CPAC had some actual Deconstruction unlike Bannon's riff on nationalist deregulation
"Bannon is a near-constant presence every time cameras cover a Trump press conference or follow the president into the Oval Office. He has gained a place on the “principals committee” of the National Security Council, elevating him above the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and the director of national intelligence."
Kumbaya in the bunker ...
Steve Bannon and Reince Priebus appeared in a joint interview at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) outside Washington, D.C. and the former provided a glimpse of the crypto-fascist mentality that informs POTUS45* and his White House.
It was quite unlike the pageant queen’s interview segment where “world peace” was the main goal for a winner or her runner-up.
Lord Dampnut is now clearly a cipher for Bannon’s Fourth Turning / Clash of Civilizations mania and functions as the national CEO in between rounds of golf. POTUS45* is Bannon’s alternative, alt-fact, media factotum, available to cut the ribbon at the launching of any car dealership.
Bannon’s goal: a Mad Max economy
Bannon’s racist minarchy aims to forward an American version of the “End of Times” in Alexandr Dugin’s Fourth Political Theory. Crony capitalism and kleptocracy will benefit from the chaos and catastrophies that result from implementing those theories.
Bannonism is more about deregulation rather than deconstruction
Bannonian nationalism privileges one ethnicity over all others and is based on an anti-scientific ignorance based on primitive supremacy of the sort promulgated by neo-fascist political parties. It specifies a permanent war between Dominionist and Islamic caliphates.
Bannonism projects a similar economic model of racial conflict onto nationalist trade wars which oversimplifies bilateralism in order to benefit ruling class wealth. It does it at the cost of social welfare that would be more optimal under multilateralism. Advantage is never comparative.
The result of destroying rather than deconstructing the administrative state is designed to profit from its destruction while advancing the goals of (ad)venture capitalist warlords. It is Malthusianism complete with prepper bunkers.
This is less creative destruction than a misanthropic chaos designed to return the global economy to some infomercialized feudalism. Bannonism’s fatal flaw lies in misunderstanding the political goals of deconstruction and enslaving it to a totalized discourse of racial superiority, resembling some defeated historical models. Since his goal is short-term capitalist profit, Bitcoin is even more of a deconstructive economic program than what Bannon wants to achieve, making his prescriptions in their reified form, crypto-fascist in its goals.
It’s not deconstruction as much as it is appropriating institutions, aided by demolishing (via deregulation) their income-distributional mechanisms for greater class wealth resulting in greater inequality. With undeconstructed profit it’s like starting a riot to disguise a bank robbery. Corporations will survive the deconstruction, so it’s no deconstruction as it is re-centralizing the administrative state for totalitarian control.
Lord Dampnut, his junk food, and nuclear trigger are on a perpetual golf vacation punctuated by ceremonial moments celebrated by mass media but with little relevance to the diminution of public policy and in favor of the privatizing the greater good.
But tensions were clear as Dan Schneider, leader of the American Conservative Union, took the stage to denounce the “alt-right”, the rebranding of the far right that has been accused of racism, Islamophobia and neo-Nazism. “There is a sinister organization that is trying to worm its way into our ranks and we must not be duped,” he told the audience.
A short distance away, outside the main hall, the prominent white nationalist Richard Spencer, wearing a general admission badge, told reporters that he “coined the term” alt-right and rejected Schneider’s criticism.
Asked if he feels he now has an ally in the White House, Spencer said: “In terms of Donald Trump, I would say that it’s not so much that he’s alt-right, it’s that he’s a nationalist and a populist and so he’s connected to us on that basic level. He doesn’t articulate our ideas – he’s not an identarian – but his arrow points in our direction.”
STEVE BANNON: And Matt, I want to thank you for finally inviting me to CPAC.
(LAUGHTER)
MATT SCHLAPP: Yeah, there's no -- the -- what was the name of the -- the...
BANNON: The uninvited.
----------—
...BANNON: But -- but -- I think -- let's go back to the point that Reince made for a second. President Trump, when he was running, he made a -- and this is the other thing that the -- the mainstream media or opposition party never caught is that if you want to see the Trump agenda it's very simple.
It was all in the speeches. He went around to these rallies, but those speeches had a tremendous amount of content in them, right? I happen to believe, and I think many others do, he's probably the great public speaker in those large arenas since William Jennings Bryan. This was galvanized.
------------
Just like they were dead wrong on the chaos of the campaign and just like they were dead wrong in the chaos of the transition, they are absolutely dead wrong about what's going on today because we have a team that's just grinding it through on President Donald Trump promised the American people. And the mainstream media better understand something, all of those promises are going to be implemented.
-----------
BANNON: I think the -- I think the same thing; I think if you look at the lines of work, I kind of break it up into three verticals of three buckets.
The first is kind of national security and sovereignty and that's your intelligence, the Defense Department, Homeland Security.
The second line of work is what I refer to as economic nationalism and that is Wilbur Ross at Commerce, Steven Mnuchin at Treasury, Lighthizer at -- at Trade, Peter Navarro, Stephen Miller, these people that are rethinking how we're gonna reconstruct the -- our trade arrangements around the world.
The third, broadly, line of work is what is deconstruction of the administrative state. And if you...
(APPLAUSE)
So I think -- I think the three most important things, I think one of the most pivotal moments in modern American history was his immediate withdraw from TPP. That got us out of a...
(APPLAUSE)
... got us out of a trade deal and let our sovereignty come back to ourselves, the people, the mainstream media don't get this, but we're already working in consultation with the Hill. People are starting to think through a whole raft of amazing and innovative, bilateral relationships -- bilateral trading relationships with people that will reposition America in the world as a -- as a fair trading nation and start to bring jobs. High value added, manufacturing jobs, back to the United States of America.
On the -- on the national security part, it was certainly the first -- I think the first two E.O.s that you start to see implemented here of the last couple of days under General Kelly. And that is, do rule of law is going to exist when you talk about our sovereignty and you talk about immigration. General Kelly...
(APPLAUSE)
... and Attorney General Sessions are adamant -- you know, that and you're gonna start to see I think with the defense budget we're going to talk about next week when we bring the budget out and also with certain things about the plan on ISIS and what General Mattis and these guys think I think you'll start to see the other part of that.
But the third, this regulation...
SCHLAPP: Yeah.
BANNON: ... every business leader we've had in is saying not just taxes, but it is -- it is also the regulation. I think the consistent, if you look at these Cabinet appointees, they were selected for a reason and that is the deconstruction, the way the progressive left runs, is if they can't get it passed, they're just gonna put in some sort of regulation in -- in an agency.
That's all gonna be deconstructed and I think that that's why this regulatory thing is so important.
---------
BANNON: You know, I've said that there's a new political order that's being formed out of this. And it's still being formed. But if you look at the wide degree of opinions in this room — we have wide and sometimes divergent opinions.
whether you're a populist;
whether you're a limited government conservative;
whether you're libertarian;
whether you're an economic nationalist --
BANNON: But I think we -- the center core of what we believe, that we're a nation with an economy, not an economy just in some global marketplace with open borders, but we are a nation with a culture and a -- and a reason for being.
And I think that is what unites us and I think that is what is going to unite this movement going forward. President Trump tomorrow is coming I think really to express his appreciation.
but you still want to get paid Steve, so you’re really a state capitalist
Bannon’s use of “deconstruction” is meant to impress Spencer without the usual punch in the head, when its application in this context is meant simply as negation whereupon smashing the American administrative state would be amusing if that was the actual goal, Leninist or not.
In Bannonism it is more structural in the sense of gaining capitalist value / building wealth which, as crony kleptocracy is more revisionist than radical in objective, hence it is less deconstruction and more demolition in the service of deregulatory profit — for each DeVos and Perry you have Goldman Sachs and Exxon/Mobil.
(Thomassen, 2010) As I have tried to argue, a deconstruction is an intervention and does not leave its object intact, nor is deconstruction itself left intact by its particular uses. Rather, deconstruction is rearticulated each time it is used; it “is” through its particular uses, and it can always be put to new uses,so what it “is” is never stable. We should think of deconstruction in terms of rearticulation. It is not a set of procedures or techniques to be applied, as if it were a given method applied to an object from the outside. Rather, we are dealing with a relation of rearticulation, where deconstruction as a method is not given prior to its particular uses. Or, if we were to use the term application,we would have to say that it is aporetic: on one hand, deconstruction cannot be applied because it is not given as a method prior to its applications; on the other hand, deconstruction can only be applied because it only exists through its particular applications, and does not exist independently of these (Derrida 1996, 218).4 The relationship between deconstruction as a theory or method and its particular uses is one of both exteriority and interiority. On the one hand, each use of deconstruction cannot simply be subsumed under an existing definition of deconstruction; on the other hand, “each deconstructive ‘event’ remains singular” (Derrida 2008, 4) and redefines what deconstruction is.
an irresolvable internal contradiction or logical disjunction in a text, argument, or theory. "the celebrated aporia whereby a Cretan declares all Cretans to be liars"
My brother sent me an article from libertarian Lew Rockwell which basically blamed all our (their) problems on the left. The way the left has infiltrated colleges, universities, all aspects of society, forcing everyone else to live according to their rules, laws.
Much like how many on the left blame everything on the right. I of course disagree that the left is to blame for everything but his main point was instead of continuing with this foolish central authority government over 330 million people with the left and right continually fighting for ideological supremacy, why not trash the whole thing and go our separate ways?
Maybe he's got a point with that.
It's either that or sit down and start from the beginning. I'm not sure there can ever be a happy medium. I was thinking about continuing this conversation with my brother, who is very open minded.
Maybe start with:
"Ok, do you think we should have stop signs?
work for him. And D45 has a life history of being drawn to the corrupt and greedy, like himself. But he's really picked a doozy this time, At least the Russians and the Mafia don't want to help bring on the 'end times'.
up
0 users have voted.
—
I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks
Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa
@Amanda Matthews
Excellent essay even though it was about a very dispiriting turn of events in our culture.
One key message here, made very effectively, which I will eloquently abbreviate (without criticism of the writer) is: Trump bad, Bannon badder.
I enjoyed learning a new word here: aporia. This is something of which I am often guilty.
Now for the sophistry in Bannon's analysis, if it indeed is his:
As I have tried to argue, a deconstruction is an intervention and does not leave its object intact, nor is deconstruction itself left intact by its particular uses. Rather, deconstruction is rearticulated each time it is used; it “is” through its particular uses, and it can always be put to new uses,so what it “is” is never stable. We should think of deconstruction in terms of rearticulation. It is not a set of procedures or techniques to be applied, as if it were a given method applied to an object from the outside. Rather, we are dealing with a relation of rearticulation, where deconstruction as a method is not given prior to its particular uses. Or, if we were to use the term application,we would have to say that it is aporetic: on one hand, deconstruction cannot be applied because it is not given as a method prior to its applications; on the other hand, deconstruction can only be applied because it only exists through its particular applications, and does not exist independently of these (Derrida 1996, 218).4 The relationship between deconstruction as a theory or method and its particular uses is one of both exteriority and interiority. On the one hand, each use of deconstruction cannot simply be subsumed under an existing definition of deconstruction; on the other hand, “each deconstructive ‘event’ remains singular” (Derrida 2008, 4) and redefines what deconstruction is.
Is this talk of deconstruction's definition like description of the eraser on a pencil as being the sum of the constituent shreds after use? That is a very poor suggestion. Would one try to describe the idea of "human" by of necessity describing each individual human? No. Deconstruction IS destruction, no matter what obfuscation is used to hide that truth. To deconstruct by definition one must take apart something which has already been constructed. It is thus destruction, no matter how accomplished.
Detection of political sophistry is actually becoming easier these days because of the greater availability of informational sources.
Trump is actively engaged in the destruction of America, most recently continued by Obama with more AUMF's and Patriot Act subversion of the Bill of Rights. His followers either are still hopeful that he will live up to his populist campaign rhetoric or already are jockeying for more pieces of the action.
work for him. And D45 has a life history of being drawn to the corrupt and greedy, like himself. But he's really picked a doozy this time, At least the Russians and the Mafia don't want to help bring on the 'end times'.
EDIT: saw I mispelled (or autocorrect screwed me once again) the word 'word'.
#2 Excellent essay even though it was about a very dispiriting turn of events in our culture.
One key message here, made very effectively, which I will eloquently abbreviate (without criticism of the writer) is: Trump bad, Bannon badder.
I enjoyed learning a new word here: aporia. This is something of which I am often guilty.
Now for the sophistry in Bannon's analysis, if it indeed is his:
As I have tried to argue, a deconstruction is an intervention and does not leave its object intact, nor is deconstruction itself left intact by its particular uses. Rather, deconstruction is rearticulated each time it is used; it “is” through its particular uses, and it can always be put to new uses,so what it “is” is never stable. We should think of deconstruction in terms of rearticulation. It is not a set of procedures or techniques to be applied, as if it were a given method applied to an object from the outside. Rather, we are dealing with a relation of rearticulation, where deconstruction as a method is not given prior to its particular uses. Or, if we were to use the term application,we would have to say that it is aporetic: on one hand, deconstruction cannot be applied because it is not given as a method prior to its applications; on the other hand, deconstruction can only be applied because it only exists through its particular applications, and does not exist independently of these (Derrida 1996, 218).4 The relationship between deconstruction as a theory or method and its particular uses is one of both exteriority and interiority. On the one hand, each use of deconstruction cannot simply be subsumed under an existing definition of deconstruction; on the other hand, “each deconstructive ‘event’ remains singular” (Derrida 2008, 4) and redefines what deconstruction is.
Is this talk of deconstruction's definition like description of the eraser on a pencil as being the sum of the constituent shreds after use? That is a very poor suggestion. Would one try to describe the idea of "human" by of necessity describing each individual human? No. Deconstruction IS destruction, no matter what obfuscation is used to hide that truth. To deconstruct by definition one must take apart something which has already been constructed. It is thus destruction, no matter how accomplished.
Detection of political sophistry is actually becoming easier these days because of the greater availability of informational sources.
Trump is actively engaged in the destruction of America, most recently continued by Obama with more AUMF's and Patriot Act subversion of the Bill of Rights. His followers either are still hopeful that he will live up to his populist campaign rhetoric or already are jockeying for more pieces of the action.
up
0 users have voted.
—
I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks
Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa
As I read through Bannon, I thought of my dad saying "the bigger they are, the harder they fall." And Bannon is making himself very big. On regulations, those were created in many cases to save lives and I cringe to think of the US without them. But Bannon's here to advance the apocalypse and anything he can do to hasten it is fine with him.
To put it mildly he does not look as if he is in good health and neither does Trump. They are not exactly physically fit, haha!
@MarilynW
than money. Big words are too, but then you have to listen, what a pain. Images you can't avoid to look at, even if you try not to.
I don't like all the noisy image stuff anymore, but then I alwasy close my eyes one second too late. That's what everybody knows and counts on. I am European and that's what the Bannons and Spencers know. They incite allergic reactions to their provocations in Europeans, so that they later have a reason to "trash us and beat us". Toxic embraces by our American friends. Rumsfeld started it. Clintons had hidden their love affairs with us Europeans. Obama just didn't care and kissed everybody. ok.
I need a nap.
Stop that shit.
As I read through Bannon, I thought of my dad saying "the bigger they are, the harder they fall." And Bannon is making himself very big. On regulations, those were created in many cases to save lives and I cringe to think of the US without them. But Bannon's here to advance the apocalypse and anything he can do to hasten it is fine with him.
To put it mildly he does not look as if he is in good health and neither does Trump. They are not exactly physically fit, haha!
"Lord Dampnut, his junk food, and nuclear trigger are on a perpetual golf vacation punctuated by ceremonial moments celebrated by mass media but with little relevance to the diminution of public policy and in favor of the privatizing the greater good."
up
0 users have voted.
—
"I can't understand why people are frightened of new ideas. I'm frightened of the old ones."
John Cage
Bannon thinks he's real sly with our language, but he's actually a dunce. Mebbe all these FRightwingnuts will eat each other alive. Hope I live long enuff to watch it. Rec'd!!
One suggestion is that you can drop crypto from crypto-fascist. Bush and Cheney, who many disavowed as insufficiently conservative, at least tried to play along. The current crew are fascists. I have no problem talking about the nazis in the white house.
Your analysis highlighted that current efforts are more state capitalism and kleptocracy than deconstruction. Bannon's invocation of Lenin is obviously divorced from reality. Lenin and the Bolsheviks overthrew tsarist rule. Bannon and company seek to reverse democratic progress and expedite the institution of a new feudalism.
Beyond the state capitalism, I want to highlight the power of irrationality that you alluded to. There is an unshakeable belief present among many that we are in the midst of a good versus evil clash of cultures and civilizations. Even if their economic aspirations fail, they are determined to combat secularism, Islam and any other unholy entity or organization. This is on top of their belief in the persecution of white men, who they fervently credit for all of the progress of humankind. All of the gains of minorities and women are seen as zero sum, with white men having to suffer. They do not see the growing inequality and increased automation as significant factors.
Even if leaders are entirely driven by economic greed, many followers completely believe the great lies. Many will fight to the end, and they expect their leaders to lead the charge.
@greenandblue
Correction, I do have problem talking about nazis in the white house. I don't have a problem calling them what they are.
One suggestion is that you can drop crypto from crypto-fascist. Bush and Cheney, who many disavowed as insufficiently conservative, at least tried to play along. The current crew are fascists. I have no problem talking about the nazis in the white house.
Your analysis highlighted that current efforts are more state capitalism and kleptocracy than deconstruction. Bannon's invocation of Lenin is obviously divorced from reality. Lenin and the Bolsheviks overthrew tsarist rule. Bannon and company seek to reverse democratic progress and expedite the institution of a new feudalism.
Beyond the state capitalism, I want to highlight the power of irrationality that you alluded to. There is an unshakeable belief present among many that we are in the midst of a good versus evil clash of cultures and civilizations. Even if their economic aspirations fail, they are determined to combat secularism, Islam and any other unholy entity or organization. This is on top of their belief in the persecution of white men, who they fervently credit for all of the progress of humankind. All of the gains of minorities and women are seen as zero sum, with white men having to suffer. They do not see the growing inequality and increased automation as significant factors.
Even if leaders are entirely driven by economic greed, many followers completely believe the great lies. Many will fight to the end, and they expect their leaders to lead the charge.
Comments
Whackos.
My brother sent me an article from libertarian Lew Rockwell which basically blamed all our (their) problems on the left. The way the left has infiltrated colleges, universities, all aspects of society, forcing everyone else to live according to their rules, laws.
Much like how many on the left blame everything on the right. I of course disagree that the left is to blame for everything but his main point was instead of continuing with this foolish central authority government over 330 million people with the left and right continually fighting for ideological supremacy, why not trash the whole thing and go our separate ways?
Maybe he's got a point with that.
It's either that or sit down and start from the beginning. I'm not sure there can ever be a happy medium. I was thinking about continuing this conversation with my brother, who is very open minded.
Maybe start with:
"Ok, do you think we should have stop signs?
Dolt 45 has to have someone to do his thinking and dirty
work for him. And D45 has a life history of being drawn to the corrupt and greedy, like himself. But he's really picked a doozy this time, At least the Russians and the Mafia don't want to help bring on the 'end times'.
I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks
Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa
Aporia, deconstruction and sophistry.
Excellent essay even though it was about a very dispiriting turn of events in our culture.
One key message here, made very effectively, which I will eloquently abbreviate (without criticism of the writer) is: Trump bad, Bannon badder.
I enjoyed learning a new word here: aporia. This is something of which I am often guilty.
Now for the sophistry in Bannon's analysis, if it indeed is his:
Is this talk of deconstruction's definition like description of the eraser on a pencil as being the sum of the constituent shreds after use? That is a very poor suggestion. Would one try to describe the idea of "human" by of necessity describing each individual human? No. Deconstruction IS destruction, no matter what obfuscation is used to hide that truth. To deconstruct by definition one must take apart something which has already been constructed. It is thus destruction, no matter how accomplished.
Detection of political sophistry is actually becoming easier these days because of the greater availability of informational sources.
Trump is actively engaged in the destruction of America, most recently continued by Obama with more AUMF's and Patriot Act subversion of the Bill of Rights. His followers either are still hopeful that he will live up to his populist campaign rhetoric or already are jockeying for more pieces of the action.
Ah! Gobbledygook word salad.
EDIT: saw I mispelled (or autocorrect screwed me once again) the word 'word'.
I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks
Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa
Great post, annieli.
Thank you.
Thank you for the comprehensive essay
As I read through Bannon, I thought of my dad saying "the bigger they are, the harder they fall." And Bannon is making himself very big. On regulations, those were created in many cases to save lives and I cringe to think of the US without them. But Bannon's here to advance the apocalypse and anything he can do to hasten it is fine with him.
To put it mildly he does not look as if he is in good health and neither does Trump. They are not exactly physically fit, haha!
To thine own self be true.
the cameras are more powerful bribery tools
than money. Big words are too, but then you have to listen, what a pain. Images you can't avoid to look at, even if you try not to.
I don't like all the noisy image stuff anymore, but then I alwasy close my eyes one second too late. That's what everybody knows and counts on. I am European and that's what the Bannons and Spencers know. They incite allergic reactions to their provocations in Europeans, so that they later have a reason to "trash us and beat us". Toxic embraces by our American friends. Rumsfeld started it. Clintons had hidden their love affairs with us Europeans. Obama just didn't care and kissed everybody. ok.
I need a nap.
Stop that shit.
https://www.euronews.com/
Best line I've read all week...
"I can't understand why people are frightened of new ideas. I'm frightened of the old ones."
John Cage
Deconstruction is another way of saying destruction.
Bannon thinks he's real sly with our language, but he's actually a dunce. Mebbe all these FRightwingnuts will eat each other alive. Hope I live long enuff to watch it.
Rec'd!!
Inner and Outer Space: the Final Frontiers.
Thanks for the insightful analysis
One suggestion is that you can drop crypto from crypto-fascist. Bush and Cheney, who many disavowed as insufficiently conservative, at least tried to play along. The current crew are fascists. I have no problem talking about the nazis in the white house.
Your analysis highlighted that current efforts are more state capitalism and kleptocracy than deconstruction. Bannon's invocation of Lenin is obviously divorced from reality. Lenin and the Bolsheviks overthrew tsarist rule. Bannon and company seek to reverse democratic progress and expedite the institution of a new feudalism.
Beyond the state capitalism, I want to highlight the power of irrationality that you alluded to. There is an unshakeable belief present among many that we are in the midst of a good versus evil clash of cultures and civilizations. Even if their economic aspirations fail, they are determined to combat secularism, Islam and any other unholy entity or organization. This is on top of their belief in the persecution of white men, who they fervently credit for all of the progress of humankind. All of the gains of minorities and women are seen as zero sum, with white men having to suffer. They do not see the growing inequality and increased automation as significant factors.
Even if leaders are entirely driven by economic greed, many followers completely believe the great lies. Many will fight to the end, and they expect their leaders to lead the charge.
@greenandblue Correction, I do have
Correction, I do have problem talking about nazis in the white house. I don't have a problem calling them what they are.