If iter_ability_ marks/divides and exceeds from the start (sic:)) then iter_ation_ - caught in a lop-sided reversal of act into potential,made a sub-transcendental asymptote - never comes,can never come. Repetition then must stand a kind of difference.
I gabble this mantra to make myself feel better about opening another /mail with apologies for the delay.:)
I think _Steal Stuff From Work_ is a little masterpiece. I'd like to concentrate on pp. 44-.
From p. 55 a generalised redistribution - initially individual--anarchistic,tendentially (as Machiavellied by Cy's spectacular theft of a grand piano pp. 48-50) (only) a gesture: constrained by (available) stock and by financial and as it were political prudence i.e. constrained by objective pro-fetishism/exploitation - phases (freed of the first constraint but not the second) into a high-potential reformist activism; but once put beyond _both_ constraints i.e. massified: converted into (a tactic of) destruction _as opposed to destructuration_ it (said redistribution) phases once more into a lawless/feudalised (= honest:)) (neo-)capitalism - retrieving (the violent _phenomenon_ of) property relations by way effectively of a dominating/principal commodity fetishism (this the constitutive mis-recognition of capitalism itself: the homeostatification of feudal fetishism (exchange-value)),implicitly fusing the previous forces means and relations of production into an/_the_ instrument of production in a new infrastructure _itself_ - finally - the neither formal nor real subsumption by capitalism of (what counts today as) (radical) _reality_). Of contingent dialectical necessity then said redistribution's truth is _non/apocalyptically_ to _destructure_ _nothing_:
STAGE 1 2a 2b 3
PAGE REFERENCE ...p.44 pp.48-50 pp.55-59 pp.62/64-
DIEGESIS ...William's Cy's the the
Kinko's piano meeting janitor/
email theft William's
COMPOSITION Redistribution Gesture Reformism Neo-capitalism
(individual-- [expressive (collectivist: [contingent--
anarchist: immediacy] pre-rational) necessary
Note the difficult logic of all this establishes not the contingency but the necessity of our 'dialectical mediacy'.--No doubt it is finally in something like these terms that we should understand both capitalism's 'ghostly' resilience(s?) and the historical lesson of the American Revolution,perhaps the only (founding) event by which capitalism's '''identity'''/_system(s?)_ was/were exposed - precisely in and by being assumed in practice.)
Still there hides in 2b's warmth and in the difficult logic of the shift from 2b to 3 the transcendental blueprint of an im/mediate/interstitial utopia: reformist praxis _lived_ (thus as a pre-communism) _i.e. outwith any (constructive)
attempt to render this pre-communism (strategically) explicit by way of destruction_,_outwith (as the first Wittgenstein might say) any attempt to _speak_ a(n only) showable/_. Because a more-than-reformist praxis carried out under the same conditions could yield yet more than a _pre-_communism.--Is that the real lesson of _Mai '68_?