A critical reading might turn to me and say: “You’re going on and on about capitalism creating an environment of uncertainty, through a price-system which has speculation as its foundation, in this first post of yours.” (An Opening Salvo About Uncertainty)
“And yet you’re a “spiritualist,” what could stress uncertainty more than your deus absconditus? Way back in the 16th century Martin Luther emphasized that “faith is a restless thing,” and that doubt goes hand in hand with belief. This is now a dogmatic position of non-dogmatic Christians. God, too, is based on uncertainty as much as any phenomenon or process, as you might say.
“Not mention Science, which is obsessed with what certainty means. The scientific method is about training oneself to be uncertain, about fostering doubt in order to gain knowledge.
“Uncertainty is a common part of most complex concepts, yes, it’s almost as if conceptualization itself operates with a necessary level of uncertainty. From an ultimate point of view, indeed, this would need to be the case, because if you’re certain about something you don’t ask questions. . .In some kind of EvPsych/descent of consciousness image, you could say it as we wouldn’t know anything if we already knew.
“So, in conclusion, your point about uncertainty and capitalism (An Opening Salvo About Uncertainty), as a contrarian riff against the centrality of “competition” to the market’s functioning, this may well have been an interesting point to you as an isolated statement comparing motivating factors, but it’s only true in a general sense, and therefore its explanatory power about capitalism in particular is trivial.”
And yet I had you convinced for a second. Merely because the sentences tried for a poetic flair, and the over-the-top delivery didn’t waste its time with citations or quotes? No, I had you convinced because I was right. But what was I even arguing for? Oh yes, I claimed I would elaborate a new form of production, a higher form of production.
I have called the path to this higher form of production anarcho-spiritualism. I will probably turn against and reject that term later once vulgar interpretations distort its intended effect beyond any meaningful usage, but for now I am inclined to use this hyphenated beast of a label, because it holds my ideas as a container. It holds my ideas as a water heater contains a shower.
The point is not to get attached to the term, or any term or label, because the term is just a pointing, always just a symbol pointing to actual human experience.
And what is the actual human experience underlying anarcho-spiritualism? — Why it is the essential building project that I’ve proposed.
This is what I’m traveling around selling this summer, at art festivals and state fairs and whoever else will have me.
I decided to start blogging so I’m not too backed up with my own thoughts to really listen to people I meet at these upcoming events, to really truly listen as best as I can, which is the intention I have set for essential building project promotional shows.
And when a blog needs flexible focus, what better than a new ism to center it, attracting some people and turning off others with this new ism, half-bullshitty-sounding and half-kind-of-interesting-actually-sounding, sort of technical in its use and sort of out of the blue and not connected to any theoretical camp.
So there it is, anarcho-spiritualism, it’s perfect for manifestoes. It’s pretty much plug and play, just say the words and manifestoes appear. Blogs sprout up along with them, like little zines with no dignity. Well, so be it. So it goes being an anarcho-spiritualist upstart.
I’m aiming for the truth, not to prove my own dignity, and so I will just keep attempting to narrow in on that. If you’ll let me just talk it out for a minute, I will explain the principles of this essential building project. Then you can tell me what I’m wrong about, and what I overlooked, and how you would do it differently. I am eager to listen.