File deleuze-guattari/deleuze-guattari.0608, message 26

To: <>
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 20:59:11 +0200
Subject: Re: [D-G] Deleuze Also personal threatened by


In order to let the cites of cites of emails not so long that one loses
overview of whats new and what the point of issue, I added some headlines to
your original Email,
refering to the headlines.


With "properly handled" I meant only that if I change  my emailadress
someome who write an email with  the old adress and is not known to
the allowed list, is automatically treated as spam
or completely ignored.
But the reason for the identity question by me is indeed that
a lot of things, really often associating in a way
that I cannot see any sense in it, especially if taken as dialogic as
to emails I have written.
Often the points I replied to are not confirmed,
and not discussed further.
This is so differing from communication known to me, I  experienced
a lot different kinds of communications with very different people,
that it results in questioning who some people are and what they want,
of discussing Deleuze and Guattari.


What you say about the people in Beirut in Tel Avicv, who have to live with
a comparative
high risk of being the victim of some attack,
 is perfectly right.
That is the reason why all are doing a lot in defence of their
If it were only money, some modus vivendi would probably had been found.
But so the whole relations, the possibility to build up a flowering economy
and in short, to live a comfortable life, are almost destroyed.
The conflicht about Isreal is from the start in 1948.

But if this conflict in way of terriorism  is brought to secure
states and towns in western high industrialized countries,
the uncertainity in regard of security calls action
of almost all people who want to live secure
and so the sympathy and understanding for the people behind these
attacks is very diminished.
Especially as Germany had a more moderatinng role and gave a lot
of money with in the EU program for the middle east.
If there is war of conflict in one corner of the world,
there is really no need to let it spread over the whole world.
My interest and the interest of that other people of  existence is
questioned in a way by such attacks
like in Cologne - there were even some more.
I cannot say that I have done any harm to them.


The legitemacy of the state or political power
is drawn from divison of work and the need to organize
a lot of things as millions of people are
living together on camparatively small
domain or territory.
Security is the most basic, emphasized as killing argument for the
state to be idispensible, as you remarked by Hobbes followed more
harmoniously argued by Spinoza
 and other state
theorists,  but far not the only thing being handled by the poltical power.
Now the constant struggle is if the peole havinfg the
political, often in combination or relation
to economical power, are doing things such
the possibilities of being happy for almost all people living there
is not to far away from what is possible by virtue
of state of technolgy, skill, knowledge and wealth in the country.

And the reason for "taking the other side of power"
is the mistrust that the people in power have a look on the happiness to the
with little or no economical or political power
from a motivation from their on, but on the contrary negelct
it in favour of their own inteterest.
The there are sonme peole who take their side of the poor.  who are a little
bit more educated,
in general by using "surplus of value" of public opinion by
publishing mistreatments and structural mistreatments.
Such an intellectual was Foucault  in some respects.
Especially for prisoners.

But the question if any other group could do better is related to the skills
of thhat imagined group.
But by divison of work and the lot of people in question,
a reformistic growing, as also proposed by Deleuze and Guattari, is more
probable and more
without friction and hurtings, which may create hostility for a long time.

And indeed it is often so, that a technological invention based on a
scientific ideas
does much more for comfortable life of the people than
hard poltical or economical struggle.
Also inside in the soul and body and dynamics of groups and relations
between them DEleuze and Guattari could
be very helpful on
a concretre level.
 Deleuze and Guattari have in my eyes in this respect much more content and
possibilties to
start from and to develop more than semm to be known.
But that is partly bound to very ardous  intelellectual effort.
But as in computer science: "No output without input".

 Also arts and developing taste and abilties to produce arts
make life much mor happy - if one likes it.

In my eyes the increase of wealth of happiness on the ground of technolgical
and scientific progress
 had been the case to such an large extent,  that
the material possibilities to life
a comfortable life in western idustruialized countries are not so bad.

And is better to make such a life also possible and more probable in the
rest of the world,
also the midddle east,
instead of destroying or diminishing it  by carrying the hard conflicts in
our regions.


What I meant was that the politics of or supprting of some movement
or person by public campaigns may not suffice.
The real problem is how to make the peole skill to
be happy enough on the ground of their own abilities.
There the old idea that the political struggle is the
school of real life giving these abilities  is in
my eyes a little bit aberrating.

This is because  the wealth is based on technology and divison of work.
And the wealth is in the "value of use" (Marx), the real
properties of things to be consumed or produced.
Also politics  structures  personal relations often to   are more  struggle
and tricks direction
than to love, honesty and cooperation based on blind trust.
This is not good for comfortable happy life.

I pointed this view already sometimes out in some emails.


I think it is really very puzzling how little the efforts
of most peolpe are leading to happiness and good relations.
 To joke a  little bit technolgical,
the happiness efficancy coefficent is very low,
A lot of  input, low output.

 Here the ideas concerning subejctivation beasd on the
brain chemistry and the existenal personal, group and society
subjectivations and structuring - added with yoga, may help.
 Things seem really to be not so easy, and therfore
a complicated theory concerning the soul of man
with some truth in it is very worthwhile to be studied.
But it is in order to increase happiness and to avoid dead end unhappy
 the reading
may not be happiness itself very often.
It is a kind of soul and social technology and  science book.
In my eyes even the style of it, machines, tool box and so on,
is that way.
You can use tools only if you learn to use them, especially very complicated

So far

Greetings Harld Wenk
-----Original Message-----
[]On Behalf Of NZ
Sent: Donnerstag, 24. August 2006 18:26
Subject: Re: [D-G] Deleuze Also personal threatened by
Lebanesetrain-terrorists attack in Cologne

> In my eyes identification is not settled,
> changing email adresses make
> wanted emails under the original address
> more unlikely to be treated properly.

think about it, somehow without writing any of the actual words you
are able to understand who I am, yet the lack of formal names still
upsets you. seems like you are not satisfied by incorpeal knowlege
/truth but additionally desire some territorialized dogma of form or
identity. Do you like to territorialize with everything?  I am
interested in knowing what is this "treated properly" business about??
 Am I going to be on you r "list?" ...perhaps the knowlege is not
enough for you but it must also fit some program of reality that you
envision, (what is it? it sounds exciting. I have friends in the
military who are required to keep similar logs, do you have an agency
that you must report this to?)

> So I feel a little bit personal attacked, also by psycholgical
> identification with other train users -

I'm sure cologne is a skeery place to live, but honestly, how would it
feel to be in beruit or nyc? tel aviv is nice. of course it is a
terrible feeling but millions of people deal with it rationally
everyday. how do they do it, are they super intelligent masterminds
who are fully conscious of their situation. I am sure most are similar
to you or I. remember the cold war? so this crisis... it is an old
game we are asked to play (we can even go back to the inquisition  or
alexander vs oriental despots.. if we must remember). As you say, I am
sure spinoza is very much responsible, but the more direct relation
must go to hobbes and his fears of the spanish armana re: leviathon.
hobbes set the  christian/apocolytic tone very intentionally by
defining exacty what is the improvement of control between kings and
republics... kings cannot engineer social structures the way
constitutional republics can. it is a tremendous difference of
despotic power if compared to the barbaric asiatic despots, just in
terms of strategy these despots have much less power then a
republican. so the crisis instigates this strategy-game of engineering
and it is an old game of crisis.

ultimately the crisis asks us to act out of fear instead of
rationality.. and from within nash's game then consciousness becomes
limited to the tempo of game play... like the chronos which scans the
aieon. hwenk, do you realize that you are giving me the exact same
line that the cia gives me everyday in the news programs? look at the
strange heading you have choosen for this thread... sounds like a fox
news program, "rampant paranoia" "fear" "fear" "anti-christ"
"apocolypse"... how utterly boring... is this the agenda-line you want
to push on us who read this list? If it isn't then you should figure
out a way to talk about these very real issues w/o submitting to some
unfortunate psy-op game play, as an intellectual you must go beyond
the counter intelligence that surrounds us. I don't mean random lines
of flight (a la derrida or zizak's obnoixious virtuals) but
pointed-circles that direct communication towards consciousness. there
is no other way.


> Even if you see things that you have "To take side on the other side of
> power.."

i dunno if you read the foucault list, I do, and I must say it is very
silent right now. there is no discussion.. period. I am very much
interested in his last book on sexuality... the care of the self... i
really get a lot from that. but foucault's story ends so badly with
telquel and those bastards who decided to continue from his line (re:
potential 3) but going the way of capitalism in the 80s with fashion
magazines and tabloid news, the information was vital and so it was
used very unethically.

> Rievere had nothing better to do than comitting the next crime
> as soon as he was set free.
> Foucault said: "What did you expect from a habitual criminal?".
> But what should Foucault said instead?

i dont know. seems like he said enough, why weren't other
intellectuals engaged by this responsibly? Maybe they were lost
persuing some stupid virtual paradoxes that intellectuals like to busy
themselves with. If we are looking at one man for a formula we are
already filled with mistaken ideas.


> I have an introduction to Deleuze,
> where the author compares Deleuze's writings with computer languages.
> There Deleuze plays the role of a higher language like C, Pascal or
> - refering short to known standard interpretations automatical compiled to
> assembler, the  machine  language.

this is interesting how you have described an intellectual's brain
like a computer machine. I don't know what to make of this yet and I
will consider the brain as bWo or the brain as machine or as
assembleges... i dunno, its weierd.
List address:

List address:


Driftline Main Page


Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005