Welcome to my TED Talk - poem

Aug 25, 2026

Upload by Aditya

Poetic monologue reflecting on art, politics, and the difficulty of writing contemporary poetry in English while engaging directly with political commitment. The text moves through online reading, post-modern influences, and a recurring provocation: how to talk about killing billionaires—framed as both moral discomfort and tactical concern. It includes a disclaimer about legal advice and shifts into dark, satirical imagery, ending with personal memory and ominous confrontation.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryLiterature

FormatPDF

Pages7

Reading Time11 min

AccessFree to download

Welcome to my TED Talk

Poetic reflection on politics and post-modernism

Provocation: how to talk about killing billionaires

Disclaimer and dark satire

Personal memory and ominous imagery

Welcome to my TED Talk Vincent O’Sullivan’s last words to me were (and this is a real email) : “It would be worth trying to write about one day… why contemporary poetry, at least in English, generally finds it so difficult to accommodate politics? Is it because it seems too‘obvious’ for a tradition that has now become so allusive, that poets in fact have become a bit scared of such directness and commitment? The seductions of post-modernism almost make post-politics obligatory. But that’s another story.” I missed his last session at Verb because my flight was delayed and don’t know if he ever wrote that book, cos I don’t read books about poetry, or books of poetry, or poetry journals, or books. I will be bludgeoned to death by a fury of falling books that I am in but which I still haven’t read, my own name will slice my head wide open. I just read articles, online, about -civilisation collapsing like a face -public-private-partnership governance and procurement standards in the construction of the new Death Star -the Manifesto on Algorithmic Sabotage by the Algorithmic Sabotage Research Group of course -how best to talk about murdering billionaires -the fire in the hills -am I an extremist? -the fire in the hills - is it still going? or -the fire in the hills only writes about vengeance, and I only write about how to do revolution and dictatorship effectively and ineffectivelycos I like to get things right and also wrong at the same time, arriving at XXXMas like I’ve opened Tinder with my nose like I’m ready for the seductions of post-modernism to make post-politics obligatory like we forgot the triple-X rating includes not just the power of love but the power of incredible violence People are concerned about tone issues when talking about murdering billionaires, but it’s not important how skilfully you dive through the burning hoop for points on the board of a game long overthat guy? not a gun, it’s just the groundskeeper, slow in the distance with a long trash picker When I ask ‘how should we talk about killing billionaires’ I don’t mean so your opinion appears morally defensible to yourself and others I mean so you don’t get arrested even though the public is increasingly finally down with killing billionaires. Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, this poem isnot to be taken as legal advice. I do need more legal advice and search engines don’t work anymore another reason why we should kill the billionaires. ‘how should we talk about killing billionaires’ how to talk about the ways to stab them through their ten thousand eyes scanning the crooked timelines of a new gilded age as they stroke their white cats with names gleeful icons of eeeevil Palantir, Sauron, The Metaverse, The Torment Nexus, cats that murder as is their nature how should we talk about killing their owners, whose reading age lags so far behind their bone density? The answer of course is QUIETLY. And I don’t say ‘not at all’ -the alternative to not speaking out loud of killing billionaires, is writing about killing billionaires, and then you gotta start with the data security encryption keys, speed-reading review sites for best secure end-to-end messaging systems of 2024 not currently owned by a billionaire, burning paper discreetly in public without starting afire in the hills when all we wanted was to enjoy a few jokes at the Christmas party about how we should talk about the fact that we should kill billionaires. swarmed as we are by tiny echoes of our own outlines the very gestures of our texture made of miniature mouths chewing the borders of our bodies tunnelbearing into sweetmeat brains til we try to kill only phantoms wearing our own faces instead of billionaires! By the time you lock down your comms and walk carefully backwards with a broom, sweeping your footprints away, you find you’re suddenly prepared for securely making plans to kill billionair

FAQs

What question does the poem repeatedly return to about politics and poetry?

It asks why contemporary poetry in English generally finds it difficult to accommodate politics, linking this to post-modern seductions that make post-politics feel obligatory.

How does the poem frame the idea of “talking about killing billionaires”?

It treats the question as both a public discourse and practical concern, suggesting the alternative to open speech is to write about it while leaning into “quiet” framing and tactical details.

Does the document provide any legal guidance?

It includes a disclaimer stating the author is not a lawyer and that the poem should not be taken as legal advice, while also calling for more legal advice.

Aug 25, 2026

Upload by Aditya