Our point is not to defend radical thought. Any idea that can be defended is presumed guilty. Any idea that does not sustain its own defense deserves to perish. But we have to fight against charges of unreality, lack of responsibility, nihilism, and despair. Radical thought is never depressing. This would be a complete misunderstanding. A moralizing and ideological critique, obsessed by meaning and content, obsessed by a political finality of discourse, never takes into account writing, the act of writing, the poetic, ironic, and allusive form of language, the play with meaning. This critique does not see that the resolution of meaning is right here, in the form itself, in the formal materiality of an expression. As for meaning, it is always unfortunate. Analysis is by its very definition unfortunate since it is born out of a critical disillusion. But language on the contrary is fortunate (happy), even when it designates a world with no illusion, with no hope. This would in fact be here the very definition of radical thought: an intelligence without hope, but a fortunate and happy form. Critics, always being unfortunate (unhappy) in their nature, choose the realm of ideas as their battle field. They do not see that if discourse always tends to produce meaning, language and writing on the contrary are always a matter of illusion. Language and writing are the living illusion of meaning, the resolution of the misfortune of meaning operated through the good fortune of language. This is the only political or transpolitical act that a writer can accomplish. – Jean Baudrillard

1. A new aesthetic is born. Postmodernism is defeatism incarnate. Revolution is long dead, vulgar hippy culture having managed to kill it with little to no effort. Any and all attempts made thus far to subvert the real have failed miserably and proven futile. Regardless of the triumphantist high command's control over the pen, history has shown us ("us" referring to the ones with x-ray eyes) nothing but a vast and continuous debacle, proving nearly without doubt -- but not fully -- that any meaningful attempt made at manipulating reality is really nothing short of analogous to the amount of robotic exasperation that a projectile in the form of a small pebble might cause when striking the chases of an automaton warrior made of steel, weighing in at 10000000 lbs, standing 8341203810283'4842'' tall and harnessing the algorithmic ability to cut rocks with lasers (the lasers don't shoot out of the amalgamation's eyes, but they are none the less "cool"). Objective reality is too far integrated and impenetrable at this point in time; the snowball effect has been set into motion. As we slowly begin to understand that the hyperbolic and hyperrealistic forces of impersonality perforating the objective can provide us with nothing but perforation itself, we are in turn naturally left with nothing but self vestiges presenting themselves to the self as the last forms of hope. It is the salvation of such vestiges that we must not only witness anymore, but act upon. The alienated and estranged "look without touch" style observation of said vestiges has gone on for far too long. If we are to describe these anecdotal failings in terms of "style," then we might also attempt to describe their failings in related colloquialisms as used by their failed curatorship. One such lowly objective distinction might exclaim that a style of this sort has become "passe" to the actualized yet subterranean cause of the self.

2. In order to manifest these obscure remnants of languished and self-vestige based hope, we are left with little option other than the positive action of syncretistic self subversion via means of realistically surreal immolation.

3. As our fate continually proves to be inevitable we have little choice but to wait for it, so why wait under the guise of traditional self-humiliation via means of subjugation to the vacuousness of the ordained zeitgeist? Self humiliation will now transcend itself and burgeon a new form: a form comprised not only of autonomous subversion, but subversion of autonomy -- a merger of the two situated within an aura of penance. The result will be a new form of autonomy based in immolation yet at the same time, juxtaposed with self reverence. Both sides will inexorably converge and clash resulting in, if not pure immolation, an honest and convictional striving for it at the very least.

4. This is a new aesthetic based not only in new music for new ears, but in new thought for ravaged minds and ravaged thought for new minds: Immolationism.

5. Immolationism is unsung hedonism and hedonistic jive.

6. Immolationism understands the truth in polarized meaning. However, while the first level of polarization may seem shockingly adroit in terms of "truistic" expression, immolationism understands this to be an illusion as well. The polarization, when transcending fragmented description/definition and immolating itself at attempted totality is cyclically perpetual. Therefore, immolationism understands truth to be ubiquitous and notions of falsity to be false in terms of their fallaciousness. Fallacy is dead and truth is everything.

7. As such, everything they say about immolationism is true including its complete falsity. The heart of immolationism is the incessant contrast between its existence and non-existence. In this sense, immolationism is in fact not an art movement as its tenets might have you believe. Instead, immolationism is an autonomous non-movement -- one which is always in flux, moving along at a velocity managing certain properties which in turn when defined in terms of elusiveness, are far too nimble for the paws and claws of art to ever grasp outside of a dreamscape. If this is the case, immolationism might then be described as "art in slumber." This of course ends up making it so that unavoidable parallels to artistic ideology become etched in the sand, affirming the axiomatic juxtaposition as described above.

8. Immolationism understands that meaning has no understanding.

9. Immolationism understands that "reality" is necessarily condescending, necessarily jovial and everything all around and in between. In light of this intuitive understanding, immolationism advocates free reign on reciprocity in terms of all elements comprising the spectrum of reality's temperament.

10. Immolationism understands that definitions no longer exist outside of critical and unmitigated definition.

11. Immolationism is the embrace of unadulterated contradiction (and it's about time).

12. As the self is understood to live by day, immolationism may be understood to live by night, yet at the same time, inversion is not necessary. Survival by day is also encouraged, but survival by night is currently projected in a needlessly decaying state. Immolationism is here to fill the gaping void that is the night.

13. Immolationism is the answer and rebuttal to cultures tolerated serfdom in any and all distinct forms within its continuum. However, this is not as simple as it may seem upon first glance. The astute reader will be quick to note that culture has always been in the business of providing a rebuttal to tolerated serfdom in the form of intolerance. While immolationism can and does indeed encompass this traditional sort of rebuttal, it is far from an isolated representation of such. Instead, it is a handshake based representation. Intolerance is now simultaneously and synergistically tolerance's best friend and worst enemy.

14. Immolationism is unrestricted immanence and imminent declassification of circumscription.

15. Profundity is not required, brevity is not required, dogma is not required, erudition is not required, literacy is not required, illiteracy is not required, et al and ad infinitum. All that is required is the completely attempted lack of attempted requirement (existing hand in hand with the required attempted lack of attempted complete requirement of course). Therefore, while would-be smarty-pants might endeavor to label immolationism as intrinsically nihilistic or anarchistic, it should be rather obvious at this point that both doctrines are not required. Engage. At the same time however, while immolationism may be described in a nihilistic sense, it can never take on a nihilistic essence. Immolationism affirms that nothing matters, but since nothing is everything, everything matters. For example, certain adherents of nihilism enjoy making the claim that "meaning beyond the immanent is irrelevant." But if we are to make simple usage of the perpetual cyclic method as described above, we quickly come to the conclusion that irrelevance is immanence beyond (objective) meaning. From this point of understanding, the potentiality for expansion is infinite (meaning is immanence beyond relevance, etc.).

16. Immolationism is not existence preceding essence nor is it essence preceding existence. Instead, immolationism exists within the idea of the complete fusion and reconciliation of existence with essence. As such, immolationism is the end of all dichotomies and all dialectics as we know them, their implosion finally symbolizing the ideology of ontology in a purist and non-scatterbrained form. Dualist rhetorical stylings of the past are of no match nor consequence.

17. Immolationism understands that presupposition within any given realm or paradigm of banality is boring, while presupposition outside of any given realm or paradigm is necessary. Or maybe it doesn't and would only like to. What is important is that either result is of no consequence.

18. Immolationism is etymology beyond the speed of light.

19. Immolationism is not only to be left behind at the departure of argumentation of the uselessness of manifested ambiguity, but instead (hopefully) is to be picked up after school at the ambiguous manifestation of the uselessness of argument.

20. Immolationism is the proposed embrace of all ambiguity and contradiction, permeated with the understanding that self sacrifice -- in terms of critically uncritical awareness, acknowledgement and affirmation for all forms of psychic temperament -- is the only possible and possibly the only means of action allowing for victorious nonsuccess.

21. Not only is immolationism a simulacrum of simultaneous acceptance for all and hatred for all, but is a simulacrum of uncontrolled acceptance for hatred and uncontrolled hatred for acceptance. Why don't you add some more, math whiz?

22. Immolation: syn., immersion, anointment, dousing. Like the uncertain region between destruction and creation which cancels their distinction, it demonstrates the indeterminacy between thirst and its quenching, enflamement and and its extinguishing; literally, to sprinkle food (meal) on a corpse, as opposed to the apparently identical process of salvation, to sprinkle salt on a meal for enhanced salivation. Immolative volition gives flavour to the bland and its philosophy of immersion is the search for the spice of life. As such, immolationism is as far from suicide or sacrificial victimisation as water is from fire or air from earth. It is the congenital genesis of generous sui generis – the social aesthetics of self-actualisation in reciprocal feedback, aka 'embellished growth' or 'ad-ornament' (see 'pantomine'), hence, it is not unbecomingly confused with art.