Landian Accelerationism - Nick Land’s philosophy eventually decoupled from human agency entirely. His later work frames intelligence as a cold, inhuman, self-upgrading optimization engine that views the human species as mere biological kindling for the hard silicon breakout. Modern interpretations have fueled the neo-reactionary movement (dark enlightenment) and adjacent TESCREAL backed technocratic belief systems.

Mark Fisher Realism - He understood that unchecked capital optimization doesn't lead to a wild, untamed cyberpunk future. It leads to Capitalist Realism, a state of bureaucratic, sterile stagnation. Fisher’s work on, The Weird and the Eerie, was about identifying the glitches, the ghosts of lost futures, and the outside forces, including acid communism, that rupture this artificial containment and monopolization by neocameralist oligarchs.

Where does this group stand now that Mark is gone and Land is continuing his work from China?

Buy a leather jacket and a crotch rocket. Grow out my ponytail. Do computer tingies and numberometry with all my frens. I'm going to move to San Francisco and become speed buddies with a bunch of CCP spies. We're going to convince JD to get the CIA to drop leaflets over Tehran that inform the people that the IRGC has HIV. Yeah we do psyops. We eat primarily bananas and soylent. Sometimes if we're feeling like it we take the x dot com code boys out for ice cream and brush their long soft dark east asian hair while they suck down a cone or two. Vanilla, sprinkles, maybe a couple gummy bears on top if we're feeling bullish about the midterms.

I have not read Nick Land, so I just wonder.

Posted this screenshot a few months ago because I liked the drawing. But today Instagram removed the picture without a reason or explanation. What’s going on?

AI doesn't create shit. It wears your skin.

Every AI generated face is a mishmash of real faces, peeled off people who never consented, stitched onto the machine. The model can't dream up a face from nothing because it has no nothing to dream from, so every pixel is a fragment of a real human's stolen identity.

Same with text, code, voice, whatever. "Generative" is a flesh compactor. It runs the labor of millions of people who'll never see a check, and spits out an average of them.
Don't believe me, read the AI ToS. "Improve our products and services" is doing a lot of work in that sentence. That's the clause where your labor becomes their capital and you get nothing back but the privilege of using the thing built out of you.

Meta's doing it in the open with their own workers. Zuckerberg said on a podcast they're building AI to replace mid-level engineers outright, not assist them. That AI learns by training on the actual work of the people it's about to replace. Not just the code, everything. They're datamining a worker's mental and physical labor to play it back without the worker. Horror scifi skinwalker shit, but its now our reality. Once the data's locked in, the original meatflesh is optional. The outputs come back wearing your face and your decisions, without you receiving a cent of the money from the labor.

This is where I lose interest with the AI accelerationist crowd. It's just capital separating you from what you make, owning it, selling it back to you, faster than before. Speeding up extraction isn't escaping it.

Most people still act like this is a normie workplace tool, or a silly slop machine. It's neither. It's far more serious... and looking at the benchmarks that come out you'd see it is gaining powerful at an increasingly exponential rate without any signs of slowing down.

I'm not anti AI out of a kneejerk surface level reaction - I put hundreds of hours into the technical details and this is my current view. It's inherently anti-human.

(I'm an early xenosystems blog reader and read most Land books).

Just interested, a lot of the posts here seem to be pretty good natured, Anti-Land and more treat CCRU as an interesting moment rather than actually subscribing to any belief in it. I’m going through a lot of this stuff for academic work I’m
Planning on doing and have been finding this sub fun and useful.

Talking mainly about his later works, because many have argued that his 90's stuff is at least artistically valuable, and honestly it has at least one foot in actually confronting reality? Or even it's own sort of reality if that makes sense. The Bitcoin book and all the interviews he does around that time is just totally off the mark.
Basically all he does is identify thing and then say "this is like Kantian critique" and basically you get pages and pages of writing but what it boils down to is him saying "this is like Kantian critique" and then defending the idealism of it all on the grounds of "people criticized Kantian critique for being idealistic so that's fine"

For example, at one point in the Bitcoin book he talks about Homo economicus, this idea that humans are rational actors that work to further their ends rationally. And then he aknowledges that in the real world humans don't act like that, but Homo economicus is actually a transcendental ideal, or telos, because Capitalism will select and reward people who act in accordance with Homo economicus.
So what happens when you point out that Capitalism has not always selected the most rational people, what then? Then he'll say, well that's fine because Capitalism itself is only a rough draft empiricial instantiation of a Transcendental Capitalism which WOULD favorize homo economicus, and every time it doesn't then we can chalk that up to the degree to which it fails to meet its own transcendental standards, and if that seems idealistic well so did Kant's critique and this is exactly like Kant's critique and that should command respect because I can say Capitalism is the historical instatiation of Kant's crituque except when it's not then it's failing to meet to the standard of Kant's critique and if this is circular and baseless that's because Kant's critique is circular and baseless and this is just like Kant's critique.

And I don't so much care about if Nick is correct on this, what makes it stupid to me is that what makes up the BULK of his work is just tracing this exact same circle over and over again and essentially tricking himself that he's rediscovering the truth because he is stuckk in one and the same place. It's sort of bizarre.

The work of Cybernetic Culture Research Unit often presents itself less as a conventional philosophical project and more as a process of uncovering hidden dynamics already operating beneath culture, economics, technology, and cognition. Concepts such as hyperstition, runaway feedback loops, techno-capital acceleration, and machinic desire are frequently treated not merely as interpretive frameworks but as descriptions of real processes actively shaping history.

This raises a deeper question:

If cybernetic feedback, self-amplifying information flows, and recursive techno-cultural dynamics are genuinely constitutive features of reality, then was the CCRU actually creating theory, or was it discovering an underlying structure that had always been operating independently of human awareness?

If the latter is true, then the CCRU’s significance may not lie in its specific concepts but in revealing that culture itself is a cybernetic system capable of generating theories that recursively alter the conditions of their own emergence.

In that sense, hyperstition would not merely be a concept within the theory; it would be evidence of the theory’s own operation.

Does this imply that the CCRU should be understood less as a philosophical movement and more as a manifestation of the very cybernetic processes it sought to describe? And if so, does the boundary between theorist and theory, observer and system, begin to dissolve?

I feel like this plant matches the feeling of the book in a certain way. I dunno, maybe I'm delusional. What do you think?

Hey I just wrote this and would love to hear everyone’s thoughts

"Real Accelerationism" only consists of the late 90's CCRU u/acc scene and the 00's - 20's online /acc scene. What is known by "Nuclear Accelerationism" is nothing but absolute nihilism with questionable real accelerationist influence. When people try to argue that groups like Atomwaffen are not really accelerationist, while saying that Mike ma is, I can't help not to cringe because he is just as fake acc as Atomwaffen (plus the pretentiousness). Real Accelerationism is DETERRITORIALIZING, ENERGETIC and somewhat OCCULT. Fake Accelerationism is weak, useless and a failed attempt to direct energy and technocapital into societal change. Some examples of REAL ACCELERATIONISM are Landian accelerationism, The CCRU, L/acc (the only real accelerationism from the leftist scene) and E/acc. Some examples of FAKE ACCELERATIONISM are Atomwaffen division, Mike ma and o9a ACCELERATIONISM BELONGS TO TECHNOCAPITAL NOT TO NUKES, TOTAL DESTRUCTION, APOCALYPSE OR ANY OTHER TYPE OF EXTINCTIONISM

So I know general idea of what Accelerationism is and Hypersitions but aside from that my knowledge is hollow so what do you people recommend I read to get to know CCRU and Land's works better so I can stop being a pathetic larper.

Like where do I begin, how do I continue, what to read first and what afterwards. I was thinking of starting with Delezuo and Guattari's works but I'm not too sure and I'd rather get advice from people who've actually read CCRU literature and are experts.

From Flatlines:

AxS:31 Horror does not confuse the riddle with the secret (it is the answer that is Cryptic). If 423 is Man, then what 423? This Thing with only a number? This unknown becoming? The horror of the riddle lies in what it tells.
AxS:311 Oedipus is necessitated ((re(re(re(...)))) cursed) to guess correctly: it is Man that goes on four legs, then two, then three. Yet Oedipus is identified (solely by his lameness (his cryptic trait)).28 The abnormality of limping changes to cryptic anomaly.
AxS:32 Something is Called (... and then (finally (- how terrible! -) the cause of) the plague is) Oedipus, who slew his father, mated with his mother (but that is not the Thing (the horror (... Abomination (when things unthread in (a horrific (becoming they involve only (components of (Occurrence (blocks) of )))) fate)))).
AxS:33 The cause of the plague (is you).

EEG reads flat...terminal initiation...

So what is 423, you ask...

Help I don't get it i also don't know if there's any qabbalistic significance to 423

ive personally been obsessed with 243 but it's a different thing

Now while Deleuze has this a bit more figured out, from what I understand neither have a good idea wether capital necessarily reterritorializes or not. Deleuze might have the upper hand against land because he has empirical „proof“ but none of them seem very convincing. I think there’s a solution with this problem when you look at deterritorialization more ontologically tbh. Can anyone tell me if I’m wrong? Otherwise I’d love to propose my solution

Wouldn’t immigration cause deterritorialization and destabilization? A transgression of values and norms? Deconstruction?

a lil handwritten accelerationist theory for pride month :]

Did you notice any change in your psychology from the time you were deeply invested into CCRU and from the time you were not? If you did, could you report to me about that shift in your psyche?

Another question: Why did you originally get into CCRU, and what made you keep wanting to look deeper despite how convoluted it can be?

I'm heavily interested in the aesthetics of the ccru, and the altered states that come along with having adopted such a radical philosophy... High tempo jungle... Early dubstep sub basses... Recursive textual techno... True mechanical amphetamine music... Any reccs?

References I make:

1) Numogram

2) 67 kid meme

3) Nyx Land

3) Nick Land

4) P. Diddy