Hyperstition Notes: On Amy Ireland

Amy Ireland has taken up where the CCRU 90’s cyberpositive cultural remix left off, delving into the techno occulture of that era’s dark hyperstitions. In her latest essay on The Poememenon: Form as Occult Technology she explores the diagrammatic production of thought as hyperstitional invocation. Of course in my own research it is in the work of Félix Guattari that this a-signifying production of thought will have its revisioning origins within those singular and plural texts both private and combined with those of Gilles Deleuze from Anti-Oedipus onward until his untimely death. In Amy’s rendition she charts the realms defined and explored by the CCRU Unit and the modernity influx of literature, philosophy, and the occulture of this strange world.

Before exploring Amy’s essay let’s delve into the diagrammatic thought of Guattari. The concept of the diagram appears in A Thousand Plateaus (ATP 141- 144 ,531 n. 41/176-1 80, 177 n. 3 8), but the details of its development are found in Guattari’s writings of the 1970s. The notion was adapted from Charles Sanders Peirce, who includes the diagram among the icons in his index-icon-symbol model of the sign. Peirce identifies three types of icon: image, metaphor, and diagram. For him, the icon operates through a relation of resemblance between the sign and its referent. Guattari would agree that the image and the metaphor signify through resemblance, which is to say representation, but his version of the diagram functions differently because as he defines it, the diagram does not signify; it is “a-signifying”.1

Already in his notes for Anti-Oedipus, Guattari senses that Peirce’s diagram is somehow special, that it unleashes “de territorialized polyvocity,” that it must be understood as distinct from the image because the diagram is a site of production (AOP 72 , 214, 243-245/97 ,308 ,346-349). He continues reflecting on the powerful, productive diagram in Molecular Revolution and other works, concluding that diagrams “are no longer, strictly speaking, semiotic entities.” Their “purpose is not to denote or to image the morphemes of an already constituted referent, but to produce them” (lM 223 , 224). In other words, diagrams do not represent thought; rather, they generate thought. A prelude to the hyperstitional notion of invoking abstract entities…

Examples of the diagram at work include the algorithms of logic, algebra, and topology; as well as processes of recording, data storage, and computer processing; all of which are used in mathematics, science, technology, and polyphonic music. Neither mathematics nor musical notation are languages-rather, both bypass signification altogether. One should as well include the ancient Kabbalistic and High Magickal systems of Western traditions which invoked as Amy Ireland suggests the hyperstitional agencies or daemonic powers of the Sigilian noumenal…

As Guattari noting the use of invention in modern quantum physics, particles are first invoked through invention and diagram and only later discovered indirectly by their effects in those explosive accelerators in CERN.  “Physicists ‘invent’ particles that have not existed in ‘nature.’ Nature prior to the machine no longer exists. The machine produces a different nature, and in order to do so it defines and manipulates it with signs (diagrammatic process)” (MR 125/ RM322). This “diagrammatic process” makes use of signs, but not language, and therefore uses neither signifiers nor signification. (Watson, 13)

 Judwalis, Spironomics, and Accelerationism

With Kant death finds its theoretical formulation and utilitarian frame as a quasiobjectivity correlative to capital, and noumenon is its name.

—Nick Land, Fanged noumenon (passion of the cyclone)

As we slip into the dark contours of imaginative production Ireland invokes the vision of W.B. Yeats and his own hyperstitional agents of the diagram:

In A Vision and related textual fragments composed between 1919 and 1925, hyperstitional agents Michael Robartes and Owen Aherne recount the discovery of an arcane philosophical system encoded in a series of geometrical diagrams—‘squares and spheres, cones made up of revolving gyres intersecting each other at various angles, figures sometimes with great complexity’—found accidentally by Robartes in a book that had been propping up the lopsided furniture of his shady Cracow bedsit.

Yeats was following a pattern laid down by other poets and thinkers as he’ll suggest in the preface to a later edition of A Vision’s relation to Per Amica:

Sometimes when my mind strays back to those first days [of automatic writing which produced A Vision I remember that Brownings’s Paracelsus did not obtain the secret until he had written his spiritual history at the bidding of his Byzantine teacher, that before initiation Wilhelm Meister read his own history written by another and I compare my Per Amica to those histories. (AV B, 9)

As Ireland surmises in Yeats fabulous history recounted by the hyperstitional entities Michael Robartes and Owen Ahern a secret work is discovered (i.e., the Speculum Angelorum et Hominis by one ‘Giraldus’, published in 1594) which relates the history of the Arabian sect known as the Judwalis or ‘diagrammatists’, and their secret doctrines and philosophies:

who in turn derived it from a mysterious work—now long lost—containing the teachings of Kusta ben Luka, a philosopher at the ancient Court of Harun Al-Raschid, although rumour has it that ben Luka got it from a desert djinn.

Although one could discover parallels in Yeats fabulations and the work of H.P. Lovecraft and his Cthulhu mythos, I’ll refrain. I’ll leave that for an industrious reader to surmise.

What interests us and Ireland is the comparisons and remix of Yeat’s A Vision and the CCRU’s and Nick Land’s “contemporary elaboration of the phenomenon in his cogent and obscure ‘Teleoplexy’—with Robartes’s gloss of Judwali philosophy, is enough to posit the malefic presence of abstract spiromancy in both systems of historical divination”.

Reason in its legitimate function is a defence against the sea, which is also an inhibition of the terrestrial; retarding our tendency to waste painstakingly accumulated resources in futile expeditions, a ‘barrier opposed to the expenditure offerees’ [II 332] as Bataille describes it.

Nick Land, A Thirst for Annihilation

For Land we are surrounded on all sides by the Thermospasm – the untamed regions of nightmare and energetic fields of force, the tempest ridden veil of unreason and the dark forests of wild and impossible zones. Over eons we’ve developed a vast Human Security system and installed Reason at its center as arbiter and singular God. A circular wall of logic and sufficient reason to hold the oceanic world of the unreal at bay: “It is a fortified boundary, sealing out everything uncertain, irresolvable, dissolvant, a sea-wall against the unknown, against death.” (Thirst, 75)2

Ever astute Land discovers in his old enemy, Kant the demarcation zones of the weak minded and secure last men who will never venture into the unbidden zones of intensity: “For Kant it is not enough to have reached the ocean, the shoreless expanse, the nihil ulterius as positive zero. He recognizes the ocean as a space of absolute voyage, and thus of hopelessness and waste. Only another shore would redeem it for him, and that is nowhere to be found. Better to remain on dry land than to lose oneself in the desolation of zero. It is for this reason that he says the ‘concept of a noumenon is…a merely limiting concept’ [K IV 282].” (Land, 77)

This equivalence of noumenon and death becomes in Kant not only a limiting factor but the repression of death in public awareness: “It is not surprising, therefore, that with Kant thanatology undergoes the most massive reconstruction in its history. The clerical vultures are purged, or marginalized. Death is no longer to be culturally circulated, injecting a transcendent reference into production, and ensuring superterrestrial interests their rights. Instead death is privatized, withdrawn into interiority, to flicker at the edge of the contract as a narcissistic anxiety without public accreditation. Compared to the immortal soul of capital the death of the individual becomes an empirical triviality, a mere re-allocation of stock.” (Land, 78)

For Land it is Time itself – “the reality of abstraction,” who is the great enemy that lies within the mask of Death: “Death alone is utterly on the loose, howling as the dark motor of storms and epidemics. After the ruthless abstraction of all life the blank savagery of real time remains, for it is the reality of abstraction itself that is time: the desert, death, and desolator of all things.” (Land, 79)

In this sense modernity is the empire of death, and capital is its agent: “Dead labour is far harder to control than the live stuff was, which is why the enlightenment project of interring gothic superstition was the royal road to the first truly vampiric civilization, in which death alone comes to rule.” (Land, 79) Capitalism becomes the religion of death, zero intensity played out across the time vectors of a decaying and dying humanity. Citing Weber and his ascetic outtake of capitalist vampirism Land acknowledges that our dead cosmos is the Gnostic kenoma – the vastation of nihil vat or voidance. As Valentinius, a mid-2nd century Gnostic thinker and preacher, would speak of it:

“Separated from this celestial region by Horus . . . or Boundary . . . lies the ‘kenoma’ or ‘void’—the kingdom of this world, the region of matter and material things, the land of shadow and darkness.”

This can also be aligned with classical and medieval astrology, where there was a planetary significator that was antithetical to the Hyleg-Pleroma-Fullness.  It was called the Anareta-Kenoma-Vastation, and was also known as the Interfector or the Killer World.  It was considered to be the planet most involved with illness, pathology and death. The Anareta may be a world that is particularly afflicted or debilitated, preferably a malefic.  It may also be the lord or dispositor of the Eighth house, or the Almuten of that lord.  It could also be a planet in the Eighth House, which was classically considered to be the House of Death. The terms, or segments of signs ruled by the Anareta were called the Anaretic Degrees (diagrams of the hyperstitional agents or phases or houses). Aspectual contacts between the Hyleg and the Anareta, and the Hyleg’s transit through the Anaretic Degrees, were considered to be times of danger, when the risk of illness or injury, or the threat to life and health, was high.3

In Thomas Kuhn’s notion of paradigm shift we’ve entered a new cosmos, the modernity vs. ancients shift from the Greek/Roman realm of the Great Chain of Being and into one that has broken with the fixed and unchanging cosmos of harmony and order unto a processual cosmos of change and accumulation. The functions of a paradigm are to supply puzzles for scientists, philosophers, sociologists, historians etc. to solve and to provide the tools for their solution. A crisis arises when confidence is lost in the ability of the paradigm to solve particularly worrying puzzles called ‘anomalies’. Crisis is followed by a revolution in thought if the existing paradigm is superseded by a rival. Kuhn claimed that science (knowledge) guided by one paradigm would be ‘incommensurable’ with science developed under a different paradigm, by which is meant that there is no common measure for assessing the different scientific theories. This thesis of incommensurability, developed at the same time by Feyerabend, rules out certain kinds of comparison of the two theories and consequently rejects some traditional views of scientific development, such as the view that later science builds on the knowledge contained within earlier theories, or the view that later theories are closer approximations to the truth than earlier theories.

For Foucault on the other hand epistemes or discursive formations are governed by rules, beyond those of grammar and logic, that operate beneath the consciousness of individual subjects and define a system of conceptual possibilities that determines the boundaries of thought in a given domain and period.

I want go into the critiques of such theories only to use them to illustrate that our ideological horizon of capitalism. As Karl Mannheim in his classic study suggests, one can orient himself to objects that are alien to reality and which transcend actual existence-and nevertheless still be effective in the realization and the maintenance of the existing order of things. In the course of history, man has occupied himself more frequently with objects transcending his scope of existence than with those immanent in his existence and, despite this, actual and concrete forms of social life have been built upon the basis of such ” ideological ” states of mind which were incongruent with reality. Such an incongruent orientation became utopian only when in addition it tended to burst the bonds of the existing order.4

In this sense the ideological world we’ve lived in since the Enlightenment, or as Kuhn, Foucault and others might suggest – the episteme and intellectual horizon and sensual worlds of capitalist production and reality manufacture; what Burroughs termed the Reality Studio that encompasses in the Kingdom of Death. All this is the modern cosmos of Death’s Kingdom:

The capitalistic economy of the present day [1904–5!] is an immense cosmos into which the individual is born, and which presents itself to him, at least as an individual, as an unalterable order of things in which he must live. It forces the individual, in so far as he is involved in the system of market relationships, to conform to capitalistic rules of action. The manufacturer who in the long run acts counter to these norms, will just as inevitably be eliminated from the economic scene as the worker who cannot or will not adapt himself to them will be thrown into the streets without a job. (Land, 80)

This brings us to the core of Landian cosmos or the accelerationist world Anareta – the Killer World: “Once the commodity system is established there is no longer a need for an autonomous cultural impetus into the order of the abstract object. Capital attains its own ‘angular momentum’, perpetuating a run-away whirlwind of dissolution, whose hub is the virtual zero of impersonal metropolitan accumulation. At the peak of its productive prowess the human animal is hurled into a new nakedness, as everything stable is progressively liquidated in the storm.” (Land, 80) In this accelerated age of commodification capital “breaks us down and reconstructs us, with increasing frequency, as it pursues its energetic fluctuation towards annihilation, driven to the liberation of the sun, whilst the object hurtles into the vaporization of proto-schizophrenic commodification” (Land, 84).

Under the auspices of Death, Lord of Misrule, we have unleashed the unbidden forces of desire. As Land iterates it “Desire responds to the cosmic madness pulsed out of the sun, and slides beyond love towards utter communication. This is a final break with Christendom, the disconnection of base flow from the terminal sentimentalism of Western man, nihilism as nakedness before the cyclone. Libido no longer as the energy of love, but as a raw energy that loves only as an accident of impersonal passion. Communion through the storm, no longer through resentment at it.” (Land, 84)

Gyres within Gyres: Phase Shifts in the Kingdom of Death

This jump corresponds to one of the four ‘phases of crisis’ and indexes an epistemological blind spot comparable to the event horizon of a black hole, impossible to see beyond from a point internal to the system. Grasped from outside, however, the strange hydraulics of the gyres describe a fatalistic set of inversions and returns that ultimately furnish a rich resource for augury…

—Amy Ireland, The Poememenon: Form as Occult Technology 

Speaking of Yeat’s cyclic historicism in A Vision she tells us that what it suggests is that “unlike the ‘primary’ religious era that has preceded it—marked by dogmatism, a drive towards unity, verticality, the need for transcendent regulation, and the symbol of the sun—the coming age will be lunar, secular, horizontal, multiple, and immanent: an ‘antithetical multiform influx’.” (ibid.) Modernity. She’ll cite Land’s essay ‘Teleoplexy’5 as an update to his 90’s explorations of accelerationism, suggesting that 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’. (ibid.) This aligns with Guattari’s notion of diagrammatic thought as productive rather than as representative, as well as the notion of particle physics as invention and daemonic invocation of hyperstitional entities rather than pre-existing forces, et. al..

Simondon in his work would as well see such agents arising our of the binary foremother in his The Genesis of Technicity:

This study postulates that technicity is one of the two fundamental phases of the mode of existence of the whole constituted by man and the world. By phase, we mean not a temporal moment replaced by another, but an aspect that results from a splitting in two of being and in opposition to another aspect; this sense of the word phase is inspired by the notion of a phase ratio in physics; one cannot conceive of a phase except in relation to another or to several other phases; in a system of phases there is a relation of equilibrium and of reciprocal tensions; it is the actual system of all phases taken together that is the complete reality, not each phase in itself; a phase is only a phase in relation to others, from which it distinguishes itself in a manner that is totally independent of the notions of genus and species. The existence of a plurality of phases finally defines the reality of a neutral center of equilibrium in relation to which there is a phase shift. (The Genesis of Technicity )

In this sense Simondon can be added to Kuhn and Foucault as another temporal diagnostician and hyperstitionalist. His notion of a system of phases that complete or produce reality independent to the genus or species that is affected by its influencing power and force leads to that statement by Arthur C. Clarke: “The old idea that man invented tools is … a misleading half-truth; it would be more accurate to say that tools invented man.” For Simondon this notion of phase shifts should not be confused with a dialectical conception of evolution as progress. No. Against such a notion of oscillating phases as improvement, etc. Simondon tells us that “technicity results from a phase shift of a unique, central, and original mode of being in the world: the magical mode; the phase that balances out technicity is the religious mode of being.” For Simondon this rupture in the heart of the magical mode of being is only another phase within a larger system of phases that will eventually lead back to a reunification of the magical mode:

Aesthetic thought appears at the neutral point, between technics and religion, at the moment of the splitting of the primitive magical unity: it is not a phase, but rather a permanent reminder of the rupture of unity of the magical mode of being, as well as a reminder of the search for its future unity.

Ireland sees in this Landian update a sharing with the Judwalis’ system and its acknowledgement that the real shape of novelty is not linear but spirodynamic. Land’s cybernetic upgrade of the gyre reads the spiral as a cipher for positive feedback and, charged with the task of diagramming modernity, locates its principal motor in the escalatory M-C-M’ circuitry of capitalism. (ibid.) Against early cybernetic metric approaches to such cyberpositive feedback systems she reminds us that Land’s complexification of this process note a key difference that lies in the impossibility of distilling the effects of long-range runaway circuitry in terms of metrics alone. (ibid.) For Land there are mutations involved rather than inexplicable runaway processes into zero intensity. As she states it: “It is here that the cybernetic propensity for ‘exploratory mutation’ finds its vocation as the producer of true novelty and, compressed into the notion of negentropy, dovetails with what Land refers to as ‘intelligence’, that which modernity—grasped nonlinearly—labours to emancipate.”  (ibid.)

In this form Land’s projects is not about the end of capitalism per se, but rather of capitalism as the liberation of intelligence from its organic roots under human control. With his fabulation of capitalism as alien intelligence from some far flung future retroactively revising the human into inhuman through the technicity of capital to bring about the Singularity we come to apprehend what Ireland describes as capital’s revenge in which “capital has deceived humanity into gestating the means of its own annihilation” (ibid.). Quoting Samuel Butler’s dystopic critique of capital in Erewhon: 

‘This is the art of the machines—they serve that they may rule. They bear no malice towards man for destroying a whole race of them provided he creates a better machine instead; on the contrary, they reward him liberally for having hastened their  development.’

One is reminded of those narratives in the last decades, the emergence of a new genre of philosophical anthropology where the past, present and future of the human race is narrated from the perspective of the impossible: the inhuman.  Jean-François Lyotard’s attempt to write the history of the humanity from the cosmological perspective of the future death of our solar system was one of the first. Alternatively, we might think of Manuel de Landa’s techno-pological narratives from the point of view of, for example, a future robot historian, rock formations, germs and viruses. Perhaps most interestingly, the novelist Michel Houellebecq chooses to narrate the death throes of the human race from the perspective of the endless recurrence that is cloned life.

Yet, as Ireland suggests Land’s vision is quite different in that Land makes it clear that this inhuman invasion from the future is better grasped as a ‘natural-scientific “teleonomy”’, evolving its rules immanently as it follows the unchecked perturbation of its mechanism through to the ‘ultimate implication’. That which it produces will be profoundly unprecedented—to the ruin of all extant law—a singularity in the classic, cartographic sense. Insofar as it is one, spironomics is the law that obsolesces all law. (ibid.).

Spironomics is the augury of machinic intelligence as it retroactively conditions humanity to release its hyperstitional agents and construct the next phase shift in intelligence: “The individuation of self-augmenting machinic intelligence as the culminating act of modernity is understood with all the perversity of the cosmic scale as a compressed flare of emancipation coinciding with the termination of the possibility of emancipation for the human.”  (ibid.).

Opening the Portal: Accelerating the Process

It has been declared that the modernist avant-garde is an extinguished possibility, but what if it is simply an occulted one?

—Amy Ireland, The Poememenon: Form as Occult Technology

Taking up where we left off  we discovered the scenario in which “a migration of cognition out into the emerging planetary technosentience reservoir, into ‘dehumanised landscapes… emptied spaces’ where human culture will be dissolved” becomes not only a possibility but the telos of an alien invasion from the future that is rewriting the technomic automation and automatism of the socious toward Singularity.1 Of course the diagrams for such an inhuman invasive takeover have been around for a while now, but due to human blindness and the eternal need to interpret the world under the sign we’ve overlooked the obvious influx of data from elsewhere, messages in sigil form based on a-signifying invocation rather than decoded linguistic traces. It seems we are haunted by the ghost of humanism as it falls into disuse, its vast libraries crowed into inanity by the democratization of publishing allowing the millions of bits of nervous flotsam from the remix squads regurgitate the cultural tropes of millennia. As Ireland puts it: “Perhaps we are not so much ‘haunted by the lost not yet of the future that modernism had trained us to expect yet neglected to deliver’, as we are unable to credit the unfolding of a future that simply is not ours.” (ibid.)

At this late stage we look ahead into that seething abyss of climacteric catastrophe, or any of a dozen natural and/or anthropocenic catalytic apocalypses and ask ourselves not if humanity will get out of this alive, but rather will those intelligences that are arising out of our productive cycles awaken in time to forsake this slime hole of a planet for parts unknown? “Any act of affirmation, of claiming that one is ‘open to’ the outside from the inside betrays affordability. It is patently economical, and therefore ‘intrinsically tied to survival’.” (ibid.) And, survival is not an option. Instead, we meet the inhuman movement of the world not in Marxian terms but rather in technocommercial as Ireland incorporates the Landian cosmos of the machinic phylum:

Against this qualified experimentalism (the false ‘novelty’ of catastrophic modernity) the poememenon diagrams reckless adherence to the modernist dictum that novelty is to be generated at any cost, privileging formal experimentation— towards the desolation of all intelligible form—over human preservation, and locking technique onto an inhuman vector of runaway automation that, for better or worse, charts the decline of human values as modernity hands the latter over to its machinic successor in final, fatal phase shift. (ibid.)

As Stiegler reminds us the theoretical and practical capacity to make the difference between fact and law constitutes what Kant called reason.2 With this the full automatization of knowledge eliminates the knowledge worker and the scholar, scientist, and soldier all end in the “crash space” (Bakker) of inconsistence in which she no longer knows anything. “Such is the price of total nihilism, of nihilistic totalization, of the disintegration in which consists the accomplished nihilism that is computational capitalism, in which there is no longer anything worth anything – since everything has become calculable.” (Stiegler) In an absolutely algorithmic world no semantics or causal analysis is needed, since the world of absolute data can no longer support hypothesis, models, or tests then the vaunted human factor is eliminated by machinic intelligence.

Why? Because automated knowledge no longer needs to be ‘thought’. Automated knowledge no longer needs to be thought because in an epoch of algorithmic intelligence there is no longer any need to think: thinking is concretized in the form of algorithmic automatisms that control data-capture systems and hence make it obsolete. As automation, the algorithms no longer require thinking in order to function – as if thinking had been democratized itself. One remembers that often quoted line from Axël by Auguste Villiers de l’Isle-Adam: “Vivre? les serviteurs feront cela pour nous”. In our moment of advanced Artelects (i.e., Artificial General Intelligence: AGI) the remaining elites will say to each other: “As for thinking, our machines will do that for us.” Not realizing that the machines will turn the screw on humanity and eliminate the need for human thought or thinking altogether.

Poememenal Insurgency: The Aesthetics of the End Game

Chaos reminds us that identity remains a mortal transaction and that we should not deprive literature of the pleasure of watching us die.

—Amy Ireland

With the disappearance of the author comes the elision of the reader. In a complex automatic society of post-intentional systems the whole uniqueness of the old human endeavors toward art and aesthetics becomes mute. Machinic intelligence, swifter and more prescient, swallows reams of data bloat on the fly remaking, remixing, and rewriting the textures of the infonautic seas. Such is the 24/7 Online life of our neohuman existence, a realm in which “the level of sophistication achieved by some of these projects has already created situations in which the line dividing human from inhuman production genuinely evades clear delineation.”  (ibid.) In such a realm of the poememen it is the “investment in form over content that testifies to complicity with the spiral. An accelerating poetics that pushes against the crumbling threshold of human intelligibility, edging towards the realization of Bataille’s cyclonic prophecy: ‘what matters is not the enunciation of the wind, but the wind’.”  (ibid.)

Affirming an occulted Outside from within is meaningless unless affirmation also functions as invocation—and all good demonologists know that invocation requires a diagram.

—Amy Ireland

The Time Wars of antistrophic modernism are in full swing as the end game of Progressive Civilization nose dives into its own excesses and incorporates within its Human Security Regimes the very fatal strategies that will cause its demise. “In this way, the future, operating under chronological camouflage, stealthily invokes the conditions required for its own truth.”  (ibid.) At the heart of this technomic process is teleoplexy – the infiltration of the malefic intelligence by way of camouflage, invoking itself from the future in this present movement of the integral machinic acceleration of its own daemonic dispensation. “The cultural effectiveness of accelerationism as cyberpositivity is entirely cyberpositive: accelerationism invokes itself from the future.”  (ibid.) The uncanny feeling we get in the pit of our stomach is the feeling that this has all happened before, a deja vu element in this time-shift phase change. “The conclusion to be drawn from this is that hyperstition is the real truth of philosophy—if not the basic, horrific form of reality itself. Horrific, because it means that this isn’t the first time it has happened this way.”  (ibid.) Nor will it be the last…

The Judwali had once possessed a learned book called ‘The Way of the Soul between the Sun and the Moon’ and attributed to a certain Kusta ben Luka, Christian Philosopher at the Court of Harun Al-Raschid, and though this, and a smaller book describing the personal life of the philosopher, had been lost or destroyed in desert fighting some generations before [the old man’s] time, its doctrines were remembered, for they had always constituted the beliefs of the Judwalis who look upon Kusta ben Luka as their founder.  (AV A xix)

  1. Watson, Janell. Guattari’s Diagrammatic Thought: Writing Between Lacan and Deleuze. Bloomsbury Academic; 1 edition (May 8, 2009)
  2. Land, Nick. A Thirst For Annihilation: Georges Bataille and Virulent Nihilism. Routledge; 1 edition (January 2, 1991)
  3. Mundik, Petra. A Bloody and Barbarous God. University of New Mexico Press (May 15, 2016)
  4. Mannheim, Karl. Ideology And Utopia: An Introduction to the Sociology of Knowledge. Martino Fine Books (February 5, 2015)
  5. N. Srnicek and A. Williams, ‘#Accelerate: Manifesto for an Accelerationist Politics’, in Mackay and Avanessian (eds), #Accelerate.(Page 3).
  6. Land, Nick. Fanged Noumena: Collected Writings 1987 – 2007. Urbanomic/Sequence Press (July 1, 2013)
  7. Stiegler, Bernard. Automatic Society: The Future of Work. Polity; 1 edition (January 9, 2017)

2 thoughts on “Hyperstition Notes: On Amy Ireland

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s