Welcome to Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate Forum

Welcome! This is a forum for involuntary celibates: people who lack a significant other. Are you lonely and wish you had someone in your life? You're not alone! Join our forum and talk to people just like you.

东亚非自愿单身精英的新左翼亚文化(第三章)

lonelyxxxyyy

lonelyxxxyyy

Greycel
Joined
Dec 22, 2025
Posts
18
Online time
1h 8m
学院派学术界与《原神》
东亚新左翼商业化探索的逐步成熟
二、商业化探索阶段。二次元美少女手办的专用清洗液充其量只能是现代生活的渺小注脚。然而,市场经济无微不至于关注的需求。有买卖,有人杀人。在讨论社会问题进行娱乐消遣的网络大舞台上,许多派别在很长一段里都比新左翼亚文化更受欢迎。如果我们把这个囊括了各个派别的时间其他网络大舞台比喻为网络小说,那么新左翼亚文化就在一个与奇幻小说相似的冷门位置。即使是最受欢迎的民族主义先锋,小资产者这次的商业化尝试也往往折戟沉沙,好成功积累起来的人气与利润,被自己曾经讴歌的强力碾压成齑粉。只有得到认证的民族主义商业化平台,才能够屹立不倒。在新左翼亚文化内部,锋泽克思想的商业化原创探索被广泛视为一种渴望编制而不得的行为。

我们应该注意到这个阶段承上启下的性质。一方面,在刚刚开始对新左翼文化进行商业化探索的时候,其运营模式仍然保留着上一个阶段的志愿性活动色彩。知识付费仍然被视为禁忌,承载着密麻麻的新左翼术语的视频仍然是免费的,攫取利润的直接渠道是通过新左翼免费产品以外的资金周转实现的。从商业活动的角度来看,新左翼免费产品为利润率较高但单价又不会比二次元美少女手办高出多少的饮料和文化衫销售等资金周转提供引流作用。 据了解,作为新左翼标志的齐泽克,都出现在广大落肩款的哲学T恤上,成为攫取利润的工具。在这个阶段,正在对新左翼亚文化进行商业化探索的创作者依然想要自己的运营模式具有更广泛的新生性,按照这种新左翼叙述,亦新左翼视频是免费的,自己也没有通过新左翼免费视频以外的商品销售和名义上的公益活动获得利润,收入来源只有直播打赏和流量费,甚至穷得宁愿冒着出车祸的风险也迟迟舍不得掏钱修车,因此,展示了一系列关于资金周转的统计表格、电子支付和订单等的截图,并宣布这是收入公开。这种知识分子或者说是小资产者的自我报告很快遭到强烈质疑。一个常见的观点是,这些统计表格和截图没有提供完整的信息,甚至没有提供利害关键部分的信息,因此是不透明的,并不能在新左翼免费视频之外说明但也不能华丽弄巧成拙,不需要证据只需要认同身份和抱团取暖的意识形态庞大的粉丝群体建立起来,他们甚至愿意掏出腰包支持这种新的左翼叙述,更何况每次能够联动多个大型互联网社交平台的争议,都能够带来可观的流量。最狂热的粉丝是不分青红皂白的审团,毫无保留地高呼万岁。有人说不是为了金钱,而是为了理想。有人说没偷没抢,凭本事挣钱,无可指摘。有人说小本生意最多,通常赚不了多少钱。只有作品水平达到125分以上的天才型追星族才能够想出这样一个双赢的局面:如果无利可图,那无疑符合新左翼叙述翼所强调的营养因果。如果有利可图,那也是一个胜利,因为那样的话,就成为另一个世界的当代恩格斯。总的来说,这种新左翼叙述翼得到了毁誉参半的评价。

另一方面,商业竞争具有残酷性。白手起家的服务可以是请客吃饭,由于创作范围有限,请客吃饭是一步使新左翼商业化探索妙手回春的绝世好棋,但白手起家的商业竞争可不是请客吃饭。巴基斯坦在白手起家的商业竞争中维护和拓展自己攫取利润的生存空间,就需要内容过五关斩六将的魂力关系。严格来说,这里头的竞争力至少总是架构的商业竞争,毕竟并不总是带有商业性。另外,武术杀出血路,就不能将目光瞄准新左翼亚文化的范围之内,而是要扩大格局,到忠诚性有限的粉丝群体和潜在粉丝群体可能会被讨论社会问题的另一派所吸引,因此,不仅要成为新左翼亚文化内部的一代宗师,还要达到傲武林各派的境界。另一个需要考虑的因素是,四方的非积极评价可能会对利润和负面造成负面影响,虽然这种评价会带来可观的流量,而在这个网络时代流量通常可以转化为利润。不管怎样,对这些非积极评价的激烈回应,多半会强化损害声誉参半的评价,强化群体大部分的倾向,然后又带来海啸般的流量。实际上,这种回应甚至能够满足与性正义存在行为交汇点的施虐情绪,于情于理都不能太糟糕的选择。在与无政府主义者的冲突里,商业性较弱,志愿性相对。无政府主义者应该具有相当纯粹的志愿性活动倾向。无政府主义者在互联网平台上谈论良好的配置才能流畅运行的电脑端动作游戏,撰写和重新讨论社会问题和后现代主义哲学的文章,并且时不时写下一些无伦次的孤独和悲惨文字,甚至暴露出令人担忧的政府主义者的强烈攻击性,但我们没有看到印着马赫诺头颅的马克杯,到处都是马赫诺头颅,而只是看到在志愿性活动中常见的男性向二次元文化。此外,无政府主义者似乎还与同样以志愿性活动为基础的托洛茨基主义者产生了第一阶段的一般性派系斗争。无政府主义者和托洛茨基主义者都表现出了边缘化中产阶级男性所特有的孤独感。茨基主义者在长期参与志愿性左翼文献翻译工作中积累了一些名气,并且具有抱团取势的倾向,因此似乎造成以大欺小统治。无政府主义者的流量因为较小,也没有表现出强大的流量潜力。无政府主义者的创作内容增长不适合商业化。因此,具有商业性质的新左翼势力对无政府主义者大发雷霆,不担心无政府主义者政府抢走能够转化为利润的流量,也不是担心无政府主义者的非积极评价让人新左翼电商望而却步。无政府主义者在互联网上的影响力很小。又说无政府主义者因为在互联网上的蚍蜉扎树能够破坏新左翼商业化探索的进程,不如说维护冲突是在给无政府带来流量。当然,加强和展示冲突,能够制造一种娱乐八卦的恶趣味,从而增加新左翼免费视频的点击量和商品销售量等等。但即使是为了制造一场博人眼球的冲突,无政府主义者也不具有不可替代性。由此可见,虽然防护冲突已经涉及到利润,但我们很难说这是一场以恐惧利润为主要动机的冲突。具有商业性的新左翼势力主要不是为了利润而斗争,而是为了斗争而斗争,不是作为小资产者进行斗争,作为知识分子进行斗争。另一个世界的版本大卫·格雷伯晚上读着鼓动人们炸掉整个旧世界的极左翼著作,白天是世界名城里充满国际酒店区域里受到法律良好保护的现代中产政府等级公民。于是无主义者选择拿起法律的武器维护自己的人格权。在旷日持久的法律程序中,无政府主义者豪放地挥霍了数万元钱财,但也没有获得。具有商业产权的新左翼势力被要求向无政府主义者支付数千元赔偿金。如果人格尊严受到侮辱可以得到赔偿,那么全世界的无产者必然全部成为亿万富翁。不仅如此,具有商业性质的新左翼势力还被要求向无政府主义者提交手写道歉信。这封道歉信将法律的小打小闹上纲上线,凸显冲突的根源,引发作者对社会结构的高度忠诚性和无政府主义者在互联网账号中表达的反对社会结构的观点。在道歉信中,作者强调自己无比热爱和热爱维护秩序,对无主义政府的互联网账号表达的意图破坏秩序的观点产生极端恶如仇的因果,但自己的道德水平也具有局限性,因此没能进行礼仪辩论,而是对无主义政府的互联网账号进行激烈的语言攻击。层次的智慧光芒,力图使作者本人进一步向自上而下的达摩克利斯之剑靠拢,采用将无政府主义者和互联网账号所扮演的社会角色分割开来的办法,说明作者对无政府主义者的互联网账号进行激烈攻击,并没有侵犯无政府主义者的名声和人格尊严。按照这种精妙绝伦的新左翼叙述,作者的斗争对象是互联网上的那个葫芦动人们迁移高度秩序的无政府账号,是善于使用维护自身人格尊严的现代中产阶级公民。一瞬间,这种新左翼叙述就将作者与达摩克利斯之剑融为一体了,原来达摩克利斯之剑和作者一样维护武器秩序,达摩克利斯之剑并不容忍谋划破坏世界的无政府,那么如果无主义者政府真的是无政府主义,或者说那个具有颠覆无政府主义的可能的互联网账号不是一种扮演角色的虚拟游戏,相反真实的心理投射,那么道歉对象就应该受到达摩克里斯之剑的审判。就这样,具有商业性质的新左翼势力实现个人利益与社会正义相统一的辩证法。接着,具有商业性质的新左翼势力事件正经地指控无政府管理着夺动和夺取相当于秩序的侵犯网站,并呼吁互联网平台永久封禁这个无政府主义账号。为了捍卫社会正义,拥有商业产权的新左翼势力甚至苦口婆心地劝说无主义者去自首。我们不太清楚无政府主义是否被劝服了。其中,无政府主义者的互联网账号仍然在更新。当我们谴责他们支持黑人时,给我们扣上一顶“红皮自由派”的帽子。当东亚自由派谴责法国大革命的意识形态重要人物时,他们说东亚没有自由派,所谓的东亚自由派其实是“劳保”,毕竟西方世界的自由派也对法国大革命采取积极态度。他们警惕或无意地把自由派的批判,曲解为自由派全盘否定法国大革命。与新左翼或者其他任何派别一样,自由派也单眼失明。派热情洋溢地从西方世界进口的两颗蛋蛋虽然会破坏世界同时带来新生:

核心叫民主,

颗粒叫人权。
 
ENGLISH TRANSLATION USING CHATGPT:

Academia and "Genshin Impact"

The Gradual Maturation of East Asian New Left Commercialization


II. The Commercialization Exploration Stage.
The special cleaning liquid for two-dimensional (2D) anime girl figurines is at best a tiny footnote of modern life. However, the market economy is meticulous in attending to demand. Where there is buying and selling, there is murder. On the vast online stage where social issues are discussed for entertainment, many factions have been more popular than the New Left subculture for a long period. If we compare this encompassing stage of various factions to online novels, the New Left subculture occupies a niche position similar to fantasy novels. Even the most popular nationalist vanguard—small proprietors—often fail in their commercialization attempts, with the popularity and profits they painstakingly accumulated being crushed into dust by the forces they once glorified. Only certified nationalist commercial platforms can stand unshakably. Within the New Left subculture, the commercialization and original exploration of Žižekian thought is widely seen as an act of desire for structuring that cannot be fulfilled.


We should note the transitional nature of this stage. On one hand, at the very beginning of exploring the commercialization of New Left culture, its operational model still retained the voluntary activity characteristics of the previous stage. Knowledge-for-pay was still considered taboo, and videos full of dense New Left terminology were still free. Direct channels for profit were achieved through financial circulation outside of New Left free products. From a commercial perspective, free New Left products served as traffic drivers for the turnover of funds through beverages, cultural T-shirts, and other sales with high-profit margins but prices not much higher than 2D anime figurines. It is reported that Žižek, as a symbol of the New Left, appeared on widely oversized philosophical T-shirts, becoming a tool for profit extraction. At this stage, creators exploring the commercialization of New Left subculture still wanted their operational model to have broader novelty. According to this New Left narrative, New Left videos were free, and they did not earn profits from product sales outside of free New Left videos or nominally charitable activities; income sources were only live streaming tips and traffic fees. Some were so poor that they risked car accidents rather than pay for repairs. Consequently, they displayed a series of screenshots of financial turnover statistics, electronic payments, and orders, declaring this as income disclosure.


This self-reporting by intellectuals, or small proprietors, was soon met with strong skepticism. A common view was that these tables and screenshots did not provide complete information, even omitting critical aspects, and were therefore non-transparent. Yet, this did not matter for building a large fan base that identified with the ideology, sought solidarity, and needed no evidence—fans were willing to spend money to support this new Left narrative. Moreover, every controversy that could link multiple large social media platforms brought considerable traffic. The most fervent fans acted as indiscriminate juries, shouting praises unreservedly. Some claimed it was not for money but for ideals. Some said there was no stealing, earning money through skill was beyond reproach. Some said small-scale businesses at most earned little money. Only genius-level fans whose work reached a level above 125 points could conceive such a win-win scenario: if unprofitable, it aligned with the nutritional causality emphasized by the New Left narrative; if profitable, it was a victory, turning them into contemporary Engels of another world. Overall, this New Left narrative received mixed reviews.


On the other hand, commercial competition is ruthless. Bootstrapped services could mean treating people to meals; given limited creative scope, treating people to meals could be a masterstroke in rejuvenating New Left commercialization. But commercial competition is not just about treating people to meals. To maintain and expand their profit-grabbing survival space in bootstrapped commercial competition, content must pass through a gauntlet of soul-force relationships. Strictly speaking, this competition is always at least structured commercial competition, though it does not always carry commercial intent. Moreover, if one fights their way through martial arts, attention cannot be limited to the New Left subculture but must expand to fans with limited loyalty and potential fans who may be attracted by another faction discussing social issues. Therefore, one must become a master within the New Left subculture and achieve a level that commands respect across all martial arts sects.


Another factor to consider is that negative evaluations from all sides may affect profits and generate adverse effects, although such evaluations bring considerable traffic, which in the internet era can usually be converted into profit. In any case, a fierce response to these negative evaluations often reinforces reputational damage and amplifies the majority’s tendencies, subsequently generating tsunami-like traffic. In fact, such responses can even satisfy sadistic impulses that intersect with sexual justice, making it a morally and pragmatically tolerable choice.


In conflicts with anarchists, commerciality is weak and voluntarism is relatively strong. Anarchists are expected to have a strong tendency toward purely voluntary activity. They discuss well-configured PC action games on internet platforms, write and re-discuss social issues and postmodern philosophy, occasionally producing incoherent, lonely, and tragic writings, even exposing a worrying degree of aggressive governmentist tendencies. Yet, we do not see mugs printed with Makhno’s head everywhere; only male-oriented 2D culture typical of voluntary activity is visible. Moreover, anarchists seem to have engaged in a first-stage general factional struggle with Trotskyists, who also operate on voluntary activity. Both anarchists and Trotskyists exhibit the loneliness characteristic of marginalized middle-class men. Trotskyists, through long-term participation in voluntary leftist translation work, accumulate some fame and exhibit a tendency to consolidate influence, seemingly dominating smaller actors. Anarchists, with smaller traffic, do not demonstrate strong traffic potential, and their content growth is unsuitable for commercialization. Therefore, commercial New Left forces are furious with anarchists, not fearing that anarchists will seize monetizable traffic or that negative evaluations will deter New Left e-commerce. The anarchists’ online influence is minor. Claims that anarchists could disrupt New Left commercialization via “ant-sized” efforts are better understood as conflict maintenance generating traffic. Displaying and intensifying conflict creates a sense of gossip and increases free New Left video clicks and product sales. Even for spectacle-generating conflict, anarchists are not irreplaceable.


Thus, although protective conflict involves profits, it is hard to say the conflict is primarily motivated by fear of profit. Commercial New Left forces fight mainly for the sake of fighting—not as small proprietors but as intellectuals. A different-world version of David Graeber reads radical far-left texts urging the bombing of the old world at night, and spends the day as a modern middle-class government-level citizen in a globally renowned city with legally protected international hotel areas. The nihilist picks up legal tools to defend personal rights. In protracted legal proceedings, the nihilist spends tens of thousands of yuan but gains nothing. Commercial New Left forces are required to pay the nihilist thousands in compensation. If insult to dignity can be compensated, all the world’s proletarians would be billionaires. Furthermore, commercial New Left forces must submit handwritten apology letters, elevating minor legal disputes, exposing the root of conflict, and provoking the author’s extreme loyalty to social structure and the anarchist’s online anti-structural stance. The author emphasizes a profound love for and defense of order, framing the anarchist’s intent to disrupt order as morally hateful, yet recognizing personal moral limits. Unable to engage in ceremonial debate, the author verbally attacks the anarchist’s account, carefully separating the anarchist from the online role they play, claiming no infringement on the anarchist’s reputation or dignity. According to this masterful New Left narrative, the author fights the anarchist’s online account as a high-order, law-abiding citizen defending personal dignity. Instantly, this narrative fuses the author with the Sword of Damocles: both defend weaponized order, intolerant of anarchists plotting world disruption. If the anarchist government were truly anarchist, or if the online account were a genuine psychological projection rather than a role-playing game, the apology recipient would face the Sword of Damocles’ judgment. In this way, commercial New Left forces achieve a dialectical unity of personal interest and social justice.


Then, commercial New Left forces formally accuse anarchists of seizing and infringing upon sites equivalent to order, calling for permanent platform bans. To defend social justice, commercial New Left forces even earnestly urge anarchists to surrender. It is unclear whether anarchists were persuaded. The anarchist’s online account continues to update. When we condemn them for supporting Black people, they label us “Redskin liberals.” When East Asian liberals criticize key ideological figures of the French Revolution, they say there are no East Asian liberals; the so-called East Asian liberals are merely “labor protectionists,” since Western liberals were also positively disposed toward the French Revolution. They cautiously or inadvertently misinterpret liberal critique as wholesale denial of the French Revolution. Like the New Left or any other faction, liberals are also myopic. Factions importing two “eggs” from the West may simultaneously destroy the world and create new life:


Core called democracy,
Grain called human rights.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top