Discover more from Polemics
"Avant-Garde Hate" and "Hate" Itself
What does it mean to hate? And why is there an obsession around it?
What exactly is “hate?”
Hate, in any boring dictionary, is described as “a feeling of intense or passionate dislike for someone or something.”
What’s so wrong about that? I dislike eggplant. I personally dislike the taste of it. But if I were to “hate eggplant,” that’s radical!
Why can’t I just say “I hate eggplant?” Because that would make me a “hater,” or, a hobbyist obsessed with disliking everything around me.
Liberalism, a political idea, is all about being open towards the new and the unknown. It’s pretentious to assume we can love everything all at once, as we deny our true desires. Desire itself requires discrimination, prejudice, and preference that is contrary to what others may think. If we let our desires run wild, we may become sadists, where we derive our own personal perversions as a moral good.
…I’m getting too far ahead of myself. This is all a thought experiment in the hypothetical. What I am saying, is that we have a natural urge to dislike something and to be open about our hatred. Now the logical moralists may say we are acting upon irrational fears or consequences because of our justified hatred, but what they don’t understand is that hatred is indeed, rational.
That is, most of the time.
Hatred is irrational when trauma, or fear, is induced, of course. Smart people know this distinction. But smart person also have an even bigger list of sophisticated things they dislike too. It could be anywhere from a certain sect of philosophy, a skewed political ideology, a whorish professor, or even a bland and kitsch taste of art.
Liberalism fears hatred, because hatred questions the rules of the liberal’s game, be it on the concept of equality, non-aggressive individuality, or on race. I’m not a libertarian or a racist nationalist; far from it. What I am interested in, is America’s obsession with the omnipresence and hobgoblin nature of “hate” in the air. What exactly is “hate” if you can catch it like a virus? Michel Foucault once said that “fascism is a virus,” but how can fascism, a subjective political ideology, be that virulent? Why is there discrimination of the right kind here?
If I spread “love,” whatever that means, will I stop the equally ambiguous “hate?” I think love, according to liberalism, means consuming and masturbating, releasing dopamine hits in my brain till I am satisfied with the narrative they call a “life.” If I “hate,” I assert myself, and the principles of equality comes after me for getting out of line, for representing myself as unequal as the other sheep in the flock. You see, I’m harming their own happiness as I incite jealously and envy because I have the power to dislike and discriminate.
I don’t want to listen to hip-hop music. It’s not that I don’t like black people, but because most of hip-hop has subcultural values against mine. But if forced upon me, it makes me want to hate black people further, as I never demanded or wanted to belong with a flock of sheep that want to jump off a cliff.
I prefer this subgenre of hip-hop over that genre, as the mainstream always caters to the lowest common dominator of the stupid consumer. They may frame me as a “racist,” but what they can’t fathom is the natural urge to hate. I have my desires, and I have my subculture. I have my sexual preferences, and I am responsible for my future offspring against anyone who intervenes with my values.
The petite bourgeois emulate what our liberal elite want. They think if the mimic their desires, they too can get what they really want as well. That’s when I see another fake flag outside their overpriced house that reads, “spread love, not hate.” What exactly is hate to them? It means hating on liberalism and being an admitted anti-liberal. To hate liberalism is to be constructed as a universal hater, as they irrationality assume you must hate everything.
We hate to cater our desires. We hate to determine ourselves as unique individuals. And importantly, we hate to make sure we don’t want that subculture in our own reality. This profit-driven system motivates us to choose our neighborhoods, select our neighbors, and consume what we want.
I’m an anti-capitalist myself; I’m just explaining why the middle class is so cowardly when it comes to explaining themselves. For example, think of a business man who obvious runs a social campaign to call out “white supremacy,” but actually lives in the most whitest area in the country. What does this mean then? Perhaps all white people are cowardly and will churn the capitalist game till the day they die? That the white man lives in fear because he can’t be open about a single desire, or preference, which in turn, he will be called a “racist?” Many are such cases.
The anti-liberal opposition has it’s own view on hatred and it’s influence. Be it Kai Murros on his speech about “hate,” C.B. Robertson writing “In Defense of Hatred,” Greg Johnson’s “Confessions of a Reluctant Hater,” and a slew of the same racial nationalists to libertarians providing arguments that a transgressive and superficial person would like. Adam Parfrey’s Feral House publishing printed controversial books meant to stir up anti-liberal criticism, while Jim Goad’s Answer Me! played with hate as an agitating punk-rock emotion. Today, we have Adam Lehrer trying to resurrect the same old “Apocalypse Culture” from Parfrey with his politically-incorrect and PragerU sounding “Safety Propaganda” manifesto, and Philip Best of shock-jock power electronics group, Whitehouse, with his xerox transgressive label, “Amphetamine Sulphate.” “Hate” is in as an avant-garde intention and design principle, for everyone who wants to be just as transgressive as Peter Sotos or Dennis Cooper to prove a point they are more open-minded and radical than their fear-mongering liberal parents.
I’ve experienced this myself.
Think, Boyd Rice likes to think of “hate” as nothing but a show. Jim Goad continues to play an angry skinhead and write for a homonationalist blog. Chris Korda of The Church of Euthanasia ignores my questions about his concerning associates. The same happened when I asked Adam Parfrey something similar. Meanwhile, Gavin McInnes was trying to prove fringe culture existed with Vice Magazine or Street Carnage, but sold out to Disney. Jack Donovan acknowledges how liberalism is weak, but continues to showoff his vanity image. Paul Waggener call his act a terroristic “operation” and wants only tough guys running the show. That’s where you get backwards punks, like “Thomas777,” who call themselves white advocates while pretending to be tough.
It’s all a show.
Straight Edge and DIY was about helping kids of all backgrounds, but this “avant-garde hate” scene of wannabee racial nationalist thugs ruined anti-liberalism as a whole. It has a history, and I blame Boyd Rice for it. Adam Parfrey also tried to start something under this “apocalypse culture” name, but it has lead nowhere. The priority becomes a stubborn emotion, rather than an action. These useful idiots play the part of the hobgoblin that our elites so desire to eradicate. In other words, they create “the Hollywood Nazi.” Only punk rock thugs are white nationalists!
Benedict Anderson was right to assume that this “imagined community” can go so far to get out of hand and play the part of the ongoing stages of late capitalism. Thus the names I mention belong in a canon of “avant-garde hate,” where hate is a subculture and brand, than of a practical idea of personal discrimination.
The fools of power electronics continue to play the transgressive status war of “who’s the bigger hater” by celebrating who’s more shocking. Is it Daniel Sine using Chris Chan’s art on his noise album? Or is it Michael Nine shooting heroin and putting a gun up to an audience members head in his so-called performance, “Intent?” All of it is an immature and unhealthy emulation of GG Allin and the cartoonish performance of personal trauma, “tough guy hardcore,” and drifts far away from anti-liberalism into the hands of liberal projection.
Back to the bourgeois man with his flag that reads, “spread love, not hate.”
When you practice avant-garde hate, you get burned by subculture. You are judged by how offensive you are, and importantly, how “punk” and “queer” you become. For hatred is no longer about disclination, but a lifestyle brand of consumption. It’s the very same method of social control the state wants us to live under.
Meanwhile, groups like Antifa and Friends Stand United, hunts down the same so-called “haters” that our liberal elite believe to be the enemies. No analytical argument is proven under avant-garde hate. For all of it’s Whitehouse-esque rhetoric of creative “sadist” expression, it puts the ideological assumptions of “hate” as a priority.
Avant-garde hate is liberalism in disguise.
We come back to the notion that this avant-garde hate scene is related to the condition of “queer culture” and instilling the virtues of it. Don’t ask “who’s the biggest hater,” bur rather, “who’s the biggest queer?” I even done a video on this subject back in 2018, explaining Jim Goad’s actions on The Luke Ford show.
Queerness is about difference, and who is more eccentric and strange than the normal person living out in boring suburbia. The avant-garde is pretentious, and is not about deep intellectualism. It uses immature and corny rhetoric to justify actions of self-destruction and liberal assertion of freedom. It will always assume it’s against itself, but then what is real or sincere in the first place if it’s nothing but hipster postering?
Jamie Stewart of Xiu Xiu seems to be the only professional “queer culture” artist that can play with avant-garde hate and hints of anti-liberalism without contradicting himself. As Stewart himself is against racism and the far-right in general, it begs the question if other avant-garde haters of white nationalism can tolerate this.
There are many normal people who intersect between the avant-garde and anti-liberalism, as the avant-garde requires unorthodox thinking patterns and anti-normative action. I look back at the work of Shaun Partridge and his Unpop movement that followed. I was obsessed with his movement in 2018. And yet, I have pen pal friends who still love this kind of pop art collage attack, and I see it emulated in the works of Brandon Adamson to Richard Houck. I get it. I don’t want to destroy their fun and curated pop aesthetics. I admire both of them. But I’m seeing the many errors that avant-garde hate brings with it. I blame Boyd Rice and Shaun for curating this unexplained phenomenon.
I’m guilty of my own “fast food fascism” which I tried explaining for the time experiencing the Partridge Family Temple. However, the art of Ron English, Frank Kozik, Coop, and Josh Agle puts the Unpop aesthetics into principles anyway. I digress.
The point is that avant-garde hate changes at whim to whatever they can offend next. Aesthetics come and go, but always remain they same goofy images of silkscreens, black and white xeroxes of gore, and collage art based around fascism. The genre of “neo-folk” is nothing more than a collage of queer culture and avant-garde hate. And the term I made up, “post-neo-folk,” finds newer objects to incorporate in the martial industrial understanding of chants and word play.
I was always into Asian American art, and thought thought maybe an “Asian Aryan” twist of Atari Teenage Riot or Shonen Knife could balance everything out. Little did I know, I fell again for the avant-garde hate trap, and now must deal with the consequences as being “the AxA movement.” It curates my own personal aesthetics, and yet falls for the subcultural trap. I wrote a “queer culture” pamphlet to describe my creative expression in the same way J.G. Ballard wrote his collage art prose in “Why I Want to Fuck Ronald Reagan.” I am pushing the subculture I want to see. I want digital hardcore along with “queer” Unpop anti-liberalism.
Is that too much to ask for?
We discriminate and choose our desires.
For example, I’m a super fan of the anime Patalliro!, and no one seems to care. If only I could live in that universe with that art design and anime aesthetic, I think I would be finally happy. Maybe Patalliro! envisioned avant-garde hate before Boyd Rice put it on paper. That’s why I like it. Mineo Maya knew a lot about the original “queer culture” alongside Yukio Mishima.
I, however, seen many subcultural moments develop on the internet since 2009. Nothing surprises me anymore. Everything intersects like a rhizome. Our influences change with the current of anti-liberalism.
Right now, I see anti-liberalism is in a dark place, as it’s negating any self-criticism, and relying on old tropes of racial nationalism and libertarianism as the motivation. There is no way a bourgeois nationalist will like the same art and music I like. It’s just not possible.
We can be open about love as we can be open about our hate. Hatred is overcame through discussion and rational thought. Yet a pride in hate is welcomed, as open preference and desire becomes the goal.
Have a problem with a hater? Talk it out. No need to shun or to assume it’s a “virus.”
Avant-garde hate has it’s positives and negatives. The scene is mostly negative, for obvious reasons. Tread carefully. No one agrees with on another. Everyone is equally hated. But realize immaturity, selfishness, and irrationality, gets nowhere in politics. I enjoy the works of avant-garde hate, but I would never consider myself apart of the scene anymore. All of them are deeply traumatized liberals or wannabee posers.
If anything, I am my own movement. I love straight edge culture and DIY, yes. But I want my values first. I want my “AxA” ideas to flourish. I represent myself.
The only thing I truly hate is liberalism. Whatever liberalism manifests, I hate it. And sadly, much of avant-garde hate is a byproduct of liberalism. If your going to hate something, hate liberalism. Don’t hate because it’s cool to do so or it’s “punk.”