Rarely have I ever seen far left Buddhists. Most western Buddhists generally are not very far right either, usually they are pretty neoliberal. The neoliberalism of western Buddhists makes sense as what is neoliberalism but the rejection of desire? The victims of neoliberalism are constantly denying their desire to consume more, but the victory of no desire over desire is scarce, similar to the scarcity of Nirvana. All of this implies that leftists desire a lot, and this is true, but not necessarily a bad thing. Desire acts as a sort of driving force of the Thought Machene. It desires to turn the machine’s gears faster, to burn more gas, to produce even more desire. Although leftism acts in this autistic way (never in a state of being comfortable), this doesn’t mean this is a bad thing. Desire and autism are what drove the organ-ization of the Thought Machene. Every leftist desires to achieve something above the status quo, and this is a good thing. Leftism is inherently contradictory with most religions for this desire that it has.
It may sound like I’m implying autism is what drives history, this is not necessarily the case, for it is the relationship between the spectrums of autism and schizophrenia which do. The history of the Thought Machene can be known as a meta-history. The beginning of the universe was the organ-ization of the Thought Machene (an autistic territory), which will end in the complete deterritorialization of the Thought Machene (a schizond deterritorialization). This is just a cycle though, which will start over when finished. This cycle may be called an epoch. Inside of an epoch is a history, which is what makes the history of the Thought Machene a meta-history. In these smaller histories (which may be named daughter histories), there is a more familiar face. What makes this so meta is how the epochs and daughter histories begin and end. As I have said before, an epoch begins through the organ-ization of the Thought Machene, then ends with the deterritorialization of that organ-ized territory. A daughter history has a similar story. It begins with the autistic creation of an ideology (this is autistic as ideology inherently organizes things), then the schizond collapse of this ideology. A daughter history’s history is the same history of that of the epoch except it’s not a meta-history but rather follows the same historical drive as an epoch.
Similar to Buddhism, it should seem like the goal should be to break the chain of the organ-ization of the Thought Machene, but this is wrong. I will make a case against anarcho-primitivism to explain why this is wrong. It may seem as though reverting to primitivism may contradict and that autism is inherently unnatural, thus it’s natural to become primitive. This is a misconception, autism created humanity, which was unnatural, but then humans perpetuated autism, which is natural. This means that autism is natural to humans, but unnatural to the Thought Machene. If anarcho-primitivism is trying to revert to pre-humanity, then it contradicts the Thought Machene’s cycle of epochs, i.e. humans are wired to progress and they can’t do otherwise. In this way Buddhism is similar to anarcho-primitivism, for they desire to not desire, and what makes not desiring a notable desire? In the book Geometry for Ocelots by exurb1a, the opening line is, “The only noble desire is for the end of desire.” What is the justification for this? Nothing at all. Even if the book is a warning, and the omnipotent narrator is claiming this, then why does humanity die in the end? Was it not that they wished to not desire? Did they not want to be under the influence of Jhanamoksha? No.
This is the very problem with the psychology of Buddhists, neoliberals, Christians, conservatives, and anti-leftists. They all deny themselves, and thus achieve nothing. There is no breaking free from the Thought Machene, except autismophrenically embracing it.