the death of god and all that jazz

the death of god and all that jazz. it’s like this: if there’s no one upstairs to spank our bottoms for eternity, we’re on our own down here.

who will reject this view? those who bank on god. some literally make their money as “god’s” representatives. others are conscientious atheists who think that society will fall apart if god does. still others might not want others to know this secret, that god is dead, the better to exploit them.

“religion is the opiate of the people.” said marx. “marxism is the opiate of the intellectuals.” said some other guy.

question: is heroism legitimate?

this will piss folks off. do these communist really care? is it not just vanity? is not just some adopt heroic role? how much of it is sympathy and how much of it is role-play?

if we are essentially selfish beings, what then? if revolution is entertainment for the revolutionaries, what then?

i think of chomsky. i think of marx. were they hungrier for fame or a classless society? was the classless society the white hat one wears for a shoot-out?

let me tell you something, folks. i can live with it, if we are all just selfish chimps. i can die without a god. i can live with self-”perfection” as my cause. i simply don’t feel the need to play the social hero.

so i don’t want to die in your war, for or against the government, not until my gets shitty enough for me to want to throw away. i will fight the mugger and might even kill over honor. but i won’t kill (and die) with a white hat on. my hat is gray.

christianity turned into left-wing politics. but the other half turned into fascism. jesus himself is rarely found. remember, he was the opposite on an accuser.

all this shit of about white man is laughable. we did what the rest did. we conquered and enslaved. we just happened to do it better. so the school of resentment has an easy target. just as john of patmos had his rome, so the verbal-revolutionaries have their western industrial culture.

am i in favor of “western industrial culture?” yes and no. i like my air conditioning. i like the grocery store and the library. i think it’s nothing but moralist pretentiousness to ignore the good in one’s culture to simply whine about the “bad”

one things for certain: more people talk about nietzsche than actually read him. but that’s the naked ape in general. i was like that myself, spouting opinions, wanting in on the conversation before i was ready. live and learn. kids have to shit their pants before they learn to use the toilet.

if i paraphrase nietzsche and what i say sounds good to you, don’t go around thinking you about nietzsche. however right i may be, you better read those books yourself. or don’t, and don’t pretend to know anything about him.

it doesn’t take me long in person to size up what someone knows about something that i know about. one gleans from a few comments.

is it worth knowing to begin with? yes and no, depends what you are shopping for. for me it was important. i took a certain road. most people took other roads. if you are a group sort of person, then nietzsche will not appeal to you. hunt down a clique and read what they read, or read the cliff notes.

the world is clogged with sentimental lies. of course that too is a lie. it’s just not sentimental. you might call it melodramatic but i wouldn’t agree.

people want to hear what makes them happy. their ears perk up when you flatter them. well, nietzsche flatters the lone wolf. he then gives the lone wolf ammunition. you could call it propaganda. one man’s lie is another man’s truth. etc. etc.

you can at humanity as 6 billion dying apes. they want food, sex, and status symbols. these status symbols are sometimes only words. that doesn’t mean that “only words” is inferior to swimming pools and expensive cars. in fact, man has a taste for the other-wordly. poems are his bridge to this.

you can phrase it all in a million ways. give it a try. this is one way. i spit it out. we like to play hero. that’s one of my defining thoughts. put that in your critical study of me.

if a person is conscious of himself as someone who is programmed to play the hero, then how does that effect the way he plays the hero? the answer: ironically.

there are only a few good roles for the self-conscious hero. i think “philosopher/ psychologist / anti-christ” summed it up nicely. philosophy and psychology are on in the same in the end. anti-christ is more complicated.

if christ means humility to you, then the self-conscious hero is opposed to him. if christ is a poet / mystic, things are more open.

i think “the antichrist” was one of nietzsche’s worst books. it’s still damn good but not for morons. if you worship nietzsche, don’t read it. if you worship nietzsche, you don’t understand him to begin with. he was just a good writer, my friends.

nietzsche wanted to smile at the horrors of life. get that down. his battle was one of attitude. he did not want to curse this world.

sometime he was indeed the sort of crybaby he despised. no one is perfect.

his ethic vision was one of affirmation. he wanted to say yes. he did not want to reject this world in the name of some other hidden world, heaven for instance, or truth.

he mocked the stoics but he was related to them. you might call him a noisy stoic. but only if you imagine stoics laughing.

too many morons miss the most vital points of nietzsche. they can’t tell his weakness for his strength. they have their agendas. i have mine. mine is to praise where i love. theirs is to slander where they fear.

i write it with a smile. i know it’s unfair. life ain’t fair. that too is in nietzsche, implicitly. if god is dead, so, apparently, is cosmic justice.

the intellectuals for the most part reject this. they will throw out god but not their hero costume. the ironists role does not appeal to them. they want to play the good guy.

am i just a freakishly selfish person who misinterprets the altruism of others as vanity? it could be so.

“life ain’t fair. deal with it.” that philosophy will work for one type.

“it is our duty to incarnate justice.” that will work for others.

if there are 20 “nihilists” at the party, which do we prefer? i will judge them on style myself. i will judge them by their “art.”

for “art” one could say “artifice.”

how do they speak? how do they dress? what have they written? more important than anything: how do they treat me?

of course.

nietzsche saw altruism as so obviously insincere that it was anti-intellectual on a “”deep” level.

how do you even related to someone unaware of their own need to play the hero? how does a nihilist relate to someone in the Cause?

not very well, but the nihilist can manage it.

why? because he just doesn’t give a fuck. the beliefs of others are just bad taste, until they become a threat of course.


i’m talking about my nietzsche, my christ, my blake, my rorty. if you want to create your nietzsche, your christ, your blake, etc., then read the fucking books. don’t speak on them till you do. just shut up and learn. or don’t, and just shut up.

i simply expect my type to understand me. the others will not. the others (when they don’t simply ignore me) will misinterpret and slander me. such is life.

i’m used to people either not caring or not understanding or both. that’s the world i evolved in. so be it. i hope that’s not too sassy.

if you want to be an idiot, then read a writer for his or her weak points. if you want to enlarge your mind, do the opposite.

eat them. assimilate the good. shit out the bad. it’s not that complicated.

if you like being a fool, then kneel to their statue. put them above you.

if your balls are large, you are already doing the opposite. you are learning from them only to kill them after.

that’s an exaggeration (for those of you without a sense of humor.)

sink your teeth into their brains. suck out the nutrition. shit on the rest. piss on their failures.

do that to me. i did the best i could here, asshole. i tried to teach my non-biological sons something valuable. for that i only demand dismemberment. that’s a metaphor, you psychos.

if you think slang and serious thought are mutually exclusive, you haven’t thought about it seriously.

it’s the same with humor, you constituted would-be priest. i know you want to spit on the plebians. put your time in first.

comedians reveal our hypocrisies. i’m all for them. i’m on the side of comedians. whereas the moralist isn’t. the comedian refutes the moralist. the crowds laughter is proof of that.

the problem with our john wayne intellectuals is their denial of their own wolfish natures. of course they will confess just enough, but then the charge continues. how can i blame them? but for the grace of god, there go i.

but you’re an atheist, i heard one say. so fucking what? i can’t use “god” in a joke?

that’s just it. the asshole is free. he can make a joke from anything. why? because his only cause is he himself, and he himself is a comedian.

yes, an ironists is a joker, professional or not, effective or not.

i’m my own cause, so other causes are threats to me. i can’t embrace them. i mock them in self-defense. i mock charity. i mock self-sacrifice.

that’s what some of these controversial artists do, mock self-sacrifice.

others present unpopular forms of eroticism, “forbidden love.”

others are just plain nasty for the attention it brings, or to mock the hyper-sensitivity of others, which they despise (and also envy?).

satan has always been an endangered species. he’s not what the church and the corporation want. of course he is also the father of lies. he can squeeze in if he wants to.

but if he’s a writer, he just my show himself, piss off the herd.

i’m jesus too, thought. i’m not just the devil, folks. i vote christ on sundays.

why?

cause i can squeeze it all in. i can see reality as one, and mock that belief as illusion, simultaneously. so what if i know it’s a metaphor? i’m a pragmatist. like whitman, i don’t care if a contradict myself. this is life, not some bullshit argument on youtube.

i’m not so much arguing here as persuading.

what’s the difference?

i know how it works, kids. it’s not my reasons but my results that will seduce or offend you.

reasons are secondary. the myth is primary. the costume is primary. i am describing a role that you might want to play. we’re at the mall and you are browsing in my store.

does this mask fit me? that’s what argument amounts to.

in real life situations, it’s different. juries have reasons to argue. but poet - philosophers - psychologists only use arguments as a method of persuasion. they know that its only persuasion.

that’s where these chess-style philosophers go wrong. they take propositions seriously. they are lost in an illusion of man as a rational animal. how comical.

it’s as if they’ve never met the man on the street, the average asshole with his inherited prejudices.

which, by the way, so are mine. but mine are inherited from better sources. so say i, as a matter of fucking taste.

get that down. it’s a matter of taste. you like pepsi. i like coke. this is costume party. didn’t anyone tell you?

i’m telling you now. look around and perhaps you’ll see it, but only if your costume is the guy who thinks it’s a costume party.

tell my mother: i can look at myself from outside myself.

that’s bullshit, the smart reader says, and he is right.

so what? i lied. it’s part of the method. it’s a dirty fucking koan. lord knows that eastern shit is popular.

so what if some of that eastern shit is good? it’s only good if it let’s you mock it. jesus is only jesus if you can put your hand in his side.

i should be on a podium. it’s clear to me now. where are the cameras?

then taboo the bear struts in: “narcissism is taboo.”

i know mr. bear. therefore the fun in wearing it. this is artifice, friends, not the thoughts inside my head.

this is a mask. this is a poem. this is a joke. what’s the difference after all?

fuck derrida. i’ll put america back on top. down with these nutless fools. these nihilist with footnotes.

english, motherfucker. do you speak it?

i will say what rorty can’t. i’m not middle class. i’m self-educated refuse. find me down at the public library.

rorty’s polite. he wants to persuade a certain type. he wants to be friends. i’m just out to spread my seed.

i give the world at large my perverse ironic hero myth. i tear the mask off vanity.

i do it for profit. i do it for recognition. i may even do it for truth, against my better nature.

i don’t feel the need to play the scholar. i don’t feel the lack of a doctorate. i’ve learned enough to huff and puff and bluff myself to the top of bullshit mountain. my technique: i will call it bullshit mountain and climb it anyway.

zwydorff is an update of nietzsche. he takes certain modern developments for granted and focuses on the “will to power” and a pragmatic vision of truth. for him, the “will to power” is manifest as the will to play the “hero.”

he thinks each individual fashions this personal hero myth from his environment. he includes genetics as part of environment but not dogmatically.

he reduces propositional logic to a style of persuasion. he does not privilege it over satire, for instance. he mocks the idea that truth is something arrived at rationally. he mocks the concept of “rationality” itself. much of this is not original, as he himself admits. what is original about him is his use of slang and obscenity. he implicitly rejects the distance between the academic and the bawdy.

that’s right fools. porn is form of art. art is porn for the power drive. this and that and something else. take none of me at face value. look beneath and between the lines. you might sound like an idiot but at least you’re trying.

risk being wrong. mistakes are our true educations, if we survive them of course. don’t drink and drive. use condoms. try not to cheat on your girlfriend, unless the other girl is better.

rorty the anti-plato, who would not hurt a fly. but still, i love the guy. i learned so much from him. what style the man had! he was clear as bottled water.

i would first like to thank the academy, since you gave me this fucking award. then let me thank the language philosophers! you really kicked truth in the balls. kisses to nietzsche who woke me up to a new and improved personal hero myth. salute to carl jung, who motivated to embrace and study my dark side. so many others. jesus. oh yeah, jesus. jesus as poet of self. “i am the truth” he said. “ i am the alpha and omega.” he taugh me how to view myself, you see. i’m christ. did i mention that? also the romantics, who elevated personal masturbation above all else. thus spoke onanismo. kiss my ass.