144/ the Master assimilates the Rebel, appropriates or includes him by law and grace united, but the active Rebel distinguishes himself from the Master, refuses to be recognized as defeated or posits an image of himself,
-
Show this thread
-
145/ because he does not recognize himself—this is his activity—and because his only representation of himself would suffice to make him reenter under the law and make him become...dualistic.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
146/ he politics of the Rebel as resistant excludes the overly massive disjunctions of dualism, i.e. that which remains synthesis through which mastery includes the adversary.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
147/ Having supposed, through paralogism, that *desire* is confused with the given sex, Revolution with sexual rebellion, identities which found the eternity of mastery, dualism must then massively cut, abstractly and transcendently separate sex and desire
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
148/ (there will be a specific desire of the Rebel that will not be sexual), sex and rebellion (rebellion without relation to sexuality, contrary to “discourses of liberation”).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
149/ Sometimes the whole of desire will be the Master, sometimes there will be a desire that will escape from the Master. Sometimes every discourse will be the master's, sometimes there will be an autonomous discourse of the Rebel.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
150/ Sometimes discourse and desire will be assimilated, sometimes they will be distinguished: the whole of desire to the Master, but not the whole of discourse.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
151/ The Rebel as resistant leaves the dualist to his prophesies and his hesitations, he contents himself with fleeing straightaway from disjunctions, clefts, re-splits—but without negativity, thus excluding the signifying re-split—into the closures of mastery.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
152/ He refines all the dualist's transcendent and barely guaranteed disjunctions, such that his Rebel part is confused with a simple partition, but without negativity, thus without elementary or minimal term,
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
153/ and thus inaccessible to the law of the signifier, which it undoes or against which it resists: having in some way defeated signifying mastery on its terrain...from a completely different terrain. [END CHAPTER 1]
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread
@threadreaderapp hi Mr. app, unroll please
-
-
Replying to @tadkins613
Saluti you can read it here: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/992898563830140928.html … Enjoy :)
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.