_statement of purpose + statement of originality = Roadmaps to Revolutions + Formula for Revolution (or, a plea to seek redemption from my savage pasts)

1. If philosophy is “class struggle in action the field of theory”, listening as philosophy in action in the same fields, is the proposition that this report aims to qualify to forward a simple listening hack, a methodological tool, to salvage the comrade from within the recesses of our savage pasts, which cannot never be escaped, only ever be tamed, towards our revolutionary futures. The report is also a presentation in motion, a submission, to the academy, not the academia, to recognize poetry itself as a theoretical act = poetry as theory written in slow, dripping pain. The report is also a shrieking plea to posterity’s ethical & poetic courts of justice to let me present my pain sometimes presented as letters, but always poetry, as my only evidence to consider acquitting me of my savage pasts. 
2. The report aims to make a case for listening as a methodological tool for poetic, political and pedagogical futures. By insisting on listening as a philosophical location of being, I am merely making explicit the methodological roadmaps to the instructions left by Hegel to pursue true self-consciousness in the bootcamps of being. Here, following Hegel (who is also the master in this equation), recognizing that I am NOT because I think, but I think therefore I am, I submit (not surrender) to desire to be the flaneur of the only thinking, never not thinking, always knowing absolute knowing is always an aspiration, never an ambition, terrains. 
3. Hegel did not bring me here, he doesn’t speak to me (yet), in fact, besides what others have read of what he’s written, I have not read any primary texts. My only knowledge of texts written by Hegel are quotable quotes, often quoted, which I have pasted (as “things to do” details) over my desk (borrowed from other’s lives), overlooking a wild, partly rubble-filled, field & erect, handsome never-leaving mountains, with the skies staring into my soul, my only witness, as the only quotes whose quotability ain’t questionable, “… the owl of Minerva spreads its wings only with the falling of the dusk to paint grey on grey” & “… although this does not mean that we all should be mad, but being human presupposes the possibility of madness”.
4. In these terrains I am led by the only mere-mortal of a man, still alive, the closest approximation to a god that will do just well for me, whom I shall call the Master he is in the following equations, Slavoj Zizek. 
5. Befitting his Hegelian-masterly role, he is not the benevolent sorts, he is enlightened & brutal, he demands the knowing. Of course, he offers only two commandments, 1st to be followed by the 2nd, & none further, this is where the endings begin & beginning end, he insists: 1st: submit to the chaos to submit you are the chaos 2nd: submit to structuring the chaos by entering into structures of the chaos
6. He doesn’t offer any enlightenment in the immediate & for eternity, in fact poetry as theory written in slow, dripping pain is his demand. By always revealing the destruction poets can cause, he presents his own pain as his evidence to acquit himself of his savage past.
7. This report is NOT a project, it does not have a due date or its deadline, it is a report which only performs its assigned duty of always reporting. 
8. Via this report, I want to report to the Master, …if you are almost a god, I am a student even beyond the symbolic need of a statute. I shall surely not offer my thumb, it is also my tool, I can only write, I have no other skill sets; I will never sacrifice my life or soul for you, but in the pain, the Master presents in his presentations, I heard his unspoken instructions, he let me know in his own shaking & quivering ways, only churning poetry out of pain (aka & also theory, which shall save the world; if not, beauty will be the casualty), can be the only philosophical redemption from our savage pasts. 
9. I shall return back to the pleas I want to make, the permissions I seek, & the recognitions I desire to seek my own redemptions from my own savage pasts. 
10. But, here, I outline what I learned, listening to the Master, & the teachings which enabled & empowered me to claim my own structures of chaos, which I excavated & extracted from the submissions he demanded (also, fulfilling the literature review demand, complying with the structural integrity of a report). 
11. Hegel is right, always so, but here, even more particularly so.
12. Recognition is the game, desire throws the dice, all the faces the dice show, particularly the ones which are not shown, are still of the same, the self. The only escape from the misery of self, its being & becoming, is to acknowledge the mystery of the others of the self. However, unlike the Kantian core which surrenders (not submit, submission requires deliberation, a master-slave dialogue, the Master insisted) to these mysteries always remaining mysterious, the Hegelian self braces itself, & all of its others too, to enters the bootcamps of being, not to resolve the mystery, but to commit to knowing the mystery, even when knowing that mystery by its default etymological ‘mystic presence, hidden religious symbolism’ associations, shall always remain an aspiration, never an ambition (an ambitions demands destinations). In this always knowing that the mystery cannot be contained, only ever constrained but only by putting “it” (everything which seems mysterious, even the others of self, & particularly the others of the other which the others are presenting) under rigorous due-diligent dialectical bootcamp demands is the Hegelian hack to not let the mystery become mysterious. As I mentioned earlier, I am merely making explicit the methodological hack provided by Hegel, as explained by the Master, by mapping its roadmaps [Zizek Interview: Sex and the Failed Absolute with Douglas Lain, 2023].
13. A self which surrenders to the mysteriousness of the others of the self (& thus also, others of the other) without applying due-diligent dialectical bootcamp instructions can only emerge as a savage self (Ss). 
14. As Zizek categorically insists, everywhere & all the time, that surrendering to the mysteriousness of any other, without investigating their mystery, one only encounters nothingness, which can only produce violence. Nothingness, true to its designated duties, is “a state where nothing is present or where nothing exists that is important or gives meaning to life”. It cannot have structures, not even to demolish, as it lacks foundational grammatical of locations of the “I” to articulate the vocabularies, which are always the chaos & cacophonies of others, into any meaningful, let alone collective, blueprints of being. He further elaborates that the object “I” has to emerge victorious in these dialogues. “I” as the master of the never-not thinking, always-knowing, terrains, the “I” which is the object, the “I” want to be objectified as by the world I have already objectified. I employed the already available Zizekian hacks as a tool kit to map the cartographies in the bootcamps of being by recognizing, identifying & often confusing desire itself with listening in search of the “I”. 
15. Desire as itself listening into the multiplicities of multiplicities of being, self, which always remain partly inaccessible, sometimes incomprehensible, but always available archives to review, classify, discard, reject & dismiss, if not all, the others of the self, but surely some of them. Thus, by identifying listening as a philosophical location of being (otherwise, also desire), in this schematic I further elaborate that the task, challenge & compulsion of the bootcamps of being, which demands translating the love of knowing (self) into absolute knowing (others of the self) can only be actualized by listening to the self (lS) and reading the others (Ro). 
16. Here, reading is not a metaphorical evocation, it is implied in its distinct materiality. The insistence is to recognize, collect & collate the markings only which the others have deliberately made, imprinted, which they are themselves pointing out to, whilst dismissing the self’s listening of the others, but as an unresolvable  matter of desire. To always know, as standing orders to the self whilst in these bootcamps, that desire (dS) in its 12th century sense perhaps can only mean “await what the stars will bring” & to know that showers of these stars can never be contained, but often should be constrained (for these showers can often be acidic too), & perhaps even redirected, by following the methods provided by the Master in his readings of Lacan’s objet petit a’s crisis, cries & its conundrums. 
17. Within this schematic, the report aims to qualify the ‘listening as philosophy in action’ (LpA) proposition as a methodological hack towards poetic, political & pedagogical futures. These futures will necessarily be revolutionary(Rf), not utopian (revolution should always be a distance to cover. utopia are destinations which logically demand destruction), as only a self, “one who shares the same room” with the others of self, hence, “a close companion” can emerge. This self which walks with the markings of the many of its others, in its duties shares its etymological destinies with its 15th century comradely qualifications, thus it always emerges as always already a comrade(cS). 
18. In my attempts to escape my own savages, I trained myself, much like a circus animal, to engage with the other (Oo), big & otherwise, but always an other, to draw desire of the self (dS), desire which is always only of the self, to its never-actualizing, thus always-revolutionary futures(Rf), whilst employing listening to the self as a tool to instruct the self, summoning standing orders in the bootcamps of being, to listen to the Self & read the others. 
19. The other is not a project, who presents a report, which has an end, a delivery date or review demand. An Oo (or, oO) is always already a program on a podium, an invitation, a cast, crew and structures, which are not merely facades but scaffoldings. I insist on listening as a methodological tool for poetic, political & pedagogical futures as it not only facilitates, but is fact built on robust solidarities and the layered scaffoldings on which many of the others, of the self & the others of the others are already always present and presenting themselves. 
20. Otherwise elucidated, the locations on revolutionary roadmaps are thus mapped, pCS (= philosophy as class struggle in the field of theory) demands constantly negotiating the Ss (=savage self {self surrendering to its Kantian core}) by ls (=listening to the self) & practicing with immovable integrity the task of Ro (=Reading of the others) to channelize dS (=desire of the self, desires which are always of the self) towards Rf (=Revolutionary futures) by the privileging the Cs (=comrade self {self sentenced to the Hegelian bootcamps of being}) in its encounters with OSo / oSO (=others of the self, big or otherwise, but always an other), thus, thereby always enacting & performing LpA (=Listening as philosophy in Action) claim of the report.
21. Based on these deductions, the report forwards a simple listening hack to salvage the cS from our Ss, which is also not really an original contribution, but it allows to deduce a straightforward formula for revolution:
22. (dS ↔LpA) (Ss ↔Os) = cS,  thus, Rf  = Cs {pCS + LpA (ls + Ro)}