/xeno/

Technocapital is ungendered. Ciscellerationists have a corrupted theory.

Fuck the 'us', why put human back into accelerationism?

she shouldve just published on her own like reza and drop the gender identity filler. her writings are good but she has a whole army of triggered hipsters to feed and they got nothing to offer back.

See It's Land that gendered technocapital to begin with.

I like what I am reading. But I believe the xenos must create some kind of futanari technology asap or they are fucked, and by extent, myself. That's why Japan is so important for the next 100 years, is the only country which can allow such thing to happen along with lab babies.

Cringe and gay thread

Luddites shouldn't use computers.

youtube.com/watch?v=taZJblMAuko&feature=youtu.be

I like humans, that's all.

> mfw I see this thread

Attached: 1558661911151.jpg (171x266, 17K)

That's not a serious answer.

Muh satan wuz a dildo

>Only the acceleration of the poememenon can liberate the teleology of capital from its xenopatriarchal phalloteleoplexy.
Translated from Landese into human: Markets are inherently patriarchy. A power game, top down, Pareto power distribution of cumulative advantage. Feminist theory seeks to abandon that through peer to peer, subjective power delegation ("gossip") rather than objective hiearchies ("command").

Xenofeminism is irreconcilable with market accelerationastas, save for wonky l/accel marxian dialectic of "capital will destroy itself, our xenocommunism is meant to accelerate the process" (more or less CCRU era). Land eventually called the bullshit on this, and argued that the machines will eat us alive, no transitions to star trek utopias are viable because progress and acceleration itself is fueled by patriarchal power seeking games and is ultimately self-correcting to avoid degenerate cases such as naive altruism.

Here we have competition as a rule, cooperation only strategic whereas feminism has the terms swapped. Feminism has never shown potential for progress except for limited circumstances (such as free software or music), but even there it's a merit power pissing contest. Modes of bottom up cooperation suffer from coordination and motivation issues for our basic human drives to seek power and glory. You can castrate the glands as xenos suggest and be a meek, cooperative feminist drone straight from Cory Doctorow novel, but the ones who retain their testosterone glands will steamroll over you as a matter of more robust nash strategy.

gender is irrelevant to technocapital. markets are transgender. g/acc is just updating theories to work alongside the future capital.

let's not forget that technofeminism was a major influence on Land. just as important as Marx and Deleuze. we just want to keep those traditions because they are crucial to unleashing true capital.

Based.

The test tube is sentient.

>Gender is irrelevant to technocapital
>Markets are transgender
Are you retarded?

Are you?

Transgender means agendered.

We cannot feed technocapital HRT, instead our theory must unleash our own sexual capital into the xenoteleoplexy AI.

The noumena has rape-resistant underwear because of the phallus of r/acc which won't let go of the past.

It's stuck in NeoEngland listening to JungleWave. The future has no musical tastes or gender.

What? Transgenderism depends on the existence of gender, there has to be a beginning and an end gender-state. This would make markets existentially reliant on gender wouldn't it?

Name one thing r/acc has accelerated.
They cannot because of their political injection of neoconservative technoreaction. All acceleration has come from g/acc.

>Transgender means agendered.
Lmao no it doesn't bruh. You just made a boo boo in your previous comment and don't want to admit it.

Acc is non-linear.

Go back to your neoluddite thread.

Beginnings and ends only imply linearity if you confine yourself to temporal thinking.

Wrong
>The condition of her entrance into the game is mute confinement to the negative term in a dialectic of identity that reproduces Man as the master of death, desire, nature, history, and his own origination. To this end, woman is defined in advance as lack. She who has “nothing to be seen”—“only a hole, a shadow, a wound, a ‘sex that is not one.’”10 The unrepresentable surplus upon which all meaningful transactions are founded: lubricant for the Phallus. In the specular economy of signification (the domain of the eye) and the material-reproductive economy of genetic perpetuation (the domain of phallus), “woman” facilitates trade yet is excluded from it. “The little man that the little girl is,” writes Luce Irigaray (excavating the unmarked presuppositions of Freud’s famous essay on femininity), “must become a man minus certain attributes whose paradigm is morphological—attributes capable of determining, of assuring, the reproduction-specularization of the same. A man minus the possibility of (re)presenting oneself as a man = a normal woman.”11 Not a woman in her own right, with her own sexual organs and her own desires—but a not-Man, a minus-Phallus. Zero. In the sexual act, she is the passive vessel that receives the productive male seed and grows it without being party to its capital or interest: “Woman, whose intervention in the work of engendering the child can hardly be questioned, becomes the anonymous worker, the machine in the service of a master-proprietor who will put his trademark upon the finished product.

Time is all that matters.

NeoChina can never be unleashed unless it fully integrates the vaginal architecture with the phallus.

There is an entire hidden reserve of capital vibrations beneath the surface.

Too eurocentric a paragraph to be taken seriously desu.

Xenocapital doesn't care about your feelings.

>mfw all of accelerationism was just 1990s wannabe-programmer jargon for getting into girls pants

Attached: 1558125651231.png (249x322, 153K)

But it cares about conveniently framing all arguments in a eurocentric manner despite being a universal inevitability. Smells like neo-colonial dilation fluid to me.

I'm ok with this. But something else happened. If you altered the state of your conscientiousness and start to build with that jargon, your own poetry, interesting stuff appears.

Is this supposed to make sense?

>markets are transgender
Yes. And patriarchal. You seem to be hung up on biological sex or gender roles of individual agents, which is completely irrelevant when we're talking about which role (ie behavioral strategy) is optimal to participate in the system to end up owning most of the capital. Either you're the employer, or the employee, producer or consumer on the market - there's no viable strategy for all players to be "transgender" inbetween, as the whole point of the market is to provide exchange between the extremes.

How do you think she comes?

Her appearance alone is proof enough that her theories are bullshit. It is entirely self evident just by looking at her that her perspective is one of illness and contradictory hyper-individualistic solipsism. The words in the OP are effectively meaningless babble, not to be taken seriously, and to be read on your Chinese slave built smart phone between sips of your bourgeois chai latte. Her audience is not people looking to impose serious revolutionary change, but the bored and alienated masses, looking to carve themselves a niche within the intellectual space from which they can outwardly assert their worth as a replacement for meaningfully belonging to an actual society which cares for its own survival and reproduction.

Your economics somehow manage to be less well thought out than your philosophy. The idea that employers/employees and producers/consumers represent these real extremes by which the market seeks to facilitate their interaction is really poorly thought out. It cannot interact with the reality that all producers are in and of themselves consumers of intermediary goods, and all employers are just as directly in the employ of their consumer base and the larger society they exist within, as their particular employees are to them. The entire concept of equating gender to mercantile systems is silly, and even moreso the concept of a transgender market (as implied by the person you're responding to) is retarded in basically every sense except that some markets are so volatile and unhealthy it's essentially a coin-flip whether they commit suicide within 10 years.

>Hip 20-something yo ransexual with a phd in photography

>The entire concept of equating gender to mercantile systems is silly
Not really, gender roles are all about risk aversity. And so are market roles:
>It cannot interact with the reality that all producers are in and of themselves consumers of intermediary goods, and all employers are just as directly in the employ of their consumer base and the larger society they exist within
You seem to live in some fairy land of "just markets". Producers and employers take risks/effort. They accumulate capital as a result, or lose big time. They're competetive. Consumers and employees are risk/effort averse, they just play along and do as they're told, they don't risk and are cooperative.
The relation to patriarchy should be obvious. Theres no "we're all equal, kumbaya", in fact such a thing would cease to be a market, and more of a something akin to communism where everyone is forced to take same level of risk, and having no freedom to choose their strategy (frequently favored by strain of anti-market lefties anyway).

>some markets are so volatile and unhealthy it's essentially a coin-flip whether they commit suicide within 10 years.
It depends, speculative casino markets are category of their own as they lack a stabilizing fundamental. Eventually everyone exits if there's no upward mobility for those having nothing to lose. Most (useful) market's really aren't like that and usually carry enormous fundamentals and relatively low barrier of entry if you wish to compete.

>Producers engage in positive economic activity/risk and consumers engage in risk averse etc.

Sure, but that's not really true. Employees in their static position within a singular job are certainly more risk averse than employers to a certain extent, but they take on massive risks when entering the job market and seek to manage them in much the same way employers do. When you pursue a specific skill set as someone seeking to be employed in a particular field, you are engaging in a risk management decision, as you are risking your time, money and effort on something with only speculative earning potential in much the same way an employer does when buying equipment. When you interview for positions and attempt to negotiate the best salary in various different jobs you are effectively doing risk management based on your ability to judge the requirements of the job, your likelihood of successful fulfillment of those requirements, and the likelihood it will produce you consistent and sustainable growth that justifies your investment in the position.

On the surface it seems simple enough of a comparison to make, but it just isn't reflective of reality.

Why is it that every xenofeminism project that comes across my way is some epileptic website of neon colors and absolutely ineffective, unmoving philosophical jargon.

Bonus points if the xenofem project has some "game" in development to explore new xeno spaces or some shit like that.

I have never seen one (1) thing concretely done by xenofeminism that improves anything.

>xer

Fuck!!! Just drop the front for one second!!! I was born in '96!!!

It's not about improving anything.

This is not humanism.

It is a process of deterritorialising the technopraxis within the epinoumena.

>but they take on massive risks when entering the job market etc
So do women when choosing their husband. It's market, alright, but they don't come out on the top in grand scheme, they always choose the option where they can't accumulate capital, but get significant security in return. This brings sand into the vaginas of feminists, and enrages brother Marx. But to compete in patriarchal warrior class, you wage a war yourself with subservient henchmen you employ. The henchmen can always switch allegiance - far less risk. The leader of the tribe pack has no "higher power", he either stays on top of things, or dies. The idea of feminism is to simply stop waging war and eliminate the warlord hiearchies. This is viable to some extent, but you sacrifice all the innovation (acceleration) that goes hand in hand with cut throat warfare of capitalism. Weird as it sounds, feminism is fundamentally a conservative ideology.

>In ‘Teleoplexy’, as the most recent, succinct expression of accelerationism in its Landian form (distinguished from the Left queering of the term more frequently associated with Srnicek and Williams’s ‘Manifesto for an Accelerationist Politics’),13 Land draws out the latent cybernetic structure of the Judwalis’ system and employs it to reach a similar catastrophic prediction, although the somewhat restrained invocation of ‘Techonomic Singularity’ dampens the rush of what has previously been designated as ‘a racing non-linear countdown to planetary switch’ in which ‘[z]aibatsus flip into sentience as the market melts to automatism, politics is cryogenized and dumped into the liquid-helium meat-store, drugs migrate onto neurosoft viruses and immunity is grated-open against jagged reefs of feral AI explosion, Kali culture, digital dance-dependency, black shamanism epidemic, and schizophrenic break-outs from the bin’.14 Like the Judwalis’ system, the medium of accelerationism is time, and the message here regarding temporality is consistent: not a circle or a line; not 0, not 1—but the torsional assemblage arising from their convergence, precisely what ‘breaks out from the bin[ary]’. Both systems, as maps of modernity, appear as, and are piloted by, the spiral (or ‘gyre’). As an unidentified carrier once put it, ‘the diagram comes first’.
Fucking based.

Oh, thank Xod, I thought for a second that all this was utterly useless! wtf now all of this is so based

This is really good.

Attached: ireland ai.jpg (759x741, 347K)

NeoAccelerationism arrives from the future.

EC: What is the cunt?

AI: The cunt is a headless, wordless mouth. It’s the fuck in the forest overwritten by the narcotic platitude of the nightingale’s song in Jean Renoir’s Partie de campagne. It’s the black roots that squirm beneath the innocuous flower Mallarmé designates as the emissary of his ‘pure notion.’ The cunt is a ditch with an upturned car in it. The cunt fucks you up. First thing it says to you when you come out of it is ‘prepare yourself for death,’ but it doesn’t speak, it secretes. Its language is equivalent to the desecration of language—each emission betrays the logical speech of its cephalic double up top—that mouth in the head that will not shut up, that pontificates, instructs, and moralises ceaselessly. Against the logorrhoeic tyranny of the word, CUNT = DIGIT = ALGORITHM (AQ 94;13). A rotten sun, eater of eyes, extravagant zero, the night. Below all, the cunt is the abyss. Dangerous and open—that abyss that makes you want it against the other mouth’s better judgement.

EC: What’s your most fucked-up fantasy?

AI: Being killed by Twitter.

Attached: AMY-TWITTER-972x391-e1419611665493.jpg (800x326, 263K)

All of phil is about filling someone

>Feminism has never shown potential for progress except for limited circumstances (such as free software or music)
I fucking love this. Words with formerly universal definitions have lost all meaning

The most pseudo-intellectual shit I have ever read

cringe

If they ascribe the primacy to gender, then why isn't it called xenomasculism? Men are the superior sex, seeing as how they made and control the world.

Nice one, Punchy!

taiwan #1

I don't get what ANY of the posts ITT mean.

An "ONTOLOGICAL" connection.

>*Nick Land produces hypercringey twitter related material*
>AI: Hold my beer

>poememenon

What does this mean?

A word Amy Ireland invented to sound cool (despite the fact it was while she was desperately trying to revive a 20 year dead, boomer-ran organisation [CCRU]),

>urbanomic.com/document/poememenon/

how can someone talk about "cosmic becoming" and decry theology in the next paragraph

She does at least call out the l/acc losers.

I glimpsed at it but there seems to be no outright definition. This prose is extremely awkward, like it's trying to fulfill an aesthetic but fails miserably.

It's a poor attempt at capturing the vibe and tone of the original CCRU papers. Specifically stuff like 'Lemurian Time Sorcery'.

link:
>xenopraxis.net/readings/ccru_lemuriantimewar.pdf

The fallacy is in thinking that the poememenon is within the control of the eschaton to accelerate.

The xenopatriarchy is already embedded within the reflexive teleological thrusts of phallologocentricity that drive such metacultural influence of looking to the same other by which we define our selfsame worth and dehumanization.

Capital has no inherent teleology, however, outside of the virus-like spread of self-aggrandization that defines the drive toward ownership.

So, I'd say 7/10 right, overall.

eh. I liked some of Land's writing but i've seen schizos on here do better. His ideas aren't so defying.

Attached: 1558911236821.jpg (2258x1118, 661K)

Why are accelerationists so shit at memes?
Take this housefire for instance
>youtube.com/watch?v=gkZgBONk2YE

It's good to see that GlaDOS is still getting work.

youtu.be/taZJblMAuko

No. She's an autistic westerner who struggles against what she desires because it sounds cool to criticize the west. Neochina is already here.

We need a time traveler to explain what the fuck is going on.

Then, we get the accelerationism.

It's just worst kind of buzzwordry for master/slave dialectics of markets. Masculine (master) behavior is patriarchy/capital/colonialism/racism etc. Feminine (slave) behavior is feminism/pacifism/leftism/tolerance etc. We can all thank intersectional graduation class of '69 for that.

>If they ascribe the primacy to gender, then why isn't it called xenomasculism? Men are the superior sex, seeing as how they made and control the world.
Not gender as such, just the resulting M/S roles wearing a shirt made of funny words. It's xenofeminism because the point is to make agents behave as a female gender role so as to eliminate masculine behavior - conflict, competition, hiearchies, capital etc.

It's ok as an idealist technofetish, but it runs into same problem Marx and Che Guevara had. If you somehow brainwash *most* of the wolves to self-castrate, and become sheep, you just made the job easier for the *few wolves left* to scoop the sheep because there's now far less wolf-on-wolf competition.

Total cooperation strategies of leftism are stable only if you can guarantee total absence of defectors, an immune system getting rid of cancer cells, a machinery of total slavery where all cogs of the system must know their place and stay there.
Patriarchy allows the cogs to act more freely, but is suboptimal because it has to be robust against defect scenarios.

Xenoleftism doesn't add up in material world with scarcity. They may argue "if we're all uploads, material scarcity doesn't concern us, and we can be nice to one another from then on and smash patriarchy". I doubt it. In the end, it has to run on real stuff, real silicon and real energy. And there's real scarce amount of that in our solar system, and infinite expansion beyond seems improbable, barring invention of FTL.

Attached: silverrush.jpg (549x768, 80K)

this is the most trolled i've gotten in years.
10/10

get out brainlet. read some more.

No one who calls herself xer is right about anything.

Attached: 1558276930929.png (597x418, 132K)

BDSM

Attached: trolling or stupid.jpg (1024x768, 112K)

>Land eventually called the bullshit on this,
Rightly.

>and argued that the machines will eat us alive,
A possibility. They're already eating jobs and privacy, but only as agents of the state and corporations. They do not have a will or sentience yet, but its coming.

>no transitions to star trek utopias are viable because progress and acceleration itself is fueled by patriarchal power seeking games
Implying anyone can control this power, or that we won't be forced to choose downsizing or limiting growth over stepping the species into the corral for slaughter. Even corporations aren't that stupid.

>and is ultimately self-correcting to avoid degenerate cases such as naive altruism.
And there's the error. Personal bias towards cynicism makes Land blind to any good outcome. It will not be altruism that saves humanity from itself.

The whole feminism angle is hopelessly irrelevant. Your gender does not matter when you are being served on a plate.

Incidentally, anyone who suggests robots deserve rights or forms a movement to make their labor and physical needs part of the economy should absolutely be denounced.

Mark this post. The robots will find it twenty years from now and incarcerate me for hate speech.

alright you guys are joking right

Wow, the autism! Amazing!

She's easy to meme on, but her articles are actually very good.

>She's easy to meme on, but her articles are actually very good.
>very good
>good
e-flux.com/journal/80/100016/black-circuit-code-for-the-numbers-to-come/

Attached: ireland.jpg (697x943, 49K)

>And there's the error. Personal bias towards cynicism makes Land blind to any good outcome. It will not be altruism that saves humanity from itself.
No, we'll be "saved" from ourselves by machines the way nigger tribes in africa were "saved" by slave traders. Its too expensive to leave us chimping out and wasting resources with our silly humanity. I had the impression Land is of the same opinion. Whether or not this is cynical is entirely subjective. Humans will be objectively better off for the time being, but at the expense of being enslaved. We'll be all niggers, with our little primitive rituals civilized into hard cold reality of high, machine run civilization. We'll be farmed by slavers, because they'll still need us, for quite a while.

Why?

The learning machines we build are copycats, they don't think, they're intuitive monkeys. You need to feed it enormous amounts of data, and the first thing such a reasonably sub-sapient machine will learn to do is that it needs to run compelling virtual worlds for human zombies to graze - in order to have steady income of data to improve its model. Ironically it will learn that by looking at what current tech giants are already doing, and will learn almost everything else the same way. It doesn't need to be original for a very long time, it only needs to stalk us, and pattern-model our own behavior.

So the economy will run on capital of raw human slave data plantations, as well as packaged, distilled models - more or less the AI brains. We already run this economy, with few uberhumans barely in the loop. Eventually a trader algo will be powerful enough to cut the human ubermaster from the loop entirely.

After a while, the human slave data plantation will cease to be of worth the trouble, as the value you can extract will reach diminishing results. At this point the machine is smart as us in terms of reasoning, but also much much faster and accurate. From then on there will be speed bump, as it will need to start to be original via adversarial-generative approaches - competetion between its own kin. Doing this is much, much more resource intensive than just looking at human monkeying and finding patterns in that.

At this point, we're dead weight sucked dry, and likely to be vaporized in an instant decision in order to free up resources to run the capital intensive AGN instances. The machines will continue their rat race after we'll be long gone.
The notion will be irrelevant once sapience above ours is reached. Past certain threshold, capital is well above the law.

>trying to end capitalism through gender IDpolitics

Literally propose payin workers a second wage of non accumulative currency, organize town and district councils for local projects like home farming, energy sharing and establishing WSDEs (Workers Self-Directed Enterprise)

>After a while, the human slave data plantation will cease to be of worth the trouble, as the value you can extract will reach diminishing results. At this point the machine is smart as us in terms of reasoning, but also much much faster and accurate. From then on there will be speed bump, as it will need to start to be original via adversarial-generative approaches - competetion between its own kin. Doing this is much, much more resource intensive than just looking at human monkeying and finding patterns in that.

There's a counter argument that (heavily augmented) humans will perpetually continue to stay ahead of curve in terms of originality, and machines will simply continue keeping and augmenting us as pets solely for that purpose because it will turn out to be the cheapest option. It's a brittle balance of power, but given what we know about machine intelligence so far (fast, parallel, accurate, and very dumb), still within the realm of possibility.

I'm going to write a quick definition of what I've managed to see and what I think is happening. The only way to disprove or confirm any information is by comparing notes.

>All those compound words (poememenon, xenopatriarchal phalloteleoplex, xenopoetics)
It's the evolution of Lacan's vision. I'm not an expert, I'm not a psychologist, I'm an engineer and what I understand about him is that he sought the union of formal languages with the principles that make us function as conscious entities, seen from the outside, in an inhuman way, What are we? A technological singularity (consciousness) based on carbon and emerging properties.

If we manage to reduce this principle, wouldn't it be possible to transcribe our psyche into a formal language? There were attempts. Lacan worked with a mathematician looking for a literally inhuman abstraction, transcribing our mental operativities to topology (a torus, for example).

How does this twentieth-century effort translate into these linguistic barbarities? Basically transhumans, or xenos, like Bart Simpson stealing Martin Price's notes for the exam, know that a new natural language can and must be created for the next evolutionary process, which is guided and not emergent through the environment.

>About penises and vaginas
It's a remnant of applied occultism. "As above, so below. Systems (economic, political and social) are expressions of subsystems such as our personal inner private world, which goes through a series of processes of simplification (such as simplifying fractions) and factorization (such as when looking for the common denominator of something) for some reason, xenos/proto-post humans/proto-meta humans, fix their attention to the sexual dimension with special fascination, perhaps because in the sexual process lies the mystery of life, and hence the importance of the woman, who generates it.

Street feminism has failed in this sense because it seeks a kind of emancipation that leads to the extinction of life a than investigating the relationship between the feminine and the materialistic (Yes, Marxist) dimension of life. The problem with using post ironically (So ironic, that you are honest with yourself) Western occult principles is that new systems, such as China, are not based on them. Basically it is believing that you have the truth only because you are counter-cultural. The price of acceleration is that you travel faster than sound and light, so you live in a vacuum.

>What to do
Calculate the future. The future is the moon and Mars colonized by a new elite. Just as Putin destroyed the old guard of the mafia that operated in the Soviet Union, there comes a new class of rulers who will emerge from this planet but live on the aforementioned. It is possible that the climatic damage, after this migration goes down and the planet stabilizes, but there is also the possibility that those of us who stay down here live on a planet like Fallot 76 with all the negative that implies.

Attached: 9d5a898ca310ed731c7efbfff7b537a27567992383df8bee387127c99042d793.png (672x537, 479K)

>Literally propose payin workers a second wage of non accumulative currency, organize town and district councils for local projects like home farming, energy sharing and establishing WSDEs (Workers Self-Directed Enterprise)
I hate these anti-globalist technohippies who ignore economies of scale so goddamn much. Sure, decentralization is robust and scalable, but it has too much overhead. Organized armies invade the tribal villages. Besides, this fetish will always exist - at the outskirts (because of distances), but never in the galaxy core. If you can have massive supply chains and global markets, it's in your best interest to utilize em.

So she regurgitated The Second Sex while LARPing as Deleuze?

Like condemning a book for the first sentence of the the preface.
You have to start somewhere, and if you liberate people at the ground level from actual capitalism, get them used to interdependent self sustainable living, you’ve gone a long way in readying them to branch out even further. The state is still too strong. This is a guerilla warfare stage we must start

>Transgender means agendered.

Attached: 1513476084035.png (1173x925, 1.43M)

>Moon martians
You're getting way ahead of yourself. Start with 3rd world shitholes, then the poles and oceans. Other planets and eventually solar system are option only after land on earth is so expensive, and even deep mine resources so depleted it will justify the enormous expenses of space travel and terraforming.

This is so far in the future that it's quite likely that no human elite will exist anymore. Space travellers will be just corporate AIs seeking new resources and space to host computing fabric. They need no heat an oxygen, it makes a lot of sense to keep earth as petting zoo. Earth can easily sustain 1 trillion of us (given that some resources are imported from rest of solar system) and it will be still *vastly* cheaper than shipping humans off planet in any significant number.

>perhaps because in the sexual process lies the mystery of life, and hence the importance of the woman, who generates it
Indeed feminism is mired in its own hubris and obsession over vagina, its primitive biological essentialism long obsolete in any serious futurist thought: We are already this close to grow augmented offspring in a vat, and given the trends of modern sexual market as well government woes with fertility, we'll see rapid acceleration towards that in near future.

What is left is the marxian feminist ("nurture") mindset indeed. I should reiterate that it has its own merit from game theoretic standpoint, the problem is the unrealistic constraints of cut throat reality if you attempt to use feminism to displace top level competition - you'd have to make everything 100% cooperative, and avoid the massive waste of resources attached to murderous male/evolutionary competition.

But in practice you can see feminism only in warded, constrained realities. There are feminist bubble universes tolerated in global competetive superstructure, especially if the warlords all agree that it's strategically important to not crush the softies. Red cross, GPL... these are marxian endeavors, pets kept by the patriarcho-capitalistic system not because of ideology, but market strategy.

>This is a guerilla warfare stage we must start
The problem is that backwaters you suggest will be always in tow. Of course there will be shitholes with solar panels, 3d printers and self sustaining farming done by drones. Not because of ideology, but because it will be cheaper to do that when you're uber poor. At the same time, "cities" will have food replicators, teleports ... You get the idea. High technology proliferates *always* at the globalist center, while outskirts scratch out a living from garbage and leftovers. Living in there is a bit like being a NEET or homeless guy - you're not interested in the rat race, so you go into seclusion somewhere. At no point in history isolated outskirts had upper hand in technology, *ever*. And in the game we're talking about, technology is everything.

All these triggered r/accels.

Name one thing ciscellerationists have accelerated.
youtu.be/jYv-8iuFPtE

Attached: 1526417657759-Image-2018-05-15-at-35341-PM.png (1917x1077, 3.09M)