almost as if fisher wants to polish their annihilation rather than their attunement, but hes phrasing it from the other end as if the goal is flipped. the point should have ended with not the way subjectivity reflects personalized entries on automated entities but the way non automated entities try to factor out subjectivity whilst retaining personalization through the play of analogies surrounding copies and fugues/expanded trigger points. or how theres a convergence where to eliminate conversational radicals (the way its increasingly happening in urbanized spaces) is a control method, you vaporize both the overly normalizable and the overly radical, maintaining this uncanny space, where the goal is to juggle the way in which the dialogue tree both expands the contextually limited and alienated circumstance, whilst drowning out the entrance points of the external world, to the point nothing is expected but everything is still novel.

i'd even argue its not even worth it to speak to anyone in localized urban contexts whatsoever, it only serves to drown you and the realness of the situation further the more you try to signal that theres something that doesnt fit the criteria of performative lockdown being employed by the automated simulation emerging under the fully abstracted realm of wage labour. this itself only serves to obfuscate the spirit of the real is already floating around, animating everything around us.

the real is very much around, swimming through objects, lighting up relations, illuminating estrangement. its so active, so powerful, so fed, that even dialogical insertions, attempts at dialectical tension, attempts at possessing a character all fall flat to it. when accelerationalists point to a hum, a type of static low level noise in the city of capital, they dont realize that this humming ghost is exactly what's producing that sound. it helps hold things together in the city (and by things i mean poisoned cats, poisoned trashcans, ugly birds, halfmad drunk zombie walkers, the unique products of the urban city that you wouldnt find anywhere else). when fake horrible alienated non-conversations and expansive but suffocated dialogue "options"

however, i have to do one more thing, and that's climb above this territory in any way i can, because i'm still technically speaking from fisher's own achievements that don't fully emerge in this speech but do throughout his work. and i'll do that in the form of a suggestion: there are three throughlines that the call center allows: in disco elysium, you get the haunting radio siren slowly mutating - even though its automated and dead, it constantly transforms from the past, it remains in the past, however, echoing dead philosophies but doing so in ever-present ways.

the second line is that the frustrations of the call-center agent constantly appears in deleuzian micro-lines as they speak and behave. even if the rupturing moments are valorized and held together tightly, romance still fails if you dont know what the other side is thinking, and you never do. the third line is the abstraction of war itself which fisher notes through baudrillard. where is the war? its a moving object. the war is paranoia, it surpasses capital itself.

you want to see past capital? try staring really hard into one of its constructions, you will never find it in the impasse, you need to ever more clearly try to enter the zones it thinks it wants you to go into. the conspiracist is the messenger, the prophet of capital, they are the furthest from the vector point of rebellion. i think i've said enough for now to not appear like someone merely walking behind fisher trying to find where the road ends whilst trying not to find myself stuck in his head halfway through that experience instead