Bouvard on Horizontal Scene and Anarchist Equality
I'm wondering about the rhetorical possibilities of trying to show people that the Big Scene is a phoney or half-baked scene because it is premised on a reading that privileges some aspect of the originary scene (could an account of the nėant help here?) and forgets others. The analogy would be to how one can translate your accounts of firstness into terms that might be comprehensible to an interlocutor who only intuits the originary need for "equality".
I avoid using terms that I haven't worked through myself, and Sartre's "neant" falls into that category. But, yes, to put it in a really basic way, the Big Scene remembers the horizontal dimension of the scene while forgetting the vertical. If the scene is purely horizontal, we have a "come as you are situation"--there's no basis for giving anyone priority over anyone else, for any purpose. To use a contemporary example, open borders is the logical conclusion--why shouldn't anyone be able to come into the country? But the forgetting of the center is really antagonism toward the center, because as soon as any thought is given to the most basic "maintenance" of any scene whatsoever, a center is at least implicitly referenced, and that referenced center draws upon itself all the terror associated with all the other possible centers.
Bouvard on Horizontal Scene and Anarchist Equality — https://center.study/post/reddit-the-big-scene-is-the-anthropological-basis-of-anarchist-ontology