state apparatus

one major reason why trump’s muslim ban is going to fall pretty swiftly is that it reeks of poor management of imperialism. obama managed to keep muslims out of america pretty darn well, and liberals never complained (he even bombed thousands of them without a peep). “Pew Research Center said last October 38,901 Muslim refugees entered the United States in fiscal year 2016 from all countries - almost the same number of Christian refugees, 37,521.” the incoming syrian refugee total was 1% of lebanon’s, and again biased towards christians. the bush presidency actually built a database aimed at collecting as much biometric data on muslims as possible and subjecting them to numerous migration restrictions. obama kept it for 3 years and then suspended it because another biometric program pulled even more data and did so for everyone, not just muslims. none of this aroused any kind of anger or mass protests from liberals the way the current muslim ban is, and that was just how the american state apparatus preferred it. more than likely, this ban will fall in due time, and we’ll sit around crowing about how we defeated evil once again, while the previously mentioned issues will continue to plague muslims attempting to come to america.


[Image Description - A series of tweets by rawhead.bloodybones ‏@so_treu that read: 

Notice how quick the Orlando shooting turned into a referendum on gun control rather than one on anti-LGBT legislation sweeping the U.S. 

Notice how this instance of anti-LGBT violence is being used to bolster the state security apparatus rather than challenge it. 

Notice how queer death is used to bolster the imperialist “war on terror” & legitimize state sanctioned racial profiling. 

Which is what the terrorist watch list mostly is.

Notice how no one wants to put the shooting in the context of anti-LGBT, antiblack, anti-immigrant transmisogynistic violence.

Notice how much easier it is for us to discuss “islamist violence” than any of these other violences. 

Notice how they never use the word “terrorism” when it’s queer POC dying.

Notice how the shooting is being used as an excuse to further militarize queer and POC spaces. 

Notice the ties between rising nativism/nationalism and the death rates of the ones excluded in order to “make america great again”] 

so anyway i have been thinking about the force and how it is leveraged as a kind of political thing in the rebellion versus the empire conflict - where the formal aspects of the empire (beyond palps and vader) are like THE FORCE IS FAKE while the formal parts of the rebellion go around saying ‘may the force be with you’ in a way that is obviously meant to be deeply political - and because i binge read through grievous’ legends wookieepedia page for reasons yesterday, i’m now wondering about how the separatists who merged into the rebellion would think about this

because like, the force as expounded upon and performed by the jedi was effectively a state sanctioned religion under the old republic which means that any belief in the force would have been especially inextricably bound up in the problem of the state and its apparatus of power. the jedi occupy the weird space of being obviously spiritual and yet obviously deeply involved in the politics and the diplomatic fabric of the galaxy. they’re also involved militarily, even if as a last resort kind of thing so i imagine there’s a fair bit of resentment against them (this is the interesting strain of thought i picked up from grievous’ page) floating around, especially amongst the separatist camp. obviously the rebellion is a coalition formed on the basis of political expediency, but there’s obviously one particular strain of thought that’s gained primacy in there - one that dictates ‘may the force be with you’ as a political saying which marks difference from the bureaucratic indifference of the empire, which is simultaneously also a very jedi saying as compared to the kind of saying from any other conceptualizations and belief systems wrt the force.

and like, this is a charged saying! there’s a history to it! some of it politically violent, some of it being bound up in one group of people being more successful at lobbying the jedi into action than another group of people - and ofc the dynamics of power here are crucial to examine wrt who was able to lobby the jedi more successfully into action and who had the resources in the first place, to be able to push the jedi into action - some of it bound up in a history of jedi and republic interventionism that has its own fraught political complications. and especially wrt rebels who came from separatist planets: its likely that they saw a great deal of republic sanctioned violence and specifically, state sanctioned violence enacted by the jedi, on their planets and their homes before the republic transformed into the empire. and now, of course, the jedi are framed politically as martyred heroes because the empire has rendered them taboo and calls them traitors, which automatically makes the political expediencies of the rebellion expand to include the extinct jedi in their fold.

there had to have been some kind of resentment among the rank and file of rebels wrt blithely accepting the jedi conceptualization of the force as the conceptualization of the force (i mean, we’re also more or less given a nod towards there being multiple understandings of the force outside of the light/dark and jedi/sith binaries in the rogue one novel so i am taking it to its obvious furthest conclusion) and moreover, to accepting what was once the republic sanctioned conceptualization of the force which was practiced by their spiritual military enforcers. like, if you’ve lived your life in a conflict where your planet was ruined, your home destroyed and your people killed by the republic and the very visible jedi, i can’t imagine you’d take ‘may the force be with you’ with anything except deeply bitter resentment. or a kind of grudging acceptance, at best, because you recognize that this is part of political positioning on the part of the rebel leadership (again, who is the leadership and who amongst the leadership gets to elect this as the appropriate thing to say to each other while going into battle, while coming out of battle, while dying, while living - that is also a deeply deeply political choice: both mon mothma and bail organa are from planets that were loyal to the republic during the clone wars and the mon calamari were all on the side of the jedi & republic during the conflict on mon cala so their approach to the conflict and the role of the jedi in the conflict is going to be immensely different from someone who grew up on a separatist world and learned separatist politics and then watched the republic tumble it.). 

tl;dr i wonder if the separatist-turned-rebel factions of the rebellion actually grit their teeth and say ‘may the force be with you’ out loud or if the rebellion is democratic enough to allow them to use and voice their own conceptualizations of their beliefs in the force - and even if it is, i do wonder if there isn’t a deep-seated resentment that remains even through the tenuous coalition and what that means in the long run for the rebellion and for the new republic when it’s finally reinstated.

my blog for the past two weeks and foreseeable future

me: although the state apparatus is designed to curtail internal resistance there are a number of techniques that public servants may use to advocate against oppressive leadership and alter the course of policy; let us consider the activism of the various mid-level bureaucrats in the state department’s yugoslav desk who, in 1992, took the unprecedented step of-

[five minutes later]

me: paris geller DESERVES to eat rory gilmore’s pussy! let her to go down on rory! allow her to lick rory’s cli-

something i’m struggling with is: the guy who won the electoral college is about to inherit a massive state surveillance apparatus. and he holds grudges. and he deals in revenge. and his advisers are talking about restarting HUAC. and that makes all of those powerful images of protesters potentially dangerous for people who are identifiable. 

but if we don’t post those pictures, and the media jumps into his pocket all over again (because the ruin of the country will be great for ratings) and stops covering protests, it will appear as if no one is protesting. 

frembly remembly the concept of totalitarianism is frankly a garbage analysis and comparing the soviets to the nazis inherently is going to involve comparing soviet jews (who were represented in the state apparatus very well) to their murderers (keeping in mind soviet jews constituted around half of the victims of the shoah). get it together.

“It isn’t a coincidence that governments everywhere want to educate children. Government education, in turn, is supposed to be evidence of the state’s goodness and its concern for our well-being. The real explanation is less flattering. If the government’s propaganda can take root as children grow up, those kids will be no threat to the state apparatus. They’ll fasten the chains to their own ankles.” - Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

anonymous asked:

i see people go around sayong trump is the first of this and that?? is there anything tly different about trump or is everything (that used to go on) just out in the open?

On the one hand, Trump is not the first to do any of this fascist shit. Andrew Jackson engineered the Trail of Tears in the goddamn 1820s, we’ve had actual Klansmen as sitting presidents, FDR threw Japanese peeps into internment camps, Bush signed the PATRIOT Act, Obama deported three million people and developed the architecture for this massive state-security apparatus. None of this is really new; open fascism is kinda the logical endgame of all of this.

On the other, I don’t think we’ve had an openly fascist president in living memory at least. He’s definitely bringing a lot of things together–Obama’s deportations and security state, Bush’s foreign relations, Clinton’s crime bill, FDR’s internment (literally someone in his staff used Korematsu to defend the Muslim ban). I don’t think it’s new, just naked.

The formula ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’ has been used to mean many different things. If for no other reason it should be condemned as a cause of confusion. With Marx it can just as easily mean the centralised dictatorship of the party which claims to represent the proletariat as it can the federalist conception of the Commune.
Can it mean the exercise of political power by the victorious working class? No, because the exercise of political power in the recognised sense of the term can only take place through the agency of an exclusive group practising a monopoly of power, separating itself from the class and oppressing it. And this is how the attempt to use a State apparatus can reduce the dictatorship of the proletariat to the dictatorship of the party over the masses….
If by dictatorship is meant the domination of the majority by a minority, then it is not a question of giving power to the proletariat but to a party, a distinct political group. If by dictatorship is meant the domination of a minority by the majority (domination by the victorious proletariat of the remnants of a bourgeoisie that has been defeated as a class) then the setting up of dictatorship means nothing but the need for the majority to efficiently arrange for its defence its own social organisation.


The terms 'domination’, 'dictatorship’ and 'state’ are as little appropriate as the expression 'taking power’ for the revolutionary act of the seizure of the factories by the workers.

—  Manifesto of Libertarian Communism. I’m not a fan of this document, but these paragraphs are pretty good.
Religious distress is at the same time the expression of real distress and the protest against real distress. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. It is the opium of the people. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions.
—  Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right, 1843-4


1984 by George Orwell

  • Amazon: 4.5/5
  • Goodreads: 4.1/5




Nineteen Eighty-Four is one of the most haunting not to mention frightening books; 1984 should also be included in the horror genre.

1984 describes a Utopia. Not Thomas More’s version of Utopia, but this is one is the antithesis, i.e. Dystopia. Imagine living in a country, whose leaders apply a totalitarian system in regulating their citizen, in the most extreme ways, which make Hitler, Mao, Stalin and that old bloke in V for Vendetta look like sissies.

Working, eating, drinking, sleeping, talking, thinking, procreating…in short living, all are controlled by the state. Any hint of obedience or dislike can be detected by various state apparatus such as the Thought Police, telescreen, or even your children, who will not hesitate to betray you to the authorities. Even language is modified in such ways that you cannot express yourself, since individualism is a crime.

The past is controlled, rewritten into something that will strengthen the incumbent ruler. Who controls the past, controls the future. Who controls the present, controls the past. There is no real truth. The “truth” is what the state says it is. Black is white, 2+2=5, if the state says so.

The world in 1984 is divided into three states, originated from the ashes from World War II: Oceania (British Isles, the Americas, Pacific, Australia), Eurasia (Europe & Russia), and Eastasia (the rest of it). Continuous warfare between those three (who hold similar ideologies) is required to keep the society’s order and peace. Si vis pacem para bellum. That’s describes the first slogan.

The second slogan, freedom is slavery, means the only way to be free is by letting you lose yourself and to be integrated within the Party. That way, you’ll be indestructible and immortal.

Ignorance is strength, means the division on high, middle, low classes in society will never be changed. The middle wants to be the high and they’ll act “on behalf of the low” to dethrone the high. Afterwards, a new middle class arises, all will change except the low. The high and middle make and uphold the law, the low (proletarian) is just too stupid to revolt. The state maintains its structure by torture, intimidation, violence, and brainwashing.

by guest reviewer Silvana 

Get the book here!

Read excerpts from the book here!

Get the FREE Amazon Kindle app to read on most devices.


SEAB will only be checking your experiment plan and NOT your experiment, so conducting an experiment is NOT necessary.

FORMAT (in order)

AIM  - Copy this word for word from the question paper.

INTRODUCTION -  This should state and explain briefly the following: 

+ chemical concept used + types of reacions 

+ general chemical question for the reaction

 + brief description of how the concept & reaction will able to give you results and how the results will help you achieve your aim (include specifics like quantity of each substance used and the time taken, etc.)

VARIABLES -  State “Variables to be kept constant”(3) and “Variables to be changed”(1)

APPARATUS - State the apparatus you’ll be using and their respective quatities if more than one.

CHEMICALS -  State the chemicals you’ll be using and don’t forget to state the quantity. (You can pick anything! Just list what you need. Same goes for the apparatus. It doesn’t have to be a bench chemical or standard equipment. For example, you can request for delivery tubes and gas syringes!)

DIAGRAM -  Draw the entire set up and label all of the apparatus & chemicals. Pointers:

+ DO NOT cross out your diagram. ERASE IT CLEANLY if drawn wrongly.

+ in pencil of course


+ For experiments involving delivery tubes to collect gases, always remember to draw the boiling tube at a 45 degree angle. Conduct your experiment that way too.

+ The boiling tubes are always hot during heating, so please do be careful.

PROCEDURE - List out you plan in steps, just as your previous SPA worksheets have done for you. Number each step and include all specific measurements. 0.5g-1.0g of solid, always. (The key is to be AS SPECIFIC AS POSSIBLE.)

TABLE -  Again, just like your previous SPA work, draw a table to record your workings. You know the drill!

CONCLUSIONS - Explain how the results recorded in your table help you achieve your aim. For example, to find out with metal is the most reactive, your experiment varies the carbonate used and measures the volume of gas collected within 10s. What you need to state in your conclusion is that XCO3 decomposed to release/form the greatest volume of H2 gas among the carbonates. While … decomposed to form the least …. … (State the other end of the experiment.) Then conclude by explaining using your concept, linking back to your aim.

I hope this helped some of you guys out there. 加油!

the discursive intersectional biopower of the ideological state apparatus realizing and reproducing the abolition of praxis and modes of ontological phenomenology

Plan and Philosophy of Control in the SNK universe

Hi! God it’s ^^ nice to be back! Here I’d like to talk about the possible plan ofcontrol and philosophy in snk universe; meaning the First King’s will,therefore the present government of the manga. For this I will make referenceto 1984 Party Slogans “War is Peace,Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength” and Deleuze’s State Apparatus (yeah I like including philosophy stuff in my posts haha).

As always, I will divide the post in different sections of situations and themes, which you can read in the order you desire ;D

NOTE: In order to contextualize and go deeper in the analysis, I did some similes between snk First King and the common idea of God in our society – I ask you to please don’t take it personal or feel offended, me myself have my own religious believes and wrote this in the most neutral and respectful way possible. If I did not take it personal with myself or the manga, I am sure you can do the same too :D

1. Frieda Reiss: What does she symbolizes for the First King’s plan?

Frieda’s character has some features that resemble a lot to Historia in my personal opinion, especially in the fact of being control by something external or internal as an alter ego (for better understanding, you can read Historia’s Physiological Analysis ;D)

The moment Frieda decides to inject herself the King’s memories – in other words, his will – she becomes one with him: Frieda is the medium by which the King becomes present in the snk world, As Rod says (referring to his brother) “the existence that creates and govern the world”. They are now two minds or souls in Frieda’s body, which obviously creates conflict.

How can such conflict be seen? In the depression and anxiety Historia talks about earlier in the chapter. There is not an actual balance between Frieda’s thoughts and King’s; those injected memories do not work as simple information, it’s the implementation of an external philosophy in the mind, which takes power of individual as time advances. The depression and anxiety is a symptom of many things; how Frieda is losing control of her body and mind, being now control by the Kings philosophy - one she clearly does not completely agree with. Here we are talking of two ways of thinking from different context: the King’s, who believes his way of ruling the world through the power of titans is the answer; and Frieda’s (modern society) who desires a titan-free world of liberty. Both ideas contradict each other as no individual thinks exactly as the other. They are two souls leaving in one body, both fighting for power and whose winner we already now – the King.

That’s why I’d like to introduce Gorge Orwell’s concept of doublethink – being able of accepting two contradictory beliefs as correct simultaneously. In this case it would be Frieda and the King, two opposite minds whose ideas agreement is something irrelevant to worry about; Frieda is simply a puppet or medium by which the King and it’s will maintains alive. This doublethink (contradiction) in Frieda is unbalanced and mandatory to all individual who decides to inherit the memories of the first King – it can be seen in simple things as their gaze: dead and empty, as if something external was making them breathe and move.

The new governor of the world (as Kenny says,) is two heads: the individual who inherits the memories and the king; both contradictory, with one serving the other, being the actual ruler always the king, since it exist a desire from the king to maintain consistent his; how? By passing the memories through generations and taking control of the individual’s mind.

Why is it necessary to pass the memories and take control of minds in order to make the ruling philosophy maintain itself alive? Because it is not a philosophy people would easily accept, making the Kings position towards society quite prideful – if the person is against his will is because he does “not” understand, so memories and ideas have to be implanted so the individual can “understand” and “accept” the Kings will.

Conclusion: The will of the King needs to be inherited by an individual so the King’s ideas of control persist. If such thing does not occur, the whole world would easily change. Why? Because such ideologies are contradictory with what the present world needs, meaning the King’s ideology needs to be implanted in the individual -similar to Orwell’s concept of doublethink-, and take control of the mind so it can persist through the years. But, what are they such ideas and memories that cannot be taken serious by the creator of those? Well, that’s section 2 ;D

2. Fences and Walls: Are Titans a good for humanity?

OK, so this idea came by the aggressive character of Frieda when little Historia tried to cross the fence. Here is a clear contradiction between the tender character of Frieda and madness of the King when someone does not obey his orders.

Crossing the fence represents many things: possible causes of pain through the process (like the splinters Historia got) and the unknown things from the outside – as in the walls, there is danger in the exterior. Nonetheless, if we compare the walls and fence as one, Historia was protected from her father’s lies and cruelty in the farm, from the truth in some way. In terms of walls and society, the people from snk live inside a bubble that does not let them be aware of the truth: who’s their actual leader and what is his plan – in other words, the kings will.

Similar to Frieda, they are control or limited by an external and intangible ruler (King’s Will) but omnipresent, in the politics and mores of the snk society.

The outside does not only cause dead, but an alignment between the individual and its ruler (Historia and Rod/Society and King). Titans and Historia’s splinter are just ways by which the individuals are maintain under control through fear and danger. If we remember Rod’s words, the titans and walls are creation of the King, who is seen like a divinity (and even God, but I’ll go deeper with that on section 3), titans would be considered a beautiful gift from their maximum ruler; Dislike such gift and wanting to destroy it (Historia by crossing the fence, and society by trying to destroy the titans and walls) would be the same as disobeying the will of their ruler, being this the alignment I was talking about at the beginning. That’s why Frieda calls them sinners; they disobey the King by wanting more answers and a truth different from the one their ruler provides.

But, why are Titans seen as a gift? Well, here I’d like to introduce another concept from 1984 that is Freedom is Slavery, as Slavery is Freedom. Humanity has been control through 100 years by titans as the King wanted it this way, believing it was the best for the good of society and an incredible way of control. In terms of Slavery is Freedom, being a “slave” or controlled by the danger and madness of the titans gives them the freedom of live, the walls would work as a savior, protecting them from all the cruelty of the titans and making them danger free – another example of doublethink ;D (Trying not to be so obvious I just read the book and find myself obsessed by it hahaha…haha… the end killed me, ok? :C) Now in terms of Freedom is Slavery, such independence from the King’s will has lastly let to just dead and pain; Historia was left with splinters and who knows what more if she had achieved to cross the fence, and humanity full of deaths and loss by trying to cross the walls and kill the titans. The fact of giving freedom to the people would make them slaves of the dangers from the outside and their own decisions. Well thought the plan of the king in this case, doesn’t it? (That idiot son of a b*tch king ended up being smart in this analysis).

They are characters that change this and go against the king and actually achieve somehow Victory (Hange, Historia, SC), but I’ll focus on them in another post; they are war machines and this post is focus on the state apparatus, meaning the first king and all that crap. The link for such would be soon here ;D

Conclusion: The kind of life the King provides – as in the case of Historia – is “easy” to control and be taken by the individual, however it is not the desired. If the King losses control, Society would not have an exact direction anymore, being out of their comfort zone and having to find a new one – an example of this could be Historia in her character development and acceptance phases (for better understanding you can read that post :D), and other subject as Hange and the Survey Corps: all examples of controlled individuals who looked for something else (I ‘ll focus on them later on another post, please be patient, I know I have taken too much time but please owo). The plan of control the kings provide is quite tricky, as trying to go against his will bring nothing more than pain and loss, creating a tough decision between living as an slave inside walls and be safety, or be free but haunted of pain and tough decisions as new ways of government among others.

3. Rod Reiss’ Speech: The First King as God and Only Answer

(YAY finally in this part ^^ I am actually doubting of the way I organized this post…. La la la…)

“Omnipotent and omniscient (…) we call that God” as Rod Reiss makes visible in his speech, the King and his will, the “truth” is seen as a supreme God; this implies need of respect him and obey his orders; as, by being the creator of such society and infinite governor, its required (from part of the King) some pay or gratitude form the people - another proof of his power over the people; He is always there, in everything and seeing all, through politics, history, art, and simple mores of the world. As it happens with all, the king leaved indeed an impact in the world, and his essence maintains; The problem is when this essence persist alive and is overestimated as something bigger, creating the famous dependence from part of the individuals (ex. Rod Reiss and the people from the Walls religion having the King’s Will as something that is essential). Why? Because it is seen as the only bond between the present world and old one – from which there is almost no record of. Because he is the maximum truth, the only valuable source; ignoring that they are humans too, that books and mores, architectures and nature, is also a bond with the past. Sad, doesn’t it? The king was a simple human as them, but he and his ideologies were backed by the power of control. The same king does not have to exist; the ruler is the ideology, and the individual a medium for control.

Going more detailed, as Rod says in the panel above “There is a meaning to all calamity. Whether mankind survives, or whether mankind perishes, such is the will of God.” Reason why I’d like to make reference another concept form 1984: Ignorance is Strength; whoever who controls the past controls the present. By the king being the only accepted truth, anything else won’t be accepted or perceived necessary. Nonetheless, the King is quite a limited source of knowledge: Only one individual can know “all”, however such “all” is the king’s “all”, and there are as amount of different “all” as people in the world. External perceptions from the King’s are ignored – on this case, were the king’s existence is not that obvious for society, the “all” or accepted knowledge is controlled by the people with power - coming here the whole corruption and dirty business that can be evidenced in various snk chapters. Plus, the current knowledge society is allowed to have is one of ideologies and actions of a one individual who is not affected by the present context, therefore ignorant still powerful.

What is the king’s truth anyway? Just an ideology and memories, a human truth full of feelings and desires; It can be said such truth is abstract and not an actual fact about the world’s history & nature as the ones you most likely find in a book - just infinite circulating thoughts.

Now, the Past. When knowledge is a ruler’s ideas and actions, some important stuff gets loss. For instance history: a world ruled by titans has existed as long as people can remember; becoming part of the natural order of the world, and by being no records from previous times, there is no point of reference. As said in Orwell’s work, who controls the past, controls the preset, the act of compare (black/white, good/bad, bitter/sweet) is a basic way of acquiring information. When there is no point of contrast with a time were titans did not exist, and the mediums of control were different, the current one, the king’s one, becomes the only one.

In synthesis, Ignorance brings power of control to the ideology and its owner in many ways. When there is just one idea, fact and reality, the other possibilities becomes obsolete. The ruler (king) looses competence, becoming much more powerful and infinite - more godlike.

Now, there is something I find quite interesting and is that they do not pay tribute to the king but the walls. Don’t know but, maybe because they are a sign of hope, perhaps? Walls are not what desired, yet the only “obvious” action of the king that can be kind of understood and known – in King’s perspective, of course. As said is section 2, walls are symbol of power, Slavery is Freedom and even of Ignorance is Strength. As titans, it is the creation done by the desire of full and easy control of masses, which is not a pretty method; nonetheless, If such thing is seen as love, if as Historia’s case, all those lies and obligations she faced, were seen as an act of love, it gives an illusionary hope for happiness as it happened to Historia in the recent chapters whilst deciding if injecting the king’s memories or not. If walls (the act of the King) are seen as something beautiful, tricky and complicated as love, they become more bearable, don’t they? An excuse, as it happens in all those poisonous relations and acts that at the end leave you empty and cold (yeah, I don’t have luck with love and you already know that guys ;p). Not obeying the ruler and try to find something external makes the individual suffer and be seen as a sinner (like said in section 2) because it is getting outside of a reality and pain they were born in, something they were already getting used to.

That’s why Historia says “We don’t (…) humanity has no hope. Like my sister and my other successors of history, I’ll become controlled by the first king’s will (…) All we can do is pray” it always exists the desire of a reality and a leader that clearly does not exists, one that is hidden by the curtains of “love” and makes you dependent to. Hope for a world with no gloom, with no need of a change or something external; why? Because it would be easier, all we can do is pray, depend from the leader and do what he desires, not what we do.

This would lead us to what I like to call Historia’s awaking, one of the themes of the next post, so keep your eager eyes wide open (not shut ;D got the reference ewe?)

Conclusion: The first King works as God as it is not only seen as something supreme but also the creator of the current world, who (as the common idea of god) those only what is best for humanity; in this case by a weird feeling of “love”. He is the first and last governor of the world, as he is only transferring his will through generations by mind control, which is a proof of his power. By being seen as a good god and the complete truth (he is consider the only bond between the past and the present), the King becomes the only source of knowledge, which he takes advantage of and uses it as a way to control society though his ideologies, which are present in simple things from politics to mores. Making all the external be seen as something bad or unnecessary.

4. The First King’s Will as the State Apparatus of Deleuze

So, this theme is quite dense and sometimes confusing so I won’t go too deep with it. The State Apparatus (in or for this case) could be described as a monopoly of the exclusive use of force; in this case, the King’s Will.

How? First, the main characteristics: The state apparatus is composed by two heads, both of opposite nature (black/white, bitter/sweet), which complement each other with no (big) conflict – like the binary code. In this case, though the leaders in the snk power can be varied there are two main categories: the King and individual, as titans and people. Remembering what said in section 1, the governor is both the King’s will and the individual who act as a medium to achieve power (Frieda for instance). Now, in the state apparatus there are two heads but they do not always work at the same time, they alternate the power; this is something that also happens in snk world, with the variant that the King’s will has the control most of the time. In snk, there exist some conflict between both heads but it is soften by the power of the other, creating a kind of obligated yet accepted relationship. The same with titans and politics, both two heads of different nature that bind together in order to control a space.

Now, the order: The state - in this case the king’s will -, designs an especial role and characteristic to each individual, in a way it benefits both heads of control.

By being the heads of control two opposites, they define the limits, a place between white and black with no blue or red. This can be seen in snk by the ideas talked in section 3 regarding Ignorance is Strength and others; were the state has a limited knowledge but has an illusion of being big and complete. As the state, the King’s will sees the exterior as something that is unnecessary as it clash with its own order of control; the exterior is consider bad or things of a sinner – people who do not understand or respect the state. To have control over the exterior, the king’s will takes control of it by modifying it to its own benefit - similar to all Rod Reiss and the government has done in the last chapters; all those currents of ideas are changed, whether backed up by religion or law (intimate friends or assistance of the leader).

Why does the King’s will desires to banish or modify (take control of) the exterior? Because it is an obstacle in the King’s proposes, the state proposes destruction to all “vagabond in the trash and a nomadic of body” - Deleuze, a Thousand Plateaus (I will go deeper with this process of appropriation from part of the state towards the exterior – war machines – in the next post ;D)

What are the sins of the individual? Basically, disobeying the state by looking or following something external; such is seen as treason (sin) to the King, Priest and Law. In the case of snk, to the current leader (the king’s will bind with the individual), the Walls religion that see the king as a God whose creations are act of love and hard understanding, and finally the (king’s) will, the ideologies of control. Which, is clearly not very well accepted in snk, as treason is seen as a consequence of “not” understanding the king’s will, making the individual look for something external that is “erroneous”.

Another idea I consider important is the role of religion as part of the state, or King’s will. Here, Religion acts as a symbol and proof of the pact (alliance) and union between the King and his people, which is a commitment of rules. Religion in these cases is rigid and always in favor of the state’s leader – the kings will.

Now, here enters something I like to call an illusion of power: the state works with organisms, it has two heads of control but also different categories and roles for people. The state does not give power to the intellectual and creative individual, but to the ones who are dependent to the state. Giving power to the ones that feel a need of the state to exists creates an illusion of power an autonomy; which is false as by being dependent, they always obey the desires of the leader blindly; instead, the creative and intellectual most probably look for something external or create new ideas that could contradict the law & purposes of the state. Such can be seen in snk, how all the individuals that acquired the king’s will saw him as the hope or god of their world. Same happens in politics, the heads of the snk universe and the religion are people who trust in the plan of control of the king; people willing to do a change are often seen as minor. Another way by which the King acquires control, at the end, Ignorance is Strength, remember ewe? (I really need to get over that book).

Finally, inside a state with war machines exists a passive-aggressive war or conflict, caused by how the state appropriates of the different exterior currents to its own favor. Such thing occurs in snk, and is the theme of the next post, so if you are interested, liked this post or get to see it, don’t forget to give it a chance ;D

As always, thank you so much for reading my thoughts about snk and some random stuff, is always nice to get all this ideas out of my head, kind of develop them (hehe) and share them with you :3 If you have any comment, idea, argument, post, question, joke, anything, please don’t be afraid to let me know! I would love to listen to different ideas and get to new conclusions with you guys :D

And again, thank you for reading, writing such stuff is always an amazing activity which I always recommend, and the fact that you enjoy it makes me really happy ^^. THANKS! And sorry for such delay… la la la ;D

Towards a Program of Socialist Pan-Americanism

We demand:

1.     The acknowledgement and official apology by the US state apparatus of its role in destabilizing American countries and the continued exploitation of American peoples.

2.     The immediate withdrawal of all US troops and closing of military bases throughout the Americas.

3.     The immediate withdrawal, indictment, and prosecution of all agents of US imperialism including operatives of the CIA and DEA concerning criminal actions such as terrorism, sabotage, and assassinations.

4.     The immediate transfer of ownership of US-controlled capital in non-US territories either directly to local workers when possible, or in the case of countries with popular socialist governments, to said governments.

5.     The immediate end of economic warfare against the people of Cuba, the release of the remaining political prisoners known as the Cuban Five, and direct, non-imperialist assistance to the building of the Cuban economy, up to and including direct reparations.

Keep reading

To build a massive infrastructure requires an army of planners: to promote a wider reach, to prevent wasteful duplication and to decide on industry standards. That meant a growing role for the state, as the only part of society capable of becoming adequate to this task - that task of planning society. Late development occurred alongside a burgeoning state apparatus, at once more centralised and more dispersed than ever before (although this apparatus remained relatively small until the World Wars spurred its growth).

The changing role of the state dramatically transformed proletarian visions of communism. In Marx’s theory, there had been no role for the state to play, either before or after the revolution. Free-market capitalism was to be replaced by socialism: that is, the “conscious planning of production by associated producers (nowhere does Marx say: by the state)”. Marx’s model of planning was not the state, but the workers’ cooperative on the one hand, and the joint-stock company on the other. Likewise, Engels famously suggested in “Origins of the Family, Private Property and the State” that after the revolution, the state was to find its place in “a museum of antiquities, by the side of the spinning-wheel and the bronze axe”. Neither anticipated the massive role that states would play in the near future, in capitalist societies. Nor did they therefore anticipate the role the state would play in the socialist imaginary.

—  A History of Separation - Endnotes

Appalachia is America’s dirty secret.  You want to know what poverty is? There you go.

It is comparable to the urban slums of major cities like Detroit and Chicago in terms of the disparity between economic opportunities available to economically developed parts of the country and how they are viewed by the broader culture.

Poor minority communities and poor rural white communities successfully divided by leftist/communists and establishment republicans both policed by the same state apparatus. Congratulations.

In all honesty, I wouldn’t be surprised if the US government itself was behind the “north korea hack”: It all just lines up perfectly.

>Something big but ultimately meaningless gets hacked (it’s neither critical infrastructure, industrial espionage nor government/military targets)

>blamed on the biggest international pariah there is, who is also in no position to strike back in any way over false accusations, nor does it seem entirely unrealistic, considering that they constantly threaten the US

>add in a bit of terror threats that don’t impact the country in any really meaningful way, either, but appear huge to the public (a movie won’t be released)

>have the perfect justification to legitimize the ongoing NSA-Spying as well as for introducing new police state “cyber security” laws thanks to this, something Obama already announced

Even if they didn’t do it, it was the best thing that could possibly have happened to the US government and its police state and surveillance apparatus.