obsessed NRx ‘it girl’ consumed with a preoccupation with “who fucked who” scene based trivia. Yarvin is probably at least 2SD smarter than I am, but this wasn’t a particularly fair representation of the interview, which primarily sought to elicit his views on how NRx theory unfolded while he was on sabbatical at Urbit. Now, I understand that some of the people involved are ‘toxic’ and it doesn’t necessarily suit his current strategic aims, writing as a facefag to persuade openminded progressive / technocratic elites, to be openly associated with them / their ideas. Even, or perhaps especially, when some of these more bluntly articulated ideas were inspired by / derived from — or evolved in opposition to — his writing at UR, which in comparison was often cryptic, labyrinthine and cloaked in delicious irony.
However, this doesn’t really apply to Land, who remains highly influential in certain enclaves of the academic / creative elite and who’s always couched his heresies in an assiduously polite, if inhumanly cold and hyper-compressed, verbal veneer — even at their most abstrusely scathing / eviscerating. So, Yarvin’s refusal to discuss Land’s influence over what became NRx, or directly address his ‘quibbles’ with Grey Mirror’s increasingly monarchic schema — or even speak his name out loud — remains frustrating. In particular, to a gossip obsessed NRx it girl like me 💅
One point where there is an interesting overlap / conceptual coincidence between ACC and UR is AAC’s insistence on Anti-praxis — the inherent fatalism of “letting go” of your sense of agency / attachment to praxis within a cybernetic system / deterministic reality placing you – such as ‘you’ even exist – on a predetermined energetic fate-line — and UR’s unequivocal advocacy of Passivism as an apolitical-political strategy. In essence, Passivism is the mind-hack of relinquishing all desire for / claim upon power in order to “become worthy” — like a Zen monk — so that power flows / defaults to you. It’s a strategy not to seize power, but to accept power — only to subsequently relinquish power once the Reboot is completed, in order to avoid contaminating the structure you’re engineering with artefacts of what you’re replacing or your process of replacing it.
The way I remember it, NRx and ACC didn’t draw conceptual inspiration, energy or relevance from Trump’s election or presidency. In fact, Trump’s ascent to the Oval Office was deleterious to NRx because people, like chimps, are drawn to power — including the pseudo-power of the Potus — and the energy of the 2015/16 moment meant that the blogs NRx emerged out of quickly got overrun by / subsumed into the much larger ‘Alt-right’ ‘movement’.
The people that flooded in — and the overarching political context in which the blogs were operating / being interpreted — were much more conventional + nationalistic in their take on politics and the nature of their desired political solutions. This led first to the confusion / conflation of NRx with the Alt-right, when it was really its own thing. In particular, when NRx ideas started getting (mis)represented via more mainstream / enemy controlled media institutions, both as obvious hit pieces and inchoate attempts to understand / interpret what was going on.
Second, it increasingly led to the Alt-right’s co-option of NRx via a dilution of its online discourse-space, with a huge influx of warm bodied mammals, who were insufficiently cold / disillusioned with conventional politics / activist measures and believed in precisely the surface level political illusions NRx sought to critique / dispel.
NRx was never really a movement, certainly not in a politically ‘activist’ sense. It was an elitist critique of Power conducted via a constellation of loosely interconnected blogs, comments sections, and private forums, which used Moldbug’s pathbreaking concepts to undertake serious political analysis and perform a critique / object-level analysis of power — much as academics (with delicious irony) used Foucault’s concepts to critique power from within the system / Cathedral.
NRx and ACC are both systems of critique, which provide a way of understanding reality via a conceptual arsenal / theory tool kit. As such, they can fall in and out of fashion but they can’t die in the same way as a praxis focused, temporally contingent activist movement, which exists as a specific means to achieve a specific ends at a specific moment in a specific historical context. However, most if not all of the original blogs that were the lifeblood of NRx and/or ACC have gone cold. Many of the characters originally involved have moved on / forward and either reinvented themselves online or have chosen to focus on IrL renumeration / status games. Others just burned out. This is entirely to be expected, in particular with regards to theory undertaken outside the academy, which lacks a status / funding authority-structure to inhabit / survive off.
Anons contribute what they have to contribute and then they burn out or move on… but their contributions live on. It’s ridiculous for reactionaries — of all people — to complain that a concept from a decade ago has lost all currency and is dead simply because it’s fallen out of fashion. Reactionary realists should judge concepts according to their purchase on reality / truth-value and not on retweets or engagement statistics. Are we not frustrated elitists in exile, after all?
Would you care to compare and contrast Yarvin to Moldbug? Do you think Yarvin is still politically relevant and still has fresh ideas? Personally, I do, however he’s gotten quite a lot of pushback over the last year on several fronts. While I disagree with a take here and there, and while some of his most recent essays aren’t quite as cutting edge as his older work, he has enough on his blog for me to still consider him one of our most sophisticated political thinkers, in fact one of 2 or 3 relevant commentators in a sea of sycophancy and platitudes.
Moldbug is possessed by genius. He’s one of the most prescient political thinkers of the new millennium. In fact, he’s become a victim of his own success, since it’s incredibly difficult for people who are only now discovering his ideas via Grey Mirror — or even frogs who discovered Unqualified Reservations in 2016 — to really appreciate just how brilliantly out of alignment UR was with the rest of what passed for political theory circa 2007—2010. Let alone fully comprehend / mentally reconstruct the seismic impact Moldbug almost singlehandedly spearheaded on right-wing political thinking / discourse, which now resonates throughout the fringes of the mainstream.
Of course, this goes to the core of what it is to be influential. As they are copied, echoed and repeated, ideas lose their novelty / shock value and are increasingly assimilated into the fabric of mainstream political thinking / discourse + at a certain level of resolution become integrated with it.
Moldbug had certain advantages over Yarvin. For one thing, he was writing pseudonymously, in a considerably cooler political climate, which is disinhibiting and facilitates a certain laissez-faire attitude speaking truth to power and avoids things getting too Straussian. For another, even if his ideas weren’t entirely novel and were developed out of an incredibly creative reading of historical texts his presentation of them was both novel and captivating. Moreover, they were novel to his audience, which for reasons outlined above is a contingency / luxury not so readily afforded to Yarvin — precisely because of Moldbug’s memetic success and impact / influence.
[Aside: it’s incredibly difficult for anyone who discovered Moldbug post-2014 to really apprehend the impact he’s had on right-wing dissident thought currents, because his ideas subsequently infiltrated the mainstream and began the process of being assimilated by it. The nature of influence is such that, once an idea has become sufficiently influential, it’s highly unlikely that anyone encountering it for the ‘first’ time hasn’t already encountered a version of it represented in a filtered form somewhere else. Therefore, the original impact — precisely the nature / aspects of the idea which made it influential in the first place — is obscured / lost, or at least rendered non-obvious to the Moldbuggian neophyte. That said, Moldbug always made it clear that his ideas were essentially updates / patches for old-skool reactionary political theory. Ideas and concepts, which were either not widely known or had fallen out of fashion / circulation since the Cathedral had significantly advanced its pseudo-moral mind-virus — thrusting its barbed tentacles into every available orifice of the State. In the process, destroying the boundary between church and state + polluting the ideological water supply in order to cordycep / take control of the political decision structure.]
A lot of what anons object to in Yarvin was also present in Moldbug. Not just in some embryonic form, but fully realised and clearly articulated. For example, anons complain about Yarvin’s stance on being a dissident (don’t do it), activism (don’t do it), political participation (don’t do it), Chris Ruffo (don’t do it), “violence and Hitler” (don’t do it), Amerikaners (basically peasants), our current elites (actually elite), etc… but these anons frequently embraced identical positions when they were expressed at Unqualified Reservations. So, as often as not, it’s anons who’ve updated their position / analysis, or improved their reading comprehension skills, not Yarvin.
Here’s some vintage Moldbug, which, in-keeping with UR style guidelines, I’ve quoted at length. It’s all taken from the same post, A Gentle Introduction to Unqualified Reservations Chapter 9: The Procedure and the Reaction, which has the overarching aim of convincing rightwing dissidents to ditch activism and embrace their inner-passivist [Aside: I won’t insult your readers by assuming they are unfamiliar with Yarvin, holding their hands while reading it, by quoting from analogous / contemporaneous statements / sentiments expressed by Yarvin].
Let’s begin with Moldbug’s advocacy of replacement of the decision structure > reform of the decision structure:
The reactionary’s opinion of USG is that it is what it is. It is run by the people who run it. And at present, the present management may well be the best people in the world to run USG, and even if they’re not he can’t imagine what might be done about it—short of replacing the whole thing. This simple and final judgment, like the death penalty, admits no possible compromise. […]
And move onto his advocacy of anti-activism / passivism > anything which could be labelled ‘activist’ or feed energy to the System by occupying it’s frame and giving it something / a target to suppress / oppress:
As a matter of both principle and tactics, the passivist rejects any involvement with any activity whose goal is to influence, coerce, or resist the government, either directly or indirectly. He is revolted by the thought of setting public policy. He would rather drink his own piss, than shift public opinion. He finds elections—national, state or local—grimly hilarious. And if he needs to get from Richmond to Baltimore, he drives through West Virginia.
The passivist has a term for democratic activism directed by the right against the left. That term is counter-activism. Passivism does not dispute the fact that counter-activism sometimes works. For instance, it worked for Hitler. (We’ll say more about Hitler.) However, it only works in very unusual circumstances (such as those of Hitler), and is extremely dangerous when it does work (e.g., the result may be Hitler).
Basically, be subversive and cultivate spiritual defection within a tiny section of the elite > even attempt orchestrate a broad based support for reaction amongst the “river of meat”:
In case this isn’t crystal-clear, the steel rule precludes, in no particular order: demonstrations, press releases, suicide bombs, lawsuits, dirty bombs, Facebook campaigns, clean bombs, mimeographed leaflets, robbing banks, interning at nonprofits, assassination, “tea parties,” journalism, bribery, grantwriting, graffiti, crypto-anarchism, balaclavas, lynching, campaign contributions, revolutionary cells, new political parties, old political parties, flash mobs, botnets, sit-ins, direct mail, monkeywrenching, and any other activist technique, violent or harmless, legal or illegal, fashionable or despicable.
Almost as an aside, Moldbug proceeds to drop an analogy he uses every single time he does a podcast as Yarvin…
As a broad analogy, the passivist’s relationship to USG is much like the relationship of an American expatriate in Costa Rica, to the government of Costa Rica. He has no illusions about it. He submits to its authority in every detail. He is happy when it succeeds, and sad when it screws up. And he’s about as likely to try to horn in on its decision structure as he is to move to Iran and run for Grand Ayatollah.
He moves onto a discussion of the tactical benefits of passivism > activism in 2009, which are identical to his presentation of the tactical benefits in 2022:
First tactical benefit: the passivist immediately drops off the Structure’s defensive radar screen. While it must at all times be kept in mind that the Structure is not a conspiracy and has no star topology, it can be described as the organization of all those corrupted by power. If there is one thing these people understand, it is activism—the art of controlling USG from outside its formal boundaries. It is their art. And they sure don’t like it when it’s turned against them.
If there is one thing progressives are good at, it is identifying and targeting a competing activist who is attempting, futilely as we have seen above, to out-mafia the mafia. Right-wing activism acts as a sort of adjuvant to the Structure’s immune system. It activates every possible defense mechanism. Some of which are really quite nasty.
Since the Left is now thoroughly in control of the State’s bone marrow, there is only one way for the Right to evade quick, efficient destruction by its T-cells: avoid deploying any surface protein that the Left recognizes. The Left’s own weapons are trivial members of this set. And this is why counter-activism is basically a bad idea.
And continues to discuss why providing your enemy — the thing you want to destroy — with energy it uses to grow bigger, might be a bad idea…
The problem isn’t just that stimulating the left’s immune system is harmful to the right. If it was harmful to the left as well, that might be tactically acceptable.
But since leftism is a decentralized movement, not a centralized conspiracy, stimulating the left’s immune system just means stimulating the left. So the counter-activist loses on both sides of the equation. He brings hell on himself, and he donates energy to the Death Star.
[Aside: Moldbug proceeds to — brilliantly — use The Axis vs The Allies (spoiler alert: The Allies were an axis acting in concert with a plan for world domination, which we are now living in, while The Axis was a loose untrusting alliance with no such remotely actionable plan for world domination, Nazi Africa, etc…) as an illuminating example of how Leftist projection works. How the Left, which is the Structure, projects a Rightist counter-Structure, which obviously does not exist — there is only one Structure — but which, as a phantasm, imbues the Left’s struggle with a heightened sense of urgency and validates its will-to-power by any means / tactics necessary.]
However, while Moldbug was away, working down the coding salt mines at Urbit, BAP and #Frogtwitter became much more influential. Throughout this period, there was an increased cross-pollination both of ideas and personnel between post-NRx and #Frogtwitter, which has continued after Yarvin returned. BAP is MUCH more enthusiastic about the potential of involvement in politics / political activism — including taking back / occupying political structures — and cautionary about ‘voluntarily’ ceding control of these at every level, national but especially local, to your political enemies.
BAP considers local politics and strategically occupying official positions within the political structure (police, soldiers, magistrates, etc) to be especially important. Opposition is easier to coordinate at the local / ‘grassroots’ level and maintained / increased representation within these roles / professions is necessary in case low-level violence breaks out — otherwise the enemy will have an entirely freehand to fist you with.
In my opinion, some of the anons who embody / represent the spirit of the integration of post-NRx and #Frogtwitter / BAPism are accounts like @0x49fa98, @CovfefeAnon, @L0m3z and @QuasLacrimas — all of whom have synthesised conceptual elements from both sides of the sphere. Anons like @yama_pain and myself and are also part of this general transition / milieu but retain a stronger attachment to Landian NRx / Will-to-Power as something which is fundamentally a cybernetic-Capital / deterministic materialist-Thing. Something which is anti-anthropogenic, in the sense of arguing for the impact of enhanced mechinic desire > humanistic agency. Advocating silicon > carbon means it’s anti-Vitalist in a BAPist sense, which retains a certain species-based-loyalty via a cladistic commitment to realising warmblooded potential aka the beach body ready Übermensch.
Another figure Apostate focuses on is Thomas777. We’ve spoken about him a few times and I know you think his aesthetics are just as important as his ideas, if not more so. I live in a mostly blue collar town, and right down the street from my house is a dive bar frequented by construction workers, bikers, and all sorts of townies. I’ve often remarked that if I were to show the patrons there my twitter feed, they’d think everyone but Thomas was gay. Why is he important to Apostate?
Thomas777 is a fascinating figure. He was one of the OG poasters on the Salo and Phoria Forums, who became increasingly shrouded in mystery after disappearing for several years. He was drawn out of retirement when an anon published a brilliant PDF containing some of his most important posts. Anons who hadn’t been involved in forum culture and who hadn’t been initiated into T777’s uniquely insightful takes found the PDF a revelation.
But what I found FASCINATING about T777’s RETVRN was how he took it as an opportunity to REINVENT / reinvigorate how he interfaced with political theory as an online persona / CHARACTER. He accepted the faustian pact of sacrificing the mystery / intrigue he had cultivated on Salo, Phoria and MPC forums in order to become an UBER-FACEFAG — every bit as uncompromising and EXTREME as the most maladjusted 卐 saluting “Hitler and Violence” loving basement-dwelling anon, but considerably more astute in his revisionist historical takes.
Thomas777 began communicating with his audience directly on Twitter, with a high level of immediacy / purpose and without guard rails or anything to preserve a sense of distance / the fourth wall. He pioneered a new writing STYLE using random CAPITALISATION for shock and awe EMPHASIS of certain words and phrases, which, much like BAP or Weihan’s stylistic innovations, quickly became inextricably associated with his account / persona. Next he started posting more and more selfies, like some terminally self-obsessed teenage InstaThot, which were obviously massively embracing + UNCOO + self-conscious, featuring the same fixed poses and contorted expressions over and over again, taken in public toilets and dingy hotel rooms…
But INCREDIBLY he somehow pulled it off, and all of this stuff which SHOULD have been really uncool SOMEHOW — by sheer force of charisma / persona — became COO. I was fascinated by this process, since being ‘cool’ is one of the core pathways to attracting / provoking young frustrated elites into the zero-to-one gambit of defection. I was also interested in how T777 positioned himself as ‘authentic’ but how — possessed by GenX genius — he did so knowingly by self-consciously building a brand predicated on ‘authenticity’ somehow without becoming ‘inauthentic’ in the process, which is counter-intuitive, but resonates the new age of ironic-sincerity neo-artists like BAP, T777 and Nasim Aghdam aesthetic’s evoke / embody.
Can you ask Thomas to unblock me?
I can’t get Thomas777 to do anything — not even give me the ‘meditation on vengeance’ video self-portrait I’ve been chasing him for since last year. If anyone knows how to get T777 to do something he apparently doesn’t want to — threats? drugs? violence? pussy? — please let me know. I really want to document / aestheticise T777’s thoughts on VENGEANCE as something central to the Nuremberg Trials — which means vengeance is inscribed into the marrow of the establishment / foundations of the NWO from the historical moment of its inception — as well as how his own personal / biographical need / desire for vengeance drives him.
Lastly, I very much want to know whats in the future for Apostate? Not simply specific exhibits or projects being worked on, but also what role do you hope it to fill within this “movement” or within the “art right,” or however you see it?
In my more maniacal moments, I want Apostate to create exhibitions that are profoundly disturbing to the Neoreligious conscience of the CAW. I want Apostate to scale financially to the point it can conduct a hostile takeover of White Cube, PACE and Gagosian galleries and take their interns as sex slaves. I want Apostate to collaborate with creative anons to destabilise / depose the extant status hierarchy of the mainstream art establishment. More than anything, I want Apostate to fly under the radar until it’s ready to self-detonate and use it to BLOW THE WHOLE FUCKING THING UP.
[Aside: Of course, this is all just puerile fantasy / projection. But scarily, Hyperstition + simulation theory mean nothing is ever entirely just fantasy / projection — since these are energetic staging posts towards reification — and you never really know who’s fantasy-reality you’re trapped in.]
Retvrning to reality, I’ll say a bit more about specific plans and exhibitions, to give your readers a sense of what Apostate Gallery is actually doing and why I think it’s important that this stuff is being done…
I’m currently working on an exhibition of OG content called Mudshark Angels. Of course, being Apostate Gallery, this isn’t an exhibition about mudsharking so much as an abstract, lipstick smeared requiem for the girls who paid the toll — who died chugging on what they love.
An anon I’m working with is using eastern aesthetic principles to construct a series of minimalist Zen terrariums. Ostensibly, these painstakingly curated aesthetic ecosystems have nothing to do with politics and are the manifestation of pure aestheticised ecological obsession. But under the Regime everything is rendered political. So the act of constructing terrariums — the habit of aesthetic micro-world building and creating a vision of the post-Anthropocene — is rendered an implicitly political act. It’s an act of peaceful aggression — something which uses aesthetics as a force-multiplier in the realm of the symbolic to manifest alternate ecologies.
Another anon I’m working with is hunting various species of beetle, which upon capture are pined and displayed according to predefined aesthetics of scientific convention. It’s a habit / performance, which combines the predatory impulse to hunt and kill with the autistic desire to collect, classify and catalogue. We are currently preparing a bespoke selection and display of his autistic kills to exhibit at Apostate.
I also have ideas / plans for several incredibly ambitious / complex projects, which I desperately need funding to undertake in order to do them justice. These are exactly the kind of projects which would inevitably set Apostate Gallery on a collision course with the CAW because they deliberately piss all over its aesthetic / semantic territory, while producing the kind of art ethics committees have made impossible inside the arts establishment / thought-reservation.
[Aside: while this interview was written to pass as an interview for your readers, it was really written for the attention of just one man… Peter, if you’re reading this and if anything I’ve said above makes any sense to your GRIDS addled brain — please gib me monies. We can do a law suit together and call it art. Whatever it takes, I’m game (no-homo).]
But seriously, a real problem for the online Right is that Conservative Inc exists primarily to suck up / syphon off all available funding and channel it away from interesting projects — things actually designed to fuck with the System / status quo — and give it to themselves. These creatures and the institutions they secrete / inhabit are preprogrammed to meekly comply with the System — in order to protect their undeserved position within it, which is based on a pathological willingness to keep on losing — and coded merely to maintain a sterile / servile simulacrum of Resistance™.
Whatever the online Right is, it needs to dethrone / destroy the rancid pathology of systemic losing for personal professional gain — which has infected / captured every facet of the (((mainstream))) Right’s institutional / organisational infrastructure. Systemic capitulation to orthodox progressivism via the moral certitude / superiority backdoor progressivism has installed in Conservative Inc — is an anathema to the heresiarch.
Apostate Gallery is committed to waging semiotic war on the symbolic order of the CAW — via aesthetics as an iconoclastic force-multiplier in the realm of the symbolic — in an attempt to destabilise it’s inherent inertia through a visual + contextual language / idiom fatally, semiotically intelligible to it and derive irreverent, aesthetic pleasure from doing so.
Apostate Gallery is currently soliciting unsolicited donations in BTC bc1qyxxm5yel2xmzck3elm6ascyfejw68la024lfwc which will go towards creating incredible content.