<< BACK

Chapter 6: Roasting Open Relationships With the Kids

Roasting open relationships with the kids cAn be hard. Especially when you don't use language. This chapter is mostly a guide on how to raise kids after the death of language and terminology. You've probably been hearing a lot of replacement language. If that is the case, you've probably also been feeling, at some point or at several points of your life, "si autem putasse, aetatem contentam". I taught many people's children by acting like their parents, and I was able to bring their kids to my level.

You can be sneaky, you can leave your best friend in a lake and not pollute, you can dodge your job search growing up and not call it all luck and temptation. But eventually things like wind pressure, storm clouds, sun spots, and mutations even genetics. You can hope and train and cram until you ache but you will ultimately grab death by the throat. But here in between immortality is when we either lie low in the slow cold grave or shake off the death shackles and confront the rind there. Is this what you want your children to feel? If no, stop talking to them. At all. You know, basically it’s science. But is that science important? What does your Child’s Hope component mean to you? It means exactly that. Describe it to them. Voice it clearly. Make it possible for your kids to choose what they believe about your God. Avoid button they can’t push. We are going through earthquakes babies.

As opposed to liberal education, sound accelerationist education of character develops crucial psychological qualities, both for non-combatant individuals like journalists, professors, doctors, etc., and also for combatants of what might be called good causes, soldiers, pilots. It teaches them to be more precise and to have either greater or lesser aggression depending on the context. It ensures that they use their brains correctly in each of the situations that would face them during their lifetime. A black and white picture emerges from this that cannot be further specified; they do not develop, as narrow-minded individuals like Social Revolutionary fanatics, a unilateral conception of social reality that helps them to build always the same models. On the contrary, this becomes a vision of mankind, an foresight of the fact that it is a knowing subject interacting with, having to face and answer to, the world. We can thus conclude that the accelerationist curriculum for people such as journalists or doctors is in reality a critique of liberal education in general and of this so-called democratic problem. I ask now you to second this.

Linguistic anarchist education, on the third hand, is a project of individual liberation and freedom from the development of hierarchical-state power projections about language and education.