Some Irrelevant Musings on Squid Game
Squid Game is a show I don’t really care for. Already eaten up by the mimetic or rather memetic cultural piranhas, it is has devolved into what all cultural spectacles do: another thing to be vivisected into every niche.
The niche which has probably cut it up for easier consumption the most is, unsurprisingly, “the Left” (whatever that means). “Squid Game is a metaphor for a critique of last-stage capitalism” is seriously spoken by leftists. From the perspective of Dark Enlightenment realism, Squid Game is nothing less than a perfect representation of capitalism in a single sense: competition. Competition is the motor of each episode. Leftists pose this critique: “Squid Game shows how capitalism makes everyone fight each other for money, for something meaningless, something that is printed, that isn’t really real.” They continue, “It shows how capitalism has the bourgeois class use the proletariat as their playthings.” Neo-Reactionaries see this: “Squid Game shows the development of intelligence through elimination, adaptation, and optimization.” We mustn’t be too hasty though. Of course, the TV show is not going to perfectly represent the Darwinian realism of the Dark Enlightenment, but it shows the divide between the Left and Neo-Reaction. It shows how neither necessarily believe in different conditions, but rather have extremely different extrapolations.
I’m not a neo-reactionary, I must clarify. I’m not quite sure what I am. I continue to read more and more of Outside in (I’ve almost read the whole blog on the Wayback Machine), and of course, it is going to influence me, but I digress.
My position really all depends on how I feel after translating the rest of this section from the seventh volume of Bataille’s complete works. It all depends on the question of capitalism… I most definitely am not going to become an ethno-nationalist (I follow Nietzsche’s maxim Bataille points out in “Nietzsche and the Fascists”), nor would I ever regress into theology…
It all depends on capitalism
: I still kind of laugh at myself for using the term “the Left.” I feel like I’m Steven Crowder or Ben Shapiro. The Dark Enlightenment claims to be radically realist, and this may be true in terms of cosmology and metaphysics… but, when it comes to politics and political characterization, I’m not so sure. Does the Left have control in certain parts of the academy, yes (this really cannot even be questioned, my history and English teachers (except for one; also I’m a Junior in high school) have all been left-liberals or explicitly anti-capitalist socialists). But to say “the Right” doesn’t have control of other parts… is this really a ridiculous notion? If were are to be realists about this, in the fashion of Gnon’s axiom “Reality Rules,” we must realize that reactionaries and conservatives may have control of the academy, but neo-reactionaries most definitely do not. In a certain sense, the alt-right has control of certain parts of the academy as well. But, very few, if any professors or teachers are neo-reactionaries. If conservatives and reaction engender the same conditions as leftism, those conditions being the inhibition of diagonalization (occidental orthogonalism), then the Left, as in the effects of leftism, most definitely controls the academy.