887
订阅者
无数据24 小时
-37 天
-830 天
帖子存档
Iran’s 1979 Revolution transferred this logic from the realm of religious imagination into the machinery of the state. The future shifted from a promise into a demand, and the present became a field for measuring loyalty, endurance, and readiness for sacrifice. Within such an order, savagery – whether one wills it or not – finds room to emerge; for suspension must, at all costs, be preserved, violence must be converted into a tool for stabilizing expectation, and death must become a normalized marker in the management of time.
In truth, the future of the formless system that emerged from the condemned revolution of 1979 in Iran never arrives – because it has no concrete existence and remains perpetually absent. This future is bound to a logic that exiles it to the apocalyptic horizon of the appearance of the promised Mahdi. The future is severed from life and reduced to a promise that leaves no trace in history – a promise that cannot be seen, imagined, or spoken, except through the abandonment of reason and experience.
In this condition, violence no longer requires theological justification or moral persuasion. It is enough for suspension to be preserved for erasure, repression, and death to become ordinary actions – actions that do only one thing: keep time suspended and prevent it from reaching an end. When suspension persists even in the absence of belief, what remains can no longer be called an order or an ideology; it is something that kills in order to endure.
Within this apparatus, the body was reduced to the level of a consumable resource, and death acquired meaning only as an instrument. From this point on, violence became a decision: the decision of which bodies would remain and which would be erased, which deaths would be seen and which would be allowed to disappear. Nothing was accidental. Every blow carried a message, and every death drew a new boundary.
The Islamic Republic does not devour everything all at once. It calculates, marks, and strikes precisely where the blow will have the greatest disciplinary effect. Power here is not measured by the volume of blood spilled, but by the precision of selection. This logic of selection -crucially- has its own language and ritual. Politicized Shi‘ism provides a framework that renders suffering bearable and elimination justifiable. The narrative of martyrdom turns death into a form of symbolic capital and makes its distribution possible. Returns -to 1979 and to foundational narratives- serve a function: they supply ready-made documentation for every decision. The past is never closed; it is transformed into a reservoir of legitimacy, ensuring that each new act of erasure can draw on a prepared reference.
Oil binds the regime to a global rhythm that demands continuity above all else. Death moves through institutions the way crude moves through pipelines, at regulated pressure, with minimal interruption. Ritual provides meaning for this movement, bureaucracy sets its tempo, and the extraction economy provides its deepest justification. The ground beneath the country is the material basis of a temporality in which life and death are governed by the same logic of uninterrupted flow.
https://tripleampersand.org/how-was-this-monster-born-contemplations-on-the-ontology-of-the-islamic-republic-of-iran/
ما یک روز زن بزرگ در پیش داریم و خواهیم دید اوضاع چگونه خواهد پیش رفت.
There is a spectacle unfolding within segments of the self-proclaimed radical Left that would be laughable were it not so morally disfiguring. With righteous fury, you denounce the siege of Gaza, the expansion of West Bank settlements, and the normalization of far-Right ethnonationalism. These condemnations are justified. Yet when that same analytical machinery encounters the Islamic Republic of Iran, a clerical state consolidated through mass executions, sustained by routine imprisonment and torture, and enforced through gender apartheid and religious policing, the machinery suddenly stalls. What follows is evasion masquerading as sophistication.
The actual history of the Iranian state shatters your fantasy, which is precisely why you abstract it away.
https://tripleampersand.org/open-letter-to-the-anti-imperialist-left/
مثلا در این مورد، اون تاجرای حقیری که سر صف میرن تو اتاق بازرگانی حکومت و بیست دقیقه بهشون نت میدن و بالا سرشون هم ناظر هست امنیت و حریم شخصی بیشتری داشتن تا کاربر این کانفیگ
از اکستون هم بیشتر رد فلگ داره
هر وقت کانفیگی دستتون اومد لینکش رو (یا اگر به سیاست حریم شخصی هوش مصنوعی مشکوکید، صرفا پارامترهاش + قید پروتکل مورداستفاده (vless, vmess, ss) رو) به هوش مصنوعی بدین و ازش بپرسین تا چه حد امنه و چه قدر سطح دفاعی داره و چه اطلاعاتی ازتون ثبت میشه. در اکثر موارد و در بهترین حالت تنها متادیتاها ازتون باقی میمونه و نه خود دیتا. چیزای جالبی هم یاد میگیرین و رد فلگهای کانفیگها دستتون میاد.
مثلا اینکه داشتن
type=tcp & headerType=http
در اکثر موارد خصوصا اگر همراه tls یا reality نباشه افتضاحه.
کانفیگهایی که reality دارن تا حد زیادی امن هستند اما میشه بهتر هم باشن.
داشتن دامنه ir در آدرس کانفیگ داستان مفصلی داره و به خودی خود بد نیست. در بهترین حالت یک کانفیگ باید ترافیک خودش رو جوری جا بزنه که انگار به جای فلان سایت فیلتر ما داریم پستهای نینی سایت رو بخونیم. این مورد اتفاقا یک سطح دفاعی هست خصوصا اون موقع که فایروال ایران تنها اجازه دسترسی یه سری سایتهای خارجی رو به کاربران عادی میداد و اکثرا سایتهای داخلی در دسترس بود. اما همین هم یک مخمصه دیگه ایجاد میکنه: از دید فایروال ایران، چرا یه کاربر باید 10 گیگ خرج سایت نینی سایت کنه؟ به عبارتی دامنه ir هم شکزدا هست و هم شکزا. برای دور زدن و spoof کردن این الگوهای مصرفی راه هست و بهترین کار اینه که با هوش مصنوعی مشورت کنید و سوال بپرسید که کانفیگ مد نظر تا چه حد امنه. برای خودتون تفسیر نسازید. مثلا encryption=none گاهی اوقات افتضاحه و گاهی اوقات اصلا مشکلی نیست (مثلا اگر با security=reality عجین شده). موارد دیگه هم باید در نظر بگیرید: مثلا اینکه آیا کلاینت v2ray اتون امنه؟ حتی الامکان از گیتهاب دانلود کنید یا اگر خیلی unemployed هستید خودتون سورس رو مطالعه و کامپایل کنید. مورد دیگه امنیت خود سرور هست ولی حتی اگر سرور امن نباشه ولی پارامترهای دفاعی در بهترین حد ممکن باشند دیتا هنوز غیرقابل دسترسه حتی اگر اون سرور تو حوزه علمیه مستقر شده باشه (شایدم دروغ میگم و مزدورم. قرار شد بهم اعتماد نکنید و از هوش مصنوعی بپرسید. بیشوخی، داستان مفصله و منم سردرد گرفتم و گیج شدم تو این rabbit hole. حتی اگر داده رمزنگاری شده باشه، متادیتا ممکنه براتون دردسر شه یا راه اتصال رو ببندن چون متوجه شدن از وی پی ان دارید استفاده میکنید).
من سوادم در این حد قد میده. با هوش مصنوعی مشورت کنید و تحلیلهای آبدوغ خیاری چنلها رو (از جمله همین تحلیل من رو) فوروارد نکنید.
درست همچون ثروت که دیگر نه با جلوههای ثروت بلکه با گردش پنهان سرمایه نظری سنجیده میشود، جنگ نیز نه با میزان جنگ کردن بلکه با وقوع نظریاش در فضایی انتزاعی، الکترونیکی و اطلاعاتی، برآورد میشود، همان فضایی که در آن سرمایه نیز به گردش درمیآید.
این عبارت "خایمال فلسطین" هم چرندی هست که از ریشه مردوده، خایمالی یعنی برای رسیدن به منفعت مادی چاپلوسی کنی، از کسایی که خودشون آواره شدن، دارن قحطی میکشن و تحت یک نسلکشی تمام عیار هستند چه منفعتی میتونه به من برسه که صحبت کردن از رنجشون چاپلوسی برای منافع تعبیر بشه؟ اتفاقا برعکسه و کسایی که از این عبارت استفاده میکنن خودشون خایمالهای واقعی هستن
It would be too easy to say that a Picasso painting in a factory will
never abolish the division of labour and that the multiplication of
multiples, were that to be achieved, will never abolish social division and
the transcendence of Culture. The illusion of the ideologues of the
Multiple (let us not speak here of the conscious or subconscious
speculators among both artists and dealers, though they are by far the
largest group involved) and of cultural dissemination or promotion more
generally is, nonetheless, an instructive one. Their noble effort to democ-
ratize culture or, where the designers are concerned, 'to create beautiful
objects for the greatest number', visibly meets with failure - or with such
commercial success that it becomes suspect as a result, which amounts to
the same thing. But this contradiction is merely apparent: it exists
because these fine souls stubbornly insist on regarding Culture as a
universal, while seeking, at the same time, to disseminate it in the form of finite
objects (whether unique or produced in their thousands). In so doing,
they are merely delivering up to the logic of consumption (i.e. to the
manipulation of signs) certain contents or symbolic activities which were
not previously subject to that logic. Producing multiple works does not
in itself imply any 'vulgarization' or 'loss of quality': what happens is
that, as 'mass-produced' objects, works so produced become effectively objects of the same kind 'as the pair of stockings and the garden chair',
and acquire their meaning in relation to those things. They no longer
stand opposed, as works and as semantic substance - as open significa-
tions - to other finite objects. They have become finite objects themselves
and are part of the package, the constellation of accessories by which the
'socio-cultural' standing of the average citizen is determined. This, at
least, is what would happen in the best of cases, where everyone really
did have access to them. For the moment, although they are not artworks
any longer, these pseudo-works are nonetheless rare objects, economic-
ally or 'psychologically' inaccessible to most people and sustaining, as
distinctive objects, a slightly expanded parallel Culture market.
Jean Baudrillard, The Consumer Society
پشت اکراین رو خالی کرد، رو گرینلند هم که مدتهاست شق کرده، Rojava رو هم که رها کرد جلوی یه مشت داعشی کت و شلوار پوش. ولی نه قطعا برای ایرانیها وارد جنگ میشه.
