OOO has on its conscience an incredibly simplified and deformed history of philosophy by means of its its key concept of “correlationism”, or of the even vaguer Harmanian version: the “philosophy of access”. In this grand narrative OOO emerges after a long history of correlational philosophies, including the structuralist and poststructuralist thought-systems that immediately preceded them.
This fantasmatic negative history of post-kantian philosophy is even more desolating in its postive form, where it speaks of its fantasised intellectual “allies”, and not just of its polemical adversaries. The idea that OOO is a genus containing many different species, allows for the various conflicting positions by subsuming them under a unitary generic category.
This generic status of object-orientedism introduces a form of relativism at the meta-level, applied to the (extended) list of OOO philosophers (i.e. to the OOOxians and to anyone that their impudent propaganda can annex to the movement as being OOO-like). OOO fears internal debate and concentrates its polemics on the correlational others, with a very few swipes at each other. Thus the myth of a unified movement is maintained by semantic ascent to a generic unity that abstracts out from all the radical divergences. What is left is a generic category with no substance and a meta-history with no credibility.