619 lines
342 KiB
JavaScript
619 lines
342 KiB
JavaScript
{
|
||
"end2end": {
|
||
"lists": [],
|
||
"desc": "..."
|
||
},
|
||
"net.art": {
|
||
"lists": [
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "\"McKenzie Wark\" <mckenziewark {AT} hotmail.com>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0210/msg00040.html",
|
||
"author_name": "McKenzie Wark",
|
||
"content": "\nSTUDIES IN TACTICAL MEDIA #3\n\n>From Mail Art to Net.art: Ray Johnson and the Lives of the Saints.\n\nMcKenzie Wark <mw35 {AT} nyu.edu>\n\nA review of:\nHow to Draw a Bunny, directed by John Walter, Film Forum, 209 W Houston st.\nhttp://www.filmforum.com\nRay Johnson: How To Draw a Bunny, Feigen Contemporary, 535 W 20th st. New \nYork.\nhttp://www.artnet.com/feigen.html\n\n\n\"Twenty-eight dollars a month -- including utilities.\" This was the line in \nJohn Walker's film about the artist Ray Johnson that makes a New York \naudience release a collective sigh. That it used to be cheaper to live in \nthe city everyone assumes -- but *that* cheap? It's the moment when you \nrealize that the New York art world of the 50s and 60s was a different \nplanet.\n\nRay Johnson is the kind of artist who could only come from such a world. \nSome consider him the founder of Mail Art, which in turn might stand as a \nsignificant but undervalued precursor to Net.art. But he is much more than \nthat.\n\nHow To Draw a Bunny documents Johnson's trajectory from Detroit to the Black \nMountain school to the Lower East Side using an amazing array of photographs \n-- somehow people intuited that he was someone whose life just had to be \ndocumented. There's even footage from a time when a videographer followed \nhim around. (Mercifully, we're shown very little of this, as video does a \npoor job of presenting anyone's legend).\n\nJohnson is one of those artists for whom there is no division between art \nand life. The work that ends up in the frame is a document of a process than \nan artifact. It is not the completion of the creative process but merely its \nmedium, its means; art as a verb, not a thing. The challenge for an artist \nlike Johnson is to live aesthetically. Cheap-rent New York of the 60s, with \nits remarkable concentration of spaces within which to explore such a \npossibility and people with the wit and sensibility to see it when it \nmanifests, is one of the few places this was ever really possible. In the \nwake of the hyper-commodified art world of the present, How to Draw a Bunny \nlooks like something from the Lives of the Saints -- an exemplary life from \nanother time.\n\nMake no mistake -- I don't mean to propose Johnson as a secular equivalent \nof a saint for ironic purposes. There seems to me a real need to identify \nwhat might occupy the place of sainthood, in a world in which even art is \ncompletely dominated by the commodity. By saying there is something saintly \nabout Johnson I do not mean he was a moral goody-goody, the kind of vapid \ngreeting card veneration that has overtaken all kinds of veneration of the \nexceptional, whether saintly or secular. Rather, the artist as saint is \nsomeone who manages to reveal the venality of this world through her or his \nmethod of interacting with it, and in so doing, point toward the possibility \nof living otherwise.\n\nA remarkable range of New York art world luminaries are assembled in this \nfilm to comment on Johnson, and none really have anything much to say about \nhim. The police officer who discovered his body comes much closer to him \nthan any of the commentators who knew Johnson when he was alive. He was, as \na saint should be, opaque to mere psychologizing. He works a different \nplane. Johnson's inner motivations become uninteresting, invisible. It is \nwhat his actions show of what the world is or could become that matter.\n\nThe talking heads who populate the film are called upon as witnesses. They \ntell stories about Johnson which validate his otherness. In some stories, we \nhear of Johnson's ability to aestheticize any and every moment. There is no \nprivileged space where art resides. There's a Dada strain to Johnson's \nantics, but at some point they cease being acts of negation, aimed against \nsome institution or moral. They become pure affirmative acts that open up \nthe possibilities for aesthetic wonder or joy from within everyday lived \ntime.\n\nSome stories are about the commodity aspect of the art-work. When it comes \ntime to name a price, to bargain, Johnson appears to 'haggle', but not in \nthe name of a rational self interest. Rather, he haggles to call into \nquestion not the value of the artwork but the process of valuation. When a \nbuyer counters Johnson's $2000 price with a $1500 offer, he ends up owning \nthe work, with a quarter of it cut out. The correspondence about the value \nbecomes an art in and of itself.\n\nSome of the stories are about the prestige value of art, and its management \nby the museum and gallery system. Johnson uses the horizontal, networked, \ncirculatory possibilities of the US Mail to escape the hierarchical lines of \ncontrol of the art world. But Johnson's mail art is more than that. It has a \npositive dimension as well. It opens up the possibility of a democratic \naesthetic in which any relationship, between anyone, can be the moment of \ncreation and reflection.\n\nOne of my favorite moments in the film shows Pop Art master Roy Lichtenstein \noffering patronizing remarks about Johnson. The joke is on Roy, not Ray. It \nis Lichtenstein whose work now seems dated, obvious, merely bourgeois. It \nwas a form of novelty that validated the systems of commodity and prestige \nvalue against which it rubbed its elegant surfaces. At a time when every \nother gallery in town plays out the tedious end game of Pop with banal \ncartoon gestures decorating the walls, it is Johnson's tiny granules of the \neveryday sublime, glued on cardboard and shoved in envelopes, that speaks to \nthe possibilities of an art to come.\n\nJohnson hung out with or bumped around with key people in the Fluxus and Pop \nArt scenes. It would not be hard to assign him art-historical precedents, \nwhether acknowledged (Joseph Cornell) or unacknowledged (Kurt Schwitters). \nIt makes more sense to think of artists like Schwitters, Cornell, Johnson, \nas spontaneously generated by a commodified culture as an alterative use of \nits most devalued resources. They are figures who get annexed to avant garde \nschools or movements rather than being products of them.\n\nWhat is extraordinary in Johnson's art is the capacity to detach any and \nevery appearance from its everyday relations, seize it for a moment, draw \nout the infinite threads of its possible connection to other moments, fix \nthe trace of those connections in the image, and reinsert it into the \neveryday flux to which it tends -- that is Johnson's practice. One could say \nthis was 'genius', if one could detach that word from its commonplace sense, \nand revalue it as precisely this practice. It is not that Johnson was 'a \ngenius', rather he offers the possibility of freeing that old shopworn word \nfrom its complicity in prestige hierarchies and commodity value. Genius \nmight not be what the great artist 'has', a personal property. It might be a \nrevealing of the spirit of things, outside their capture in the routines of \npower and value.\n\nThere's a small show of Johnson's work at Feigen Contemporary. It's a \ngathering of traces, of letters, collages, photographs, tucked away in the \nbasement, away from the wall decorations on sale upstairs. Feigen himself \nappears in the film, making an asshole of himself. He complains of how \ndifficult Ray Johnson was. How hard it was to deal with him when you \"have a \nbusiness to run.\" It's another precious moment, in which one sees the saint \nas the one who reveals the everyday folly of others, their attachment to \ntrivial or passing things. And does it, what's more, as an act of love. It \nreminds me of nothing so much as Pasolini's Teorama, in which a bourgeois \nfamily witness the sacred but are completely unable to appreciate it for \nwhat it is.\n\nThere is no positive doctrine at work in Ray Johnson's work. It has no \nmessage. It has nothing to declare. It attaches itself to what others value. \nJohnson's collages are populated by a whole pantheon of celebrities, from \nthe art world, Hollywood -- from anywhere. This has nothing to do with Pop \ndeadpan, postmodern irony, Situationist detournément. It is -- and yet isn't \n-- camp. It is more a matter of gathering the most profane detritus of what \nother people value, and pausing over it, lingering over its fallen glory. \nJohnson is always resuscitating the faint pulse of desire, finding a context \nwithin it may breathe. Johnson's style is camp abstracted, camp made both \nmore secret and more open.\n\nThere is a politics to Johnson's various practices, but it is not the \ncapital-P Politics of the avant gardes from Dada to Art & Language. It is an \neveryday, quotidian politics of quotation as a material act, a free indirect \nspeech, a packet switching of the raw material of the connections between \nperception and affection. Here hints a world in which the aesthetic is a \npractice, as Henry Flynt says, of \"just liking\", but also of attempting to \ncommunicate the fleeting, solipsistic experience of liking in the particular \nas an abstracted love of experience in general, beyond the commodity form.\n\nOne of the Johnson photocopies on display at Feigen Contemporary shows two \nof Johnson's bunny head drawings, side by side, which say:\n\n\tCOPY \tCOPY\n\tLEFT\tRIGHT\n\tRAY\tRAY\n\tJOHNSON\tJOHNSON\n\nHere is where his work makes explicit its intimations of net.art, as a \npractice that will take the splitting of the image from its material support \nas a route out of the commodification of art as object. Conceptual art still \nhad too, too precious a notion of the artist's vocation, as grand designer \nof the rationale that others would execute and experience. It dematerialized \nthe art object, but not the artist. If anything the artist becomes more \nvalued in the late 20th century avant gardes precisely through the devaluing \nof the object. Johnson subverts the problem. His work is all craft, not \ngrand design. The conceptual dimension to his work arises out of the \npractice, rather than being imposed upon it. His is a tactical, rather than \na logistics of art as media.\n\nThe usher at Film Forum -- also a witness -- told me this story: When How To \nDraw a Bunny premiered at the Sundance Film Festival, the filmmakers \ndistributed buttons with Johnson's distinctive bunnyhead emblem on them. \nSome of these soon turned up on eBay, either as Johnson 'originals', or \npassed off as the work of the seller. Consequently, the buttons later put on \nsale at Feigen Contemporary have \"Copyright the estate of Ray Johnson\" \nstamped across them. It's a telling sign of how far away we are from an age \nin which Johnson's art might have been possible. When artists are paying \nthousands a month -- without utilities -- to live and work in New York, that \nrare coincidence of concentration and poverty that made Johnson's early work \npossible disappears. There can be no art in any put the most banal sense \nwhen art is immediately branded as \"intellectual property\". This is why it \nmatters to tell and retell the stories of the \"lives of the saints\", such as \nJohnson.\n\nOf course it wasn't all fun and happenings. Johnson moved out to Long Island \nin 1968 after a particularly nasty mugging. From this point on, mail art as \na means of dispersed connection becomes significant. Perhaps the whole \nhistory of the avant gardes is a history of mail art. Perhaps just as there \nis no capital-A Art without a gallery to hang it, there is no avant garde \nwithout a mail system to circulate around it. Perhaps we are obliged to \nthink of Net.art as what escapes the museum or the gallery without \nnecessarily being opposed to it. It can take from Johnson a quite new \npractice for the avant garde. Most avant garde movements are built on \nmembers whose identity is known, in opposition to others, also known in \nadvance. Johnson's New York Correspondance [sic] School is a practice that \ncan address itself to anyone with a zip code.\n\nHow To Draw a Bunny begins and ends with the question of Johnson's suicide \nin 1995. It appears that he arranged his affairs and staged his death as one \nlast artwork. Rather than pondering how extraordinary this seems, one might \ntry to imagine why it is that it should seem extraordinary at all. In what \nother way can an artist 'Return to Sender' a package with no address?\n\nMcKenzie Wark is the author of A Hacker Manifesto\nhttp://subsol.c3.hu/subsol_2/contributors0/warktext.html\n\n\n\n\n\n_________________________________________________________________\nSend and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"follow-up": [
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "anna balint <epistolaris {AT} freemail.hu>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0210/msg00081.html",
|
||
"author_name": "anna balint",
|
||
"content": "\n\n\nI also remember a story about Ray Johnson: a journalist kept asking him\nfor an interview and a visit at his studio at 44 West 7 Street Locust\nValley. After ten years he was admitted in the house. The art critic was\nvery surprised to see that there was nothing but a bed in the whole house.\nIt took some other years for the journalist to understand that Ray Johnson\nemptied his house intentionally on that day when his visit was expected.\nRetrospectively, i understand that this behaviour might have been Ray\nJohnson's way to avoid to have his art called \"tactical\", \"camp\", \"no\npositive doctrine at work\", \"quotidian politics at work\", \"craft, not\ngrand design\".\n\ngreetings,\nanna balint\n\n>\n10/11/02 9:21:12 PM, \"McKenzie Wark\" <mckenziewark {AT} hotmail.com> wrote:\n\n>STUDIES IN TACTICAL MEDIA #3\n>\n>>From Mail Art to Net.art: Ray Johnson and the Lives of the Saints.\n>\n>McKenzie Wark <mw35 {AT} nyu.edu>\n>\n>A review of:\n>How to Draw a Bunny, directed by John Walter, Film Forum, 209 W Houston st.\n>http://www.filmforum.com\n>Ray Johnson: How To Draw a Bunny, Feigen Contemporary, 535 W 20th st. New \n>York.\n>http://www.artnet.com/feigen.html\n>\n>\n\n\n\n\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"date": "Sun, 13 Oct 2002 21:33:54 +0200",
|
||
"message-id": "200210161700.g9GH06V24243 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00081",
|
||
"subject": "<nettime> From Mail Art to Net.art (studies in tactical media #3)"
|
||
}
|
||
],
|
||
"date": "Fri, 11 Oct 2002 15:21:12 -0400",
|
||
"message-id": "200210120710.g9C7AcV27977 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00040",
|
||
"subject": "<nettime> From Mail Art to Net.art (studies in tactical media #3)",
|
||
"list": "nettime_l"
|
||
}
|
||
],
|
||
"desc": "..."
|
||
},
|
||
"Tactical Media": {
|
||
"desc": "...",
|
||
"lists": [
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "joanne richardson <subsol {AT} mi2.hr>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00013.html",
|
||
"author_name": "joanne richardson",
|
||
"content": "\n\nGreetings,\n\nAn earlier version of this text was first circulated on the Next 5 Minutes\n4 editorial mailing list. Current version rewritten for a feature on\ntactical media of the magazine Balkon, due to appear in conjunction with\nthe Cluj, Romania co-edition of N5M4 in September.\n\n\nThe Language of Tactical Media\n..... Joanne Richardson\n\nWorld War III will be a guerilla information war, with no division\nbetween military and civilian participation. -- motto of Tactical Media\nCrew, borrowed from Marshall McLuhan\n\nThe future is a series of small steps leading away from the wreckage of\nthe past, sometimes its actors walk face forward, blind to the history\nplayed out behind their backs, other times, they walk backwards, seeing\nonly the unfulfilled destiny of a vanished time. The promise of the\ntactical media of the future - the end of the spectacular media circus as\neveryone begins to lay their hands on cheap do it yourself media\ntechnologies made possible by new forms of production and distribution -\nwas inspired by a distinction between tactics and strategies made by\nMichel de Certeau in 1974. Strategies, which belong to states, economic\npower, and scientific rationality are formed around a clear sense of\nboundary, a separation between the proper place of the self and an outside\ndefined as an enemy. Tactics insinuate themselves into the others place\nwithout the privilege of separation; they are not a frontal assault on an\nexternal power, but makeshift, temporary infiltrations from the inside\nthrough actions of thefts, hijacks, tricks and pranks. But for de Certeau,\nthe distinction was almost entirely focused on the power of reading (the\nconsumption of signs) to transform submission into subversion. The most\nmemorable example of tactics in The Practice of Everyday Life is the\nindigenous Indians who under Spanish colonization appear to be submissive\nbut really often made of the rituals, representations, and laws imposed\non them something quite different from what their conquerors had in mind;\nthey subverted them not by rejecting or altering them, but by using them\nwith respect to ends and references foreign to the system they had no\nchoice but to accept. The apparently submissive kneel, bow down, put\ntheir hands together in prayer, but they dont believe the words; when\nthey mouth them they secretly mean something that was not intended by the\noriginal producers. The strength of their resistance is in their silent\ninterpretations of these rituals, not in their transformation.\n\nMaybe the most interesting thing about the theory of tactical media is the\nextent to which it abandons rather than pays homage to de Certeau, making\ntactics not a silent production by reading signs without changing them,\nbut outlining the way in which active production can become tactical in\ncontrast to strategic, mainstream media. The examples of tactical media\nhave almost become canonical by now: billboard pirating by Adbusters,\nplagiarized websites by the Italian hackers, 0100101110101101.org,\nRTMarks mock websites for G.W. Bush and the World Trade Organization, and\n(as theYes Men) their impersonations of WTO representatives to deliver\nmessages that dont challenge the WTOs position but over-identify with it\nto the point of absurdity. In contrast to mainstream media, tactical\ninterventions dont occupy a stable ideological place from which they put\nforward counter-arguments; they speak in tongues, offering temporary\nrevelations. But while shifting the emphasis from the consumption of signs\nto an active form of media production, the theory of tactical media seems\nto have lost some of the original contours of de Certeaus distinction.\nThe tactical media universe as mapped by David Garcia and Geert Lovink\nin The ABC of Tactical Media also included alternative media, although\nits logic seems quite different. Grassroots initiatives which are focused\non building a community around other values than the mainstream, do occupy\nan ideological place that is marked as different; they dont infiltrate\nthe mainstream in order to pirate or detourn it, as RTMark might\ninfiltrate the media image of the WTO.\n\nAnd especially in the recent transformation of alternative media into the\nglobal Indymedia network, the separation between Indymedias alternative\nvoice and the mainstream enemy is quite evident. Indymedia critique the\npretensions of mass media to be a true, genuine, democratic form of\nrepresentation; it opposes the false media shell with counter-statements\nmade from a counter-perspective a perspective that is not questioned\nbecause it is assumed as natural. My Italian friends who work with\nIndymedia showed me a video they co-produced about the anti-globalization\ndemonstrations in Prague and asked what I thought. I replied that it was a\ngood piece of propaganda, but as propaganda it never examined its own\nposition. In this video you see a lot of activists who came to Prague from\nAmerica, UK, Netherlands, France, Spain, Italy, etc; occasionally you even\nget ossified Leninist bullshit from members of communist parties. What you\nreally dont get is any reflection of the local Czech context many\nlocals denounced what they saw as attempt to playact a revolution by\nforeigners who invoked slogans from an ideology the Czechs themselves\nconsidered long obsolete. The confrontation of these different\nperspectives is absent from the video, since it is meant to promote\nIndymedias own anarcho-communist position, raised to the level of a\nuniversal truth. And in this sense it was as strategic and dogmatic as\nmainstream media; it was only the content of its message that differed.\n\nDe Certeau was a child of his time, maybe as a former Jesuit he was more\ntimid and better behaved than his siblings, but he played with the same\nconceptual toys. In its historical moment tactics was an important idea\nthat sought to define a way of subverting the information spectacle that\nwould avoid using the same tools (strategies) against its opponent.\nTactics recycled the Situationist idea of detournement: taking over the\nimages and words from the mass spectacle, but putting them through an\nunexpected detour, using them in a way they were not originally intended\nby combining them in surprising combinations, heretical juxtapositions.\nThe Lettrists kidnapped a priest, and, dressed in his gown, gave a sermon\nat the Notre Dame on the death of god; the SI altered the soundtracks of\nkarate and porn films to reflect the struggle against bureaucracy; even\nstriking workers during May 68 stole the media image of James Bond with a\ngun for a poster announcing themselves as the new specter haunting the\nworld. These were neither art nor political speech; their disruptive\npower was that they did not use the familiar, straightforward language of\npolitics. Their wit and lack of directness was a measure of their\nsuccess; the danger always lurking in the background was that this new\nmode of production through theft and infiltration of public spaces,\nincluding the media, could ultimately be used to deliver the same kind of\nblunt, inflexible propaganda as the media spectacle. As a practice,\ndetournement reflected a contradiction between the recognition that\nfighting on the same terrain as the enemy is a seductive but inevitable\ntrap, and the desire to occupy the buildings of power under a new name.\nThis contradiction crystallized in the hijacking metaphor: detourne was a\nverb commonly used to describe the hijacking of a plane.\n\nThe SI played upon this connotation, announcing their own productions as\nhijackings of films, of politics, of quotidian desires. The terrorist as\na symbolic equivalent of the subversion of power was never far in the\nbackground of associations. And in an almost straight line stretching\nacross the precipice of history, aesthetic terrorism continues to be\ninvoked as an honorific title. Etoy advertise themselves as digital\nterrorism; in an interview, Mark Dery called CAE a philosophical\nterrorist cell and made comparisons to the Red Brigades; RTMark is often\ncongratulated for its brand of media terrorism. Now it could be lamented\nthat an unfortunate metaphor is being applied to practices that are very\ndifferent but in what sense is the affinity only a matter of metaphor?\nTerrorism is a way that the weak, lacking the strength in numbers and\npolitical influence, can try to make use of the strong by infiltrating\ntheir places of power, in the hope that the temporary seizure of a key\nbuilding, an airplane, or a politician might shift the balance of things\nand bring power to the bargaining table. Ever since terrorism abandoned\nthe tradition of tyrannicide and became a form of propaganda of the deed,\nit operated through a hijack of the media. Letters to the press,\ncommuniqués: 5 minutes under the opaque illumination of the media\nspotlight. The terrorist use of media hijacks is the point where tactical\nmedia and strategy meet it may be a surprise infiltration rather than a\ndirect attack, but an infiltration with a clear sense of separation\nbetween its own position and that of the enemy, an infiltration that\nultimately mirrors the political organization, juridical system and mode\nof expression of the power it opposes. The Red Brigades hierarchy of\nbrigades, columns, national branches, and an executive committee was a\ndouble of the centralist organization of the state; the Weather\nUndergrounds counter-institution of proletarian justice mimicked the\nobscenity of the law in reverse: We now find the government guilty and\nsentence it to death on the streets. And todays fundamentalist terrorism\nis a mirror of the network society of a stateless, global capitalism.\nWestern educated bin Laden militants dont belong to any specific country;\nthey travel the globe from Bosnia to Paris and New York, use the internet\nand cellular phones, and have access to communication networks even in a\ndesert cave.\n\nAsking how media can be used tactically today implies a recognition of the\ncontradictory history in which the idea was born the moment of crisis\nwhen new social forces rendered old categories obsolete, and Marxism began\nto reveal itself as a bankrupt system in which capitalism found not its\nabolition but its supreme fulfillment. But alongside new ideas and the\nsearch for a new language, lingered old modes of organization dating back\nto the Jacobin terror, and the mythic image of the armed, militant hero.\nTactics sought to express a new way that the weak could fight against\npower by using different tools - but in the old language of military\nengagement. Before de Certeau, the distinction between tactics and\nstrategy was invoked by Clausewitz in 1812. Tactics is the manner of\nconducting each separate combat; strategy is the means of combining\nindividual combats to attain the general objective of the war. Tactics is\nthe deployment of individual parts, strategy, the overview of the whole.\nThis is a very different distinction from de Certeaus opposition between\nmodes of combat; de Certeaus tactics is actually closer to what\nClausewitz called strategem a concealed, indirect movement which doesnt\nactually deceive but provokes the enemy to commit errors of understanding.\nThis is analogous to what Sun Tzu termed a war of maneuver an artifice\nof diversion undertaken by weak forces against a large, well-organized\nopponent, an unexpected move that entices the enemy, leading him to make\nmistakes, and eventually self-destruct.\n\nWhether direct or concealed, offensive or defensive, using the strength of\nnumbers or the artifice of diversion, both strategy and tactics belong to\nthe art of warfare and have the same objectives: conquering the armed\npower of the enemy, taking possession of his goods and other sources of\nstrength, and gaining public opinion by destroying the enemys\ncredibility. And perhaps this is the limitation of a media theory based\non a distinction between tactics and strategies - ultimately both are a\nform of war against an enemy power. The tactics of media hacks may differ\nfrom the strategy of independent, alternative media in their formal\naspects, but what seems common to both is their self-definition through an\nact of opposition. A fake GWBush page cannot exist without the authentic\none, which it parodies. Indymedia cannot exist without global capital,\nwhose abuses it chronicles, or without mainstream media, whose\nfalsifications it denounces. The mainstream spectacle also needs an\nembodiment of opposition to the universal values of democracy, enlightened\nhumanitarianism, and the right to consume without restraint. And after the\ncollapse of the other of Eastern Europe, the image of the terrorist is\nnow the perfect media fantasy, the face against which it can define its\nown values in reverse.\n\nThis reflection was occasioned by my editorial participation in the 4th\nNext 5 Minutes Festival; its an attempt to think about its content, which\nproposes an investigation of the meaning of tactical media in the wake of\nSeptember 11, and its decentralized organizational structure, which will\ntransform it into a series of dispersed but linked events, each focused on\ndifferent local issues. If as David Garcia admits, the idea of tactical\nmedia grew out of a specifically Amsterdam context (or perhaps in a wider\nsense, the liberal democratic context of the countries of advanced\ncapitalism), it is commendable that N5M4 is attempting to transcend its\norigins and include initiatives that were previously left out of what\nseemed to be a primarily western idea of tactical media. The editorial\nteam for N5M4 includes media tacticians like CAE, members of the Indymedia\nnetwork, media centers in post-socialist countries which provide\ninfrastructural support and access and education to local producers, and\nEuropean organizations which provide ICT assistance to groups in Mali,\nGhana, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, Jamaica, and Bolivia. Under the expanded\ncover concept of tactical media are included what appear to be both\ntactical and strategic media, as well phenomena that differ from both\ninsofar as they are not forms of warfare - initiatives to provide\ninfrastructure, improved access, means of communication and exchange to\npeople who for economic and political reasons are lacking these means.\nThese modes of production and exchange are not primarily constituted by\nbeing directed against an enemy; the content is not determined in advance\nthrough a preconceived opposition, but left to be shaped by its producers.\nNow to my mind, labeling all these diverse practices forms of tactical\nmedia risks missing precisely their differences and making the term\nmeaningless. This loss of signification seems to correspond, in inverse\nproportion, to the recent inflation of tactical media as a cool label on\nthe market of ideas. Instead of analyzing concretely what is inherent in\ndifferent forms of media production and the ideologies they shelter and\npreserve, the term papers over their contradictions. Tactical media is\ngood, progressive, alternative, etc. There is no need to ask questions,\nits truth already appears self-evident.\n\nAfter making some extremely arrogant, offensive films of Maoist propaganda\nduring the early 1970s, Godard became embarrassed. And started making\nfilms that had nothing to say. Here & Elsewhere we went to Palestine a\nfew years ago, Godard says. To make a film about the coming revolution.\nBut who is this we, here? Why did we go there, elsewhere? And why dont\nhere and elsewhere ever really meet? What do we mean when we use this\nstrange word revolution? It is only when he was old that Godard learned\nhow to ask questions, stumbling around like a foreigner in a language and\na history he did not possess. Here & Elsewhere, which came out in the same\nyear as de Certeaus book, occupies no fixed position, moves towards no\npreconceived destination, and takes nothing for granted, not even its own\nvoice. In an era dominated by a politics of the message (statements,\ndeclarations of war, communiqués, demands in the form of new five year\nplans), it searches for a politics of the question.\n\nThe idea of tactical media is the harbinger of a question both necessary\nand timely: how is it possible to make media otherwise, media that\nexpresses its solidarity with the humiliated thoughts and incomprehensible\ndesires of those who seem doomed to silence, media that does not mirror\nthe strategic power of the mainstream by lapsing into a self-certain\npropaganda identical to itself and blind to its own history. But the\nlanguage of tactical media simultaneously imprisons the idea of a\ndifferent type of media production inside a theory of warfare, as a media\nof opposition, defined in relation to its enemy. While it is necessary to\ncontinue asking the question and experimenting with models of media\nproduction that work in situations of crisis and adversity, it is also\nimportant to know when to change terrain. As wars rage around us - wars\nthat rationalize the trafficking in merchandise under the shadow of\nsublime principles, wars against terrorism, wars against drugs, wars of\ninformation against information - maybe what we need least is to advertise\nour practice as an extension of one or another principle of warfare. When\nasked to take sides, for or against, siding with one army or the other,\nsometimes the only real answer is not to play the game. This refusal\nshould not be confused with an exodus, a silent passivity, or a patient\nresignation. It is the vigilance of continuing to think, beyond the\nobvious - of a third, a fourth, or fifth alternative to the apocalyptic or\nutopian sense of the media.\n\n\n\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
|
||
"follow-up": [
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "\"McKenzie Wark\" <mckenziewark {AT} hotmail.com>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00017.html",
|
||
"author_name": "McKenzie Wark",
|
||
"content": "\n\n[from] Tactical Media and Tactical Knowledge\nMcKenzie Wark\n\n\nGeert Lovink and David Garcia speak of a tactical media that\nmight free itself from the dialectic of being an alternative or\nan opposition, which merely reproduces the sterile sense of a\nWedom versus a Theydom in the media sphere. They claim\nthat the \"identity politics, media critiques and theories of\nrepresentation\" that were the foundation of oppositional\nmedia practices \"are themselves in crisis.\" They propose\ninstead an \"existential aesthetic\" based on the temporary\n\"creation of spaces, channels and platforms\". Lovink and\nGarcia's seminal text on tactical media doesn't entirely succeed\nin extracting itself from the oppositional language of Wedom\nversus Theydom, but it points towards an alterative strategy\nto the negation that paradoxically unites Osama Bin Laden,\nGeorge W Bush and the writers of The Nation as purveyors,\nnot of the same world view, but of world views constructed\nthe same way. It is a question of combining tactical media\nwith a tactical knowledge, of using the extensive vector of\nthe media in combination with the intensive vector of the\nscholarly archive.\n\nIn a nominally democratic country, one acts as part of a public\nsphere in the sense Alexander Kluge give to the term. A\npublic sphere a matrix of accessible vectors acts as a\npoint of exchange between private experience and public life;\nbetween intimate, incommunicable experience and collective\nperception. Public networks are arenas where the struggle to\ncommunicate takes place. Two aspects of this concept are\nrelevant here. For Kluge, writing in post war Germany, the\nproblem revolves around the historic failure in 1933 of the\npublic sphere to prevent the rise of fascism. \"Since 1933 we\nhave been waging a war that has not stopped. It is always\nthe same theme the noncorrelation of intimacy and public\nlife and the same question: how can I communicate strong\nemotions to build a common life?\" For Kluge, the public\nsphere is a fundamentally problematic domain, caught\nbetween the complexities of the social and the increasing\nseparation of private life.\n\nOne has to ask: for whom does Kluge imagine he speaks?\nPerhaps there are other experiences of the relation between\nthe time of intimate experience and the time of the public\nsphere, buried out there in popular culture. Perhaps it is only\nintellectuals who feel so estranged from the time of\ninformation in the era of telesthesia. After all, the mode of\naddress adopted by most popular media doesn't speak to a\nhighly cultured intellectual like Kluge or even a provincial\none like me. We were trained in slower ways of handling\ninformation, and have a repertoire of quite different stories\nwith which to filter present events. How could we claim to\nknow what goes on out there in the other interzones, in quite\nother spaces where different flows from different vectors\nmeet quite other memories and experiences of everyday life?\nAfter all, we intellectuals keep finding more than enough\ndifferences amongst ourselves.\n\nA tactical knowledge of media may have among its merits the\nfact that it takes these other interzones seriously. It tries to\ntheorize the frictions between Kluge's intimate experience and\nthe network of vectors, or it actually tries to collect and\ninterpret accounts of such experiences. It is necessary to at\nleast attempt to maintain a self-critical relation to the codes\nand practices of the interzone specific to intellectual media\nexperiences. After all, 'our' training, 'our' prejudices in\nrelation to the vector might be part of the problem. Nothing\nexempts 'our' institutions and interests from the war of the\nvector, the struggle to control the trajectories of information.\n\nWith the spread of the vector into the private realm, a\nwindow opens that might be used to create a line along\nwhich the communication of intimate experience and collective\nfeeling might take place, in those eventful moments when\ntheir separation collapses. The protocols of tactical media are\nnot given in advance. As Gilles Deleuze says: \"Experiment,\nnever interpret.\" What is at stake is not the recreation of the\npublic grounds for a universal reason, but finding the tactical\nresources for a far more differentiated and diverse struggle\nto communicate, that simple thing so hard to achieve.\n\nThe maintenance of democracy requires a practice within the\npublic networks for responding to events that it was never\nquite designed to handle. Virilio asks whether democracy is\nstill possible in this era of what he calls 'chronopolitics'.\nPerhaps democracy succumbs to 'dromocracy' the power\nof the people ploughed under by the power to technological\nspeed. Well perhaps, but the only way to forestall such\npessimism is to experiment with tactics for knowing and\nacting in the face of events. One has to experiment with\nrelatively freely available conceptual tools and practices and\nbase a democratic knowledge on them. This may involve\nmoving beyond the techniques and procedures of the\nacademy. In Antonio Gramsci's terms, the academic\nintellectual risks becoming merely a traditional intellectual, one\nof many layers of cultural sediment, deposited and passed\nover by the engine capital and the trajectory of the vector,\ncaught up in a temporality that is not even dialectically\nresistant, but is merely residual. One has to make organic\nconnections with the leading media and cultural practices of\nthe day.\n\nNevertheless, the historic memory and living tissue of\nscholarship stores resources that are useful and vital. In\nstudying an event like September 11, a tactical knowledge can\nbuild on the best of two existing critical approaches. To the\nschools that concentrate on the structural power of\ntransnational capital flows and military coercion it adds a\nclose attention to the power of transgressive media vectors\nand the specific features of the events they generate. To the\nschools that study the space of the media text in the context\nof periodic struggles for influence with the national-popular\ndiscourse it adds an international dimension and a closer\nattention to the changing technical means that produce\ninformation flows. The event is a phenomena a little too\nslippery for either of these approaches. Hence the need to\nexamine it in a new light, as the chance encounter of the local\nconjuncture with the global vector on the operating table.\n\nThe chance encounter of Osama Bin Laden with CNN, like\nthe meeting of the umbrella with the sewing machine, has a\nsurreal, 'surgical' logic specific to it. It is not entirely reducible\nto the long term temporalities of capital or military power and\nlies in the spaces between national-popular discourses.\nWriting the vector is not really something that can be\npractices with the tools of the Herbert Schiller school of\npolitical economy or the Stuart Hall school of cultural studies,\nalone, although a tactical knowledge might owes something\nto both. A tactical intellectual practice that uses the moment\nof the event to cross the divide between infrastructural and\nsuperstructural time.\n\nThe event is not reducible to the methods of the 'areas\nspecialists'. When studying events from the point of view of\nthe site at which the originate, they always remain the\nprovince of specialists who deal with that particular turf.\nEvents often generate valuable responses from area\nspecialists, but these usually focus on the economic, political or\ncultural factors at work in the area the specialists know first\nhand. They do not often analyze the vectoral trajectories via\nwhich the rest of the world views the event. A tactical\nknowledge borrows from area studies without being caught\nwithin its territorial prerogatives.\n\nIn an age when transnational media flows are running across\nall those academic specialties, perhaps it is time to construct a\ndiscourse that follows the flow of information (and power)\nacross both the geographic and conceptual borders of\ndiscourse. Perhaps it is time to start experimenting, as Kluge\nhas done, with modes of disseminating critical information in\nthe vector field. Perhaps it is time to examine intellectual\npractices of storing, retrieving and circulating knowledge.\nWithout wishing to return to the practice of the 'general\nintellectual', it may be worth considering whether the\ndevelopment of the vector calls for new ways for playing the\nrole of the tactical intellectual. The tactical intellectual would\ncombine the practices of tactical media and tactical\nscholarship, while being careful not to fall into the temporality\nof either journalism or the academy, but rather remain alert\nto the moments in which such distinct times are brought into\ncrisis by the time of the event.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n___________________________________________________\n\nhttp://subsol.c3.hu/subsol_2/contributors0/warktext.html\n ... we no longer have roots, we have aerials ...\n___________________________________________________\n\n\n_________________________________________________________________\nMSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: \nhttp://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"date": "Wed, 03 Jul 2002 17:16:33 -0400",
|
||
"message-id": "200207041210.IAA01221 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00017",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "\"Michael Benson\" <michael.benson {AT} pristop.si>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00018.html",
|
||
"author_name": "Michael Benson",
|
||
"content": "\nJoanne:\n\nReading your text on tactical media reminds me of the experience of seeing\na group of Ljubljana skinheads aggressively singing the words to the\nSlovenian national anthem the other day. One would think that the effect\nwould be nationalistic, which is what they intended, but the lyrics kept\non tripping them up -- only they themselves didn't know it. (The words\ncall for equality and peace among nations) So in the skinhead's case,\nthere was a kind of inadvertent monkeywrenching or Adbuster-style action,\nbut one where the subversion which crept into the mix was there to begin\nwith: it was only the context of the racist nationalists singing it that\ngave it a nice reversal only apparent to an outside observer. And so what\nwas meant to be menacing was actually funny, its racist/nationalist\ndelivery subverted not by its subtext but by its text. It was the song\nthat detourned the singers.\n\nIn your case, what was meant to read as incisive analysis, couched in a\nhard-edged, dispassionate variant of the academese everyone's familiar\nwith, is a kind of fog concealing exactly what you inaccurately accuse\nGodard of: it has \"nothing to say\" -- beyond its citations. If there's any\nkind of revelation in this post it's in your uneasy fascination with\nGodard's film about the Palestinian cause. (Right -- the same one I got to\nrefamiliarize myself with because you lent me a tape of it when you were\nin Ljubljana. For the record.) \"Here & Elsewhere\" doesn't have nothing to\nsay -- rather it's the only film document I know of that accurately\nconveys the complexity of the Palestinian/Israeli disaster, for which\nthere are exactly no easy answers, and maybe no answers at all. But when I\naccuse you of having nothing to say it's also not quite right, because\nthere's something fascinating about the coexistence of your ambivalent\nobservations about his film with your other observations, all of which\nlead to a conclusion in which fellow travelers are advised to drop the\nmetaphors of warfare, something (we're told) that's not a cop-out but\ninstead shows \"the vigilance of continuing to think, beyond the\nobvious...\" Are we beyond the obvious here? Didn't \"Here & Elsewhere\"\nalready signpost an alternative to what you call the apocalyptic vs.\nutopian \"sense\" of the media, 30 years ago? Isn't that, more than\napproximately, the very voice of Godard's film I detect, rising like a\nstale but at least believable truth in your conclusion? I detect \"nothing\nto say\" in your post beyond what you inherited from those you'd accuse of\nthe same.\n\nRegards, MB\n\n\n\n\n\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
|
||
"date": "Thu, 4 Jul 2002 17:34:22 +0200",
|
||
"message-id": "200207042310.TAA15484 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00018",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "\"David Goldschmidt\" <dgoldsch {AT} tampabay.rr.com>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00023.html",
|
||
"author_name": "David Goldschmidt",
|
||
"content": "\nMichael-\n\nClearly you profess to have an intimate understanding of JoAnne's motives,\nconclusions. But, IMO, you only provide me with more evidence that the\ninherently paranoid only see the ulterior motive. If your not paranoid\nthen you are under the delusion that your previous interactions with her\nhave given you the insight to critique her for now, and forever. All I\ncan do is applaud her. I hope she ignores you, Michael. She is the\nauthor ... you are nothing but a critic. She took her time to deliver a\ndispassionate and eloquent arguement (with proper citations) that was very\nenlighening (especailly for those of us who think the anti-globalisation\nfolks are full of shit and just looking for a fight). And you, as a\nsimpleton, rebuff her out-of-hand. You think you're so clever with your\ninsider information ... but you're not ... you either missed (or ignored)\nthe big picture.\n\nAs a very liberal democrat, I keep waiting for the anti-globalisation\nfreaks to offer an alternative to the status quo ... but you never do. \nIf they ever offered the first first idea on how to \"better\" govern then I\nwould be their greatest champion ... but all I ever see is criticizism.\n\nIt may not mean much ...but I would like to thank JoAnne. The perspective\nshe presented may have been \"obvious\" to Michael but it was new to me.\n\ndavid goldschmidt\n\n\n\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
|
||
"date": "Thu, 4 Jul 2002 23:41:08 -0400",
|
||
"message-id": "200207051821.OAA07631 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00023",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "Morlock Elloi <morlockelloi {AT} yahoo.com>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00032.html",
|
||
"author_name": "Morlock Elloi",
|
||
"content": "\n> As a very liberal democrat, I keep waiting for the anti-globalisation\n> freaks to offer an alternative to the status quo ... but you never do. \n> If they ever offered the first first idea on how to \"better\" govern then I\n> would be their greatest champion ... but all I ever see is criticizism.\n\nNorman Mailer in 1962 interview:\n\n\nThere's something pompous about people who join peace movements, SANE,\nand so forth. They're the radical equivalent to working for the FBI. You\nsee, nobody can criticize you. You're doing God's work, you're clean.\nHow can anyone object to anybody who works for SANE or is for banning\nthe bomb?\n\n- You're not questioning their motives, are you?\n\nI am questioning their motives. I think there's something doubtful about\nthese people. I don't trust them. I think they're totalitarian in\nspirit. Now, of course I'm certainly not saying they're Communist, and\nthey most obviously are not Fascists, but there are new kinds of\ntotalitarians. A most numerous number since World War II.\n\n\n=====\nend\n(of original message)\n\nY-a*h*o-o (yes, they scan for this) spam follows:\n\n__________________________________________________\nDo You Yahoo!?\nSign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free\nhttp://sbc.yahoo.com\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"date": "Fri, 5 Jul 2002 14:13:49 -0700 (PDT)",
|
||
"message-id": "200207061922.PAA10638 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00032",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "proff {AT} iq.org (Julian Assange)",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00039.html",
|
||
"author_name": "Julian Assange",
|
||
"content": "\n> would be their greatest champion ... but all I ever see is criticizism.\n\nNature is life's greatist critic. Yet through nothing more than its\nrelentless takedowns it has created man.\n\n--\n Julian Assange |If you want to build a ship, don't drum up people\n |together to collect wood or assign them tasks and\n proff {AT} iq.org |work, but rather teach them to long for the endless\n proff {AT} gnu.ai.mit.edu |immensity of the sea. -- Antoine de Saint Exupery\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"date": "Sat, 6 Jul 2002 14:33:26 +1000 (EST)",
|
||
"message-id": "200207070339.XAA22349 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00039",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "joanne richardson <subsol {AT} mi2.hr>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00045.html",
|
||
"author_name": "joanne richardson",
|
||
"content": "\nDear Michael,\n\nWow, it's not every day I get compared to a Slovenian skinhead\naggressively singing a dispassionate anthem. I find it hard to reply since\nyou're right: I have nothing to say, offer no original ideas or\nconclusions about what is to be done, and only cite a few names and ask a\nfew questions - about some things I think are often passed over in\nsilence.\n\n> Are we beyond the obvious here? Didn't \"Here & Elsewhere\"\n> already signpost an alternative to what you call the apocalyptic vs.\n> utopian \"sense\" of the media, 30 years ago?\n\nWell, yes, that was the reason I used the example. Your reply seems based\non a misunderstanding that I'm \"accusing\" Godard of having nothing to say.\nWhen I said that Godard became embarrassed about his past and started\nmaking films that had \"nothing to say\" I was at least ironic, and at best\nserious. Apologies for not being obvious and straightforward enough, and\nat the same time too academic. The contrast was between having something\nto say -- in the sense of making absolutely declarative statements like the\none's we're familiar with from the history of manifestoes - and telling a\nhistory by way of asking questions. So I am neither ambivalent nor\nuneasily fascinated by H&E, and I would agree with you that the film is\none of the better examples of conveying the complexity of the\nPalestinian/Israeli disaster, maybe because it asks a lot of naďve\nquestions, presents contradictory perspectives on the event, and instead\nof offering easy answers, leaves it up to others to draw inferences and\nconclusions. The contrast was also meant to suggest that it is maybe too\neasy to criticize something like the 'anti-globalization' movement for\nbeing merely negative and lacking any positive demands. It's not just a\nquestion of having something to say, but how you say it, how convinced you\nare of the correctness of your theory, who participates in it, how open it\nis to criticism and recognizing its contradictions, and probably a lot of\nother things which can't be listed in advance.\n\nCiao,\nJoanne\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"date": "Sun, 7 Jul 2002 10:21:40 +0200 (MEST)",
|
||
"message-id": "200207071810.OAA10594 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00045",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "Benjamin Geer <benjamin.geer {AT} attac.org.uk>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00056.html",
|
||
"author_name": "Benjamin Geer",
|
||
"content": "\nOn Friday 05 July 2002 10:13 pm, Morlock Elloi wrote:\n> [someone else] wrote:\n> > As a very liberal democrat, I keep waiting for the anti-globalisation\n> > freaks to offer an alternative to the status quo ... but you never do.\n> > If they ever offered the first first idea on how to \"better\" govern then\n> > I would be their greatest champion ... but all I ever see is criticizism.\n\nMichael Albert, editor of ZNet (http://www.znet.org), has what I think is a\nvery sensible proposal called `Participatory Economics', about how regional\neconomies could be run on the basis of participatory democracy. He's written\ntwo or three books about it:\n\nhttp://www.parecon.org\n\nBen\n\n\n\n________________________________________________________________________\nThis email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan\nservice. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working\naround the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com\n________________________________________________________________________\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"date": "Mon, 8 Jul 2002 10:02:18 +0100",
|
||
"message-id": "200207081634.MAA09955 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00056",
|
||
"subject": "Fwd: Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "\"nettime's digest\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00061.html",
|
||
"author_name": "nettime's digest",
|
||
"content": "\n\nTable of Contents:\n\n RE: Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media \n \"Derek Baker\" <derek {AT} perfectfit.net> \n\n Re: Fwd: Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media \n \"N Jett\" <njett {AT} hotmail.com> \n\n\n\n------------------------------\n\nDate: Mon, 8 Jul 2002 13:07:10 -0700\nFrom: \"Derek Baker\" <derek {AT} perfectfit.net>\nSubject: RE: Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media\n\nAlso Read: When Corporations Rule the World by David Korten. The entire\nsecond half of the book is dedicated to resolving 'the problem'.\n\n- -----Original Message-----\nFrom: nettime-l-request {AT} bbs.thing.net\n[mailto:nettime-l-request {AT} bbs.thing.net]On Behalf Of Benjamin Geer\nSent: Monday, July 08, 2002 2:02 AM\nTo: nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\nSubject: Fwd: Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media\n\n\nOn Friday 05 July 2002 10:13 pm, Morlock Elloi wrote:\n> [someone else] wrote:\n> > As a very liberal democrat, I keep waiting for the anti-globalisation\n> > freaks to offer an alternative to the status quo ... but you never do.\n> > If they ever offered the first first idea on how to \"better\" govern then\n> > I would be their greatest champion ... but all I ever see is\ncriticizism.\n\nMichael Albert, editor of ZNet (http://www.znet.org), has what I think is\na very sensible proposal called `Participatory Economics', about how\nregional economies could be run on the basis of participatory democracy. \nHe's written two or three books about it:\n\nhttp://www.parecon.org\n\nBen\n\n\n________________________________________________________________________\nThis email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan\nservice. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working\naround the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com\n________________________________________________________________________\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n\n------------------------------\n\nDate: Mon, 08 Jul 2002 20:19:18 +0000\nFrom: \"N Jett\" <njett {AT} hotmail.com>\nSubject: Re: Fwd: Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media\n\n\nAh yes... Parecon... no longer shall we have surgeons and janitors,\ninstead there is just the person who takes out your trash, and your\nappendix (and gets paid more for the trash because surgery is\n\"glamorous\"). His \"Balanced Job Complex\" idea seems like a very unfunny\njoke to me. The whole \"committees to decide absolutely everything\" concept\nis kind of a joke too, but no need to get into that here...\n\nThe Parecon project may be an \"alternative\", but it certainly seems\nunfeasible and unattractive and extremely unlikely to go anywhere beyond\nthe minds of the radical intellectual elite. Hopefully he isn't on this\nlist too, the guy gets rather feisty when challenged.\n\n\n\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"date": "Mon, 8 Jul 2002 20:53:56 -0400",
|
||
"message-id": "200207090116.VAA22448 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00061",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "\"W R E Reynolds\" <wre.reynolds {AT} sympatico.ca>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00069.html",
|
||
"author_name": "W R E Reynolds",
|
||
"content": "\n\nDavid Goldschmidt said:\n\n> As a very liberal democrat, I keep waiting for the anti-globalisation\n> freaks to offer an alternative to the status quo ... but you never do.\n> If they ever offered the first idea on how to \"better\" govern then I\n> would be their greatest champion ... but all I ever see is\ncriticizism.\n\n\nThis is simply not true and I can only suppose that you don't read much.\n\n\nThere are so many concrete proposals for change it would be well nigh\nimpossible to catalogue here. I would mention only a few to refute your\nassertions:\n\n--Joseph Stiglitz (who has been mentioned on this list numerous times)\nis a the former chief economist of the World Bank and in his recent book\nhe provides a highly specific critique of how the World Bank and the IMF\ndamages the economies of less-developed nations, primarily because it is\nbeholden to a pro-globalized-business agenda. He offers numerous\nsuggestions for reform of the IMF and the World Bank.\n\n--I am involved in creating an independent organization that will\nspecifically provide certification of standards at garment factories in\nthe developing world. It is to be funded by retailers and manufacturers,\nbut remain independent and arms length.\n\nBTW, It was the idea of a bunch of anti-globalization freaks including\nmyself, working with business leaders to create a workable solution to a\nproblem that all sides in the debate generally acknowledge is real.\n\nLastly, I would say that awareness is the most important element of real\nchange. I certainly believe that most of today's misdirection is the\ndirect result of ignorance. In a media saturated world, we remain\nuninformed; in a world supposedly governed by reason, we question\nsurprisingly little; in our so-called democracies there is little\ndebate, remarkably little public participation and little choice.\n\nIf people simply paid more attention things would change.\n\nAnd if that doesn't work then lets blow things up!!\n\n\nObey little, resist much (Walt Whitman)\n_____ \n\nW. Richard Reynolds de La Rochelle\njournalist / author / polemicist \n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
|
||
"date": "Mon, 8 Jul 2002 22:05:27 -0400",
|
||
"message-id": "200207091741.NAA12133 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00069",
|
||
"subject": "RE: <nettime> the language of tactical media"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "Benjamin Geer <ben {AT} beroul.uklinux.net>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00070.html",
|
||
"author_name": "Benjamin Geer",
|
||
"content": "\nOn Tuesday 09 July 2002 1:53 am, \"N Jett\" wrote:\n> Ah yes... Parecon... no longer shall we have surgeons and janitors,\n> instead there is just the person who takes out your trash, and your\n> appendix (and gets paid more for the trash because surgery is\n> \"glamorous\").\n\nThis is a misreading of parecon. You wouldn't get paid more for the trash, \nand glamour isn't a consideration.\n\n> His \"Balanced Job Complex\" idea seems like a very unfunny\n> joke to me.\n\nScorn, on its own, is a very weak argument against anything. If you want to \nargue convincingly against balanced job complexes, you'll have to do better \nthan that.\n\n> The whole \"committees to decide absolutely everything\"\n> concept\n\nThis is a gross misrepresentation of parecon.\n\nIf you have objections to parecon, and you are really interested in thinking \nthrough the issues involved, I suggest that you try reading Albert's and \nHahnel's replies to their critics on www.parecon.org; it may well be that \nyour objections are answered there.\n\nBen\n\n\n________________________________________________________________________\nThis email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan\nservice. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working\naround the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com\n________________________________________________________________________\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"date": "Tue, 9 Jul 2002 12:09:37 +0100",
|
||
"message-id": "200207091740.NAA12116 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00070",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media"
|
||
}
|
||
],
|
||
"date": "Wed, 3 Jul 2002 15:56:54 +0200 (MEST)",
|
||
"message-id": "200207031837.OAA11363 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00013",
|
||
"subject": "<nettime> the language of tactical media",
|
||
"list": "nettime_l"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "\"N Jett\" <njett {AT} hotmail.com>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00072.html",
|
||
"author_name": "N Jett",
|
||
"content": "\n\n>On Tuesday 09 July 2002 1:53 am, \"N Jett\" wrote:\n> > Ah yes... Parecon... no longer shall we have surgeons and janitors,\n> > instead there is just the person who takes out your trash, and your\n> > appendix (and gets paid more for the trash because surgery is\n> > \"glamorous\").\n>\n>This is a misreading of parecon. You wouldn't get paid more for the trash,\n>and glamour isn't a consideration.\n\nIf it is then it is a misreading that Albert encourages. When I saw him\nspeak he specifically said that the glamour of a job is a consideration in\nwho gets assigned what tasks as part of their job complex. It is a factor\nin the balancing so that glamorous jobs are \"fairly\" distributed. Perhaps\nI and everyone I spoke with afterwards completely misunderstood him, but\nit seemed pretty clear at the time.\n\n>\n> > His \"Balanced Job Complex\" idea seems like a very unfunny\n> > joke to me.\n>\n>Scorn, on its own, is a very weak argument against anything. If you want \n>to\n>argue convincingly against balanced job complexes, you'll have to do better\n>than that.\n\nThis was meant in the context of the rest of my statements (i.e. the\ncomments regarding janitors and surgeons). It is a good point though, I\nhaven't provided a strong argument against, but then I haven't seen a\nstrong argument for (and I do admit I haven't looked very hard, I've only\nread one of Albert's books). Additionally, I've tended to be somewhat\nscornful of Parecon after seeing what a pompous ass Albert is, I know,\ndon't judge the message by the messenger, but the guy came across as such\nan elitest jerk it's hard to dismiss.\n\n>\n> > The whole \"committees to decide absolutely everything\"\n> > concept\n>\n>This is a gross misrepresentation of parecon.\n\nAgain, Albert specifically said this in public that the authority to make\nall economic decisions is vested in the Soviet... err... committees.\n\n\n>\n>If you have objections to parecon, and you are really interested in \n>thinking\n>through the issues involved, I suggest that you try reading Albert's and\n>Hahnel's replies to their critics on www.parecon.org; it may well be that\n>your objections are answered there.\n>\n>Ben\n>\n\nThanks, I will definitely do that sometime in the near future.\n\n\n\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"follow-up": [
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "Benjamin Geer <ben {AT} beroul.uklinux.net>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00086.html",
|
||
"author_name": "Benjamin Geer",
|
||
"content": "\nOn Tuesday 09 July 2002 8:14 pm, N Jett wrote:\n> >On Tuesday 09 July 2002 1:53 am, \"N Jett\" wrote:\n> > This is a misreading of parecon. You wouldn't get paid more for the\n> > trash, and glamour isn't a consideration.\n>\n> If it is then it is a misreading that Albert encourages. When I saw him\n> speak he specifically said that the glamour of a job is a consideration in\n> who gets assigned what tasks as part of their job complex. It is a factor\n> in the balancing so that glamorous jobs are \"fairly\" distributed. Perhaps\n> I and everyone I spoke with afterwards completely misunderstood him, but\n> it seemed pretty clear at the time.\n\nThe way it's explained in his book _Moving Forward_ is that certain jobs are \ninherently more interesting and empowering than others. This is no doubt why \nthey're more glamorous. The particular problem parecon is trying to solve, \nthrough balanced job complexes, is that workplaces cannot be democratic if \nsome people are numbed and exhausted by jobs that never exercise their \nintellectual faculties, and others spend all their time having interesting \nproblem-solving discussions. Therefore everyone should do a fair share of \nnon-empowering tasks as well as the empowering ones.\n\nAbout getting paid more for doing certain things: the idea (at least in \n_Moving Forward_) is that remuneration should be partly dependent on effort \nand sacrifice. Everyone who works would, by default, receive the same \nremuneration for their labour, but people who wanted to make an extra effort \nor sacrifice could get somewhat more. This is a very different consideration \nfrom glamour.\n\n> > > The whole \"committees to decide absolutely everything\"\n> > > concept\n> >\n> >This is a gross misrepresentation of parecon.\n>\n> Again, Albert specifically said this in public that the authority to make\n> all economic decisions is vested in the Soviet... err... committees.\n\n\"All economic decisions\" doesn't mean the same thing as \"absolutely \neverything\".\n\nBen\n\n\n________________________________________________________________________\nThis email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan\nservice. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working\naround the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com\n________________________________________________________________________\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"date": "Wed, 10 Jul 2002 14:47:25 +0100",
|
||
"message-id": "200207111741.NAA09142 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00086",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media (parecon)"
|
||
}
|
||
],
|
||
"date": "Tue, 09 Jul 2002 19:14:55 +0000",
|
||
"message-id": "200207100757.DAA30337 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00072",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media (parecon)",
|
||
"list": "nettime_l"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "geert lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00002.html",
|
||
"author_name": "geert lovink",
|
||
"content": "\n\nA Virtual World is Possible: From Tactical Media to Digital Multitudes\nBy Geert Lovink and Florian Schneider\n\nI.\n\nWe start with the current strategy debates of the so-called\n\"anti-globalisation movement\", the biggest emerging political force for\ndecades. In Part II we will look into strategies of critical new media\nculture in the post-speculative phase after dotcommania. Four phases of\nthe global movement are becoming visible, all of which have distinct\npolitical, artistic and aesthetic qualities.\n\n1. The 90s and tactical media activism\n\nThe term 'tactical media' arose in the aftermath of the fall of the Berlin\nWall as a renaissance of media activism, blending old school political\nwork and artists' engagement with new technologies. The early nineties saw\na growing awareness of gender issues, exponential growth of media\nindustries and the increasing availability of cheap do-it-yourself\nequipment creating a new sense of self-awareness amongst activists,\nprogrammers, theorists, curators and artists. Media were no longer seen as\nmerely tools for the Struggle, but experienced as virtual environments\nwhose parameters were permanently 'under construction'. This was the\ngolden age of tactical media, open to issues of aesthetics and\nexperimentation with alternative forms of story telling. However, these\nliberating techno practices did not immediately translate into visible\nsocial movements. Rather, they symbolized the celebration of media\nfreedom, in itself a great political goal. The media used - from video,\nCD-ROM, cassettes, zines and flyers to music styles such as rap and techno\n- varied widely, as did the content. A commonly shared feeling was that\npolitically motivated activities, be they art or research or advocacy\nwork, were no longer part of a politically correct ghetto and could\nintervene in 'pop culture' without necessarily having to compromise with\nthe 'system.' With everything up for negotiation, new coalitions could be\nformed. The current movements worldwide cannot be understood outside of\nthe diverse and often very personal for digital freedom of expression.\n\n2. 99-01: The period of big mobilizations\n\nBy the end of the nineties the post-modern 'time without movements' had\ncome to pass. The organized discontent against neo-liberalism, global\nwarming policies, labour exploitation and numerous other issues converged.\nEquipped with networks and arguments, backed up by decades of research, a\nhybrid movement - wrongly labelled by mainstream media as\n'anti-globalisation' - gained momentum. One of the particular features of\nthis movement lies in its apparent inability and unwillingness to answer\nthe question that is typical of any kind of movement on the rise or any\ngeneration on the move: what's to be done? There was and there is no\nanswer, no alternative - either strategic or tactical - to the existing\nworld order, to the dominant mode of globalisation.\n\nAnd maybe this is the most important and liberating conclusion: there is\nno way back to the twentieth century, the protective nation state and the\ngruesome tragedies of the 'left.' It has been good to remember - but\nequally good to throw off - the past. The question 'what's to be done'\nshould not be read as an attempt to re-introduce some form of Leninist\nprinciples. The issues of strategy, organization and democracy belong to\nall times. We neither want to bring back old policies through the\nbackdoor, nor do we think that this urgent question can be dismissed by\ninvoking crimes committed under the banner of Lenin, however justified\nsuch arguments are. When Slavoj Zizek looks in the mirror he may see\nFather Lenin, but that's not the case for everyone. It is possible to wake\nup from the nightmare of the past history of communism and (still) pose\nthe question: what's to be done? Can a 'multitude' of interests and\nbackgrounds ask that question, or is the only agenda that defined by the\nsummit calendar of world leaders and the business elite?\n\nNevertheless, the movement has been growing rapidly. At first sight it\nappears to use a pretty boring and very traditional medium: the\nmass-mobilization of tens of thousands in the streets of Seattle, hundreds\nof thousands in the streets of Genoa. And yet, tactical media networks\nplayed an important role in it's coming into being. From now on\npluriformity of issues and identities was a given reality. Difference is\nhere to stay and no longer needs to legitimize itself against higher\nauthorities such as the Party, the Union or the Media. Compared to\nprevious decades this is its biggest gain. The 'multitudes' are not a\ndream or some theoretical construct but a reality.\n\nIf there is a strategy, it is not contradiction but complementary\nexistence. Despite theoretical deliberations, there is no contradiction\nbetween the street and cyberspace. The one fuels the other. Protests\nagainst the WTO, neo-liberal EU policies, and party conventions are all\nstaged in front of the gathered world press. Indymedia crops up as a\nparasite of the mainstream media. Instead of having to beg for attention,\nprotests take place under the eyes of the world media during summits of\npoliticians and business leaders, seeking direct confrontation.\nAlternatively, symbolic sites are chosen such as border regions (East-West\nEurope, USA-Mexico) or refugee detention centres (Frankfurt airport, the\ncentralized Eurocop database in Strasbourg, the Woomera detention centre\nin the Australian desert). Rather than just objecting to it, the global\nentitlement of the movement adds to the ruling mode of globalisation a new\nlayer of globalisation from below.\n\n3. Confusion and resignation after 9-11\n\nAt first glance, the future of the movement is a confusing and irritating\none. Old-leftist grand vistas, explaining US imperialism and its\naggressive unilateralist foreign policy, provided by Chomsky, Pilger and\nother baby boomers are consumed with interest but no longer give the\nbigger picture. In a polycentric world conspiracy theories can only\nprovide temporary comfort for the confused. No moralist condemnation of\ncapitalism is necessary as facts and events speak for themselves. People\nare driven to the street by the situation, not by an analysis (neither\nours nor the one from Hardt & Negri). The few remaining leftists can no\nlonger provide the movement with an ideology, as it works perfectly\nwithout one. \"We don't need your revolution.\" Even the social movements of\nthe 70s and 80s, locked up in their NGO structures, have a hard time\nkeeping up. New social formations are taking possession of the streets and\nmedia spaces, without feeling the need of representation by some higher\nauthority, not even the heterogenous committees gathering in Porto Alegre.\n\nSo far this movement has been bound in clearly defined time/space\ncoordinates. It still takes months to mobilize multitudes and organize the\nlogistics, from buses and planes, camping grounds and hostels, to\nindependent media centres. This movement is anything but spontaneous (and\ndoes not even claim to be so). The people that travel hundreds or\nthousands of miles to attend protest rallies are driven by real concerns,\nnot by some romantic notion of socialism. The worn-out question: \"reform\nor revolution?\" sounds more like blackmail to provoke the politically\ncorrect answer.\n\nThe contradiction between selfishness and altruism is also a false one.\nState-sponsored corporate globalisation affects everyone. International\nbodies such as the WTO, the Kyoto Agreement on global warming, or the\nprivatisation of the energy sector are no longer abstract news items,\ndealt with by bureaucrats and (NGO) lobbyists. This political insight has\nbeen the major quantum leap of recent times. Is this then the Last\nInternational? No. There is no way back to the nation state, to\ntraditional concepts of liberation, the logic of transgression and\ntranscendence, exclusion and inclusion. Struggles are no longer projected\nonto a distant Other that begs for our moral support and money. We have\nfinally arrived in the post-solidarity age. As a consequence, national\nliberation movements have been replaced by a by a new analysis of power,\nwhich is simultaneously incredibly abstract, symbolic and virtual, whilst\nterribly concrete, detailed and intimate.\n\n4. Present challenge: liquidate the regressive third period of marginal\nmoral protest\n\nLuckily September 11 has had no immediate impact on the movement. The\nchoice between Bush and Bin Laden was irrelevant. Both agendas were\nrejected as devastating fundamentalisms. The all too obvious question:\n\"whose terror is worse?\" was carefully avoided as it leads away from the\npressing emergencies of everyday life: the struggle for a living wage,\ndecent public transport, health care, water, etc. As both social democracy\nand really existing socialism depended heavily on the nation state a\nreturn to the 20thcentury sounds as disastrous as all the catastrophes it\nproduced. The concept of a digital multitude is fundamentally different\nand based entirely on openness. Over the last few years the creative\nstruggles of the multitudes have produced outputs on many different\nlayers: the dialectics of open sources, open borders, open knowledge. Yet\nthe deep penetration of the concepts of openness and freedom into the\nprinciple of struggle is by no means a compromise to the cynical and\ngreedy neo-liberal class. Progressive movements have always dealt with a\nradical democratisation of the rules of access, decision-making and the\nsharing of gained capacities. Usually it started from an illegal or\nillegitimate common ground. Within the bounds of the analogue world it led\nto all sorts of cooperatives and self-organized enterprises, whose\nspecific notions of justice were based on efforts to circumvent the brutal\nregime of the market and on different ways of dealing with the scarcity of\nmaterial resources.\n\nWe're not simply seeking proper equality on a digital level. We're in the\nmidst of a process that constitutes the totality of a revolutionary being,\nas global as it is digital. We have to develop ways of reading the raw\ndata of the movements and struggles and ways to make their experimental\nknowledge legible; to encode and decode the algorithms of its singularity,\nnonconformity and non-confoundability; to invent, refresh and update the\nnarratives and images of a truly global connectivity; to open the source\ncode of all the circulating knowledge and install a virtual world.\n\nBringing these efforts down to the level of production challenges new\nforms of subjectivity, which almost necessarily leads to the conclusion\nthat everyone is an expert. The superflux of human resources and the\nbrilliance of everyday experience get dramatically lost in the\n'academification' of radical left theory. Rather the new ethical-aesthetic\nparadigm lives on in the pragmatic consciousness of affective labour, in\nthe nerdish attitude of a digital working class, in the omnipresence of\nmigrant struggles as well as many other border-crossing experiences, in\ndeep notions of friendship within networked environments as well as the\n'real' world.\n\nII.\n\nLet's now look at strategies for Internet art & activism. Critical new\nmedia culture faces a tough climate of budget cuts in the cultural sector\nand a growing hostility and indifference towards new media. But hasn't\npower shifted to cyberspace, as Critical Art Ensemble once claimed? Not so\nif we look at the countless street marches around the world.\n\nThe Seattle movement against corporate globalisation appears to have\ngained momentum - both on the street and online. But can we really speak\nof a synergy between street protests and online 'hacktivism'? No. But what\nthey have in common is their (temporal) conceptual stage. Both real and\nvirtual protests risk getting stuck at the level of a global 'demo\ndesign,' no longer grounded in actual topics and local situations. This\nmeans the movement never gets out of beta. At first glance, reconciling\nthe virtual and the real seems to be an attractive rhetorical act. Radical\npragmatists have often emphasized the embodiment of online networks in\nreal-life society, dispensing with the real/virtual contradiction. Net\nactivism, like the Internet itself, is always hybrid, a blend of old and\nnew, haunted by geography, gender, race and other political factors. There\nis no pure disembodied zone of global communication, as the 90s\ncyber-mythology claimed.\n\nEquations such as street plus cyberspace, art meets science, and\n'techno-culture'are all interesting interdisciplinary approaches but are\nproving to have little effect beyond the symbolic level of dialogue and\ndiscourse. The fact is that established disciplines are in a defensive\nmode. The 'new' movements and media are not yet mature enough to question\nand challenge the powers that be. In a conservative climate, the claim to\n'embody the future' becomes a weak and empty gesture.\n\nOn the other hand, the call of many artists and activists to return to\n\"real life\" does not provide us with a solution to how alternative new\nmedia models can be raised to the level of mass (pop) culture. Yes, street\ndemonstrations raise solidarity levels and lift us up from the daily\nsolitude of one-way media interfaces. Despite September 11 and its\nright-wing political fallout, social movements worldwide are gaining\nimportance and visibility. We should, however, ask the question \"what\ncomes after the demo version\" of both new media and the movements?\n\nThis isn't the heady 60s. The negative, pure and modernist level of the\n\"conceptual\" has hit the hard wall of demo design as Peter Lunenfeld\ndescribed it in his book 'Snap to Grid'. The question becomes: how to jump\nbeyond the prototype? What comes after the siege of yet another summit of\nCEOs and their politicians? How long can a movement grow and stay\n'virtual'? Or in IT terms, what comes after demo design, after the\ncountless PowerPoint presentations, broadband trials and Flash animations?\nWill Linux ever break out of the geek ghetto? The feel-good factor of the\nopen, ever growing crowd (Elias Canetti) will wear out; demo fatigue will\nset in. We could ask: does your Utopia version have a use-by date?\n\nRather than making up yet another concept it is time to ask the question\nof how software, interfaces and alternative standards can be installed in\nsociety. Ideas may take the shape of a virus, but society can hit back\nwith even more successful immunization programs: appropriation, repression\nand neglect. We face a scalability crisis. Most movements and initiatives\nfind themselves in a trap. The strategy of becoming \"minor\" (Guattari) is\nno longer a positive choice but the default option. Designing a successful\ncultural virus and getting millions of hits on your weblog will not bring\nyou beyond the level of a short-lived 'spectacle'. Culture jammers are no\nlonger outlaws but should be seen as experts in guerrilla communication\n\n.\n\n\nToday's movements are in danger of getting stuck in self-satisfying\nprotest mode. With access to the political process effectively blocked,\nfurther mediation seems the only available option. However, gaining more\nand more \"brand value\" in terms of global awareness may turn out to be\nlike overvalued stocks: it might pay off, it might turn out to be\nworthless. The pride of \"We have always told you so\" is boosting the moral\nof minority multitudes, but at the same time it delegates legitimate\nfights to the level of official \"Truth and Reconciliation Commissions\"\n(often parliamentary or Congressional), after the damage is done.\n\nInstead of arguing for \"reconciliation\" between the real and virtual we\ncall here for a rigorous synthesis of social movements with technology.\nInstead of taking the \"the future is now\" position derived from\ncyber-punk, a lot could be gained from a radical re-assessment of the\ntechno revolutions of the last 10-15 years. For instance, if artists and\nactivists can learn anything from the rise and subsequent fall of dot-com,\nit might be the importance of marketing. The eyeballs of the dotcom\nattention economy proved worthless.\n\nThis is a terrain is of truly taboo knowledge. Dot-coms invested their\nentire venture capital in (old media) advertisement. Their belief that\nmedia-generated attention would automatically draw users in and turn them\ninto customers was unfounded. The same could be said of activist sites.\nInformation \"forms\" us. But new consciousness results less and less in\nmeasurable action. Activists are only starting to understand the impact of\nthis paradigm. What if information merely circles around in its own\nparallel world? What's to be done if the street demonstration becomes part\nof the Spectacle?\n\nThe increasing tensions and polarizations described here force us to\nquestion the limits of new media discourse. In the age of realtime global\nevents Ezra Pound's definition of art as the antenna of the human race\nshows its passive, responsive nature. Art no longer initiates. One can be\nhappy if it responds to contemporary conflicts at all and the new media\narts sector is no exception. New media arts must be reconciled with its\ncondition as a special effect of the hard and software developed years\nago.\n\nCritical new media practices have been slow to respond to both the rise\nand fall of dotcommania. In the speculative heydays of new media culture\n(the early-mid 90s, before the rise of the World Wide Web), theorists and\nartists jumped eagerly on not yet existing and inaccessible technologies\nsuch as virtual reality. Cyberspace generated a rich collection of\nmythologies; issues of embodiment and identity were fiercely debated. Only\nfive years later, while Internet stocks were going through the roof,\nlittle was left of the initial excitement in intellectual and artistic\ncircles. Experimental techno culture missed out on the funny money.\nRecently there has been a steady stagnation of new media cultures, both in\nterms of concepts and funding. With millions of new users flocking onto\nthe Net, the arts can no longer keep up and withdraw into their own little\nworld of festivals, mailing lists and workshops.\n\nWhereas new media arts institutions, begging for goodwill, still portray\nartists as working at the forefront of technological developments, the\nreality is a different one. Multi-disciplinary goodwill is at an all time\nlow. At best, the artist's new media products are 'demo design' as\ndescribed by Lunenfeld. Often it does not even reach that level. New media\narts, as defined by its few institutions rarely reach audiences outside of\nits own electronic arts subculture. The heroic fight for the establishment\nof a self-referential 'new media arts system' through a frantic\ndifferentiation of works, concepts and traditions, might be called a\ndead-end street. The acceptance of new media by leading museums and\ncollectors will simply not happen. Why wait a few decades anyway? Why\nexhibit net art in white cubes? The majority of the new media\norganizations such as ZKM, the Ars Electronica Centre, ISEA, ICC or ACMI\nare hopeless in their techno innocence, being neither critical nor\nradically utopian in their approach. Hence, the new media arts sector,\ndespite its steady growth, is getting increasingly isolated, incapable of\naddressing the issues of today's globalised world, dominated by (the war\nagainst) terror. Let's face it, technology is no longer 'new,' the markets\nare down and out and no one wants know about it anymore. Its little wonder\nthe contemporary (visual) arts world is continuing its decade-old boycott\nof (interactive) new media works in galleries, biennales and shows like\nDocumenta XI.\n\nA critical reassessment of the role of arts and culture within today's\nnetwork society seems necessary. Let's go beyond the 'tactical' intentions\nof the players involved. The artist-engineer, tinkering on alternative\nhuman-machine interfaces, social software or digital aesthetics has\neffectively been operating in a self-imposed vacuum. Science and business\nhave successfully ignored the creative community. Worse still, artists\nhave been actively sidelined in the name of 'usability', pushed by a\nbacklash movement against web design led by the IT-guru Jakob Nielsen. The\nrevolt against usability is about to happen. Lawrence Lessig argues that\nInternet innovation is in danger. The younger generation is turning its\nback onon new media arts questions and if involved at all, operate as\nanti-corporate activists. After the dotcom crash the Internet has rapidly\nlost its imaginative attraction. File swapping and cell phones can only\ntemporarily fill up the vacuum; the once so glamorous gadgets are becoming\npart of everyday life. This long-term tendency, now accelerating,\nseriously undermines future claims of new media.\n\nAnother issue concerns generations. With video and expensive interactive\ninstallations being the domain of the '68 baby boomers, the generation of\n'89 has embraced the free Internet. But the Net turned out to be a trap\nfor them. Whereas assets, positions and power remain in the hands of the\nageing baby boomers, the gamble on the rise of new media did not pay off.\nAfter venture capital has melted away, there is still no sustainable\nrevenue system in place for the Internet. The slow working educational\nbureaucracies have not yet grasped the new media malaise. Universities are\nstill in the process of establishing new media departments. But that will\ncome to a halt at some point. The fifty-something tenured chairs and\nvice-chancellors must feel good about their persistent sabotage. What's so\nnew about new media anyway? Technology was hype after all, promoted by the\ncriminals of Enron and WorldCom. It is sufficient for students to do a bit\nof email and web surfing, safeguarded within a filtered, controlled\nintranet. In the face of this rising techno-cynicism we urgently need to\nanalyse the ideology of the greedy 90s and its techno-libertarianism. If\nwe don't disassociate new media quickly from the previous decade, the\nisolation of the new media sector will sooner or later result in its\ndeath. Let's transform the new media buzz into something more interesting\naltogether - before others do it for us.\n\n\n\n\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
|
||
"follow-up": [
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "Gabriel Pickard <werg {AT} demokratica.de>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00012.html",
|
||
"author_name": "Gabriel Pickard",
|
||
"content": "\nA possible world is virtual.\nabsolutely.\n_This_world_is_always_fucking_impossible.\n\n... There's something lovely about it _ that i just can't quite place my \nfinger on. ..\nspeak thus - and rub your finger a'll' over.\nthat is,, compelexity.\nand it won't help (much) to recognize and declare it as such (don't even \n_try to understand).\n\nthough the question may be: this? world?\nok, it should be clear that a _this_world_ (in _this_ (absolute \n(non-multiple)) sense) does not exist.\nSo we already have one reason why? a possible world is so utterly virtual.\n\nthis is of course a question of reality and reality multiplicity and \nproduction, which presents itself asa painful and fascinating issue to a \nmedia-activist. what is often overlooked, though, is that reality != media.\nThe term \"world' even more so. I certainly do not want to criticize those \nwho analyse and fight the evil corporate media in its malicious influence \non mass realization ,but as important as this is, reality is about more \nthan just media. media in the narrow space of communication connects \ninformation and material, virtuality and actuality. reality is nothing else \nbut a borderline, discerning in&out, real&irreal. maybe we should get past \nthe point of pushing around this borderline, it's all existence -anyway.\n much rather, i'd propose we reflect upon the everyday, unspoken \nimplications of our \"doing media| because if we realize that information is \nindependent parallel existence, this abstractive \"interface' becomes quite \ninteresting. \"doing media' and 'doing information\" are two different \nthings. now ishould say that we can hardly get around doing information, \nbut media is still a much more alterable mass than we might think.\neventhough it may seem old, i'd like to suggest that we rethink- remake- \nredo. if our media is discontenting, question its foundations - build a new \nnew media -!realy /if our movement seems frustrating, poses: wastun?, why \nnot move something else, somewhere else _and_under_another_name_. that will \n-andis- being done anyway.\n\nwastun?so_\nwhat only may be tried, is both an immediate and metamediate radicalization \nin addition to mediate radicalism.\n\nconcerning bubble&burst:\nnow to me, as potential early representant of the generation following the \ngen. of 89, the whole dotcom thing had a lot to do with adolescence. with \ngrowing pains, puberty and confusion. growing up with people envying you \nfor all the new, new developments you'll witness - and pitying you for not \nbeing able to cash in and grow in power at the beginning of the \"long \nboom\". nowadays, people don't philosophize over the future too much, they \njust tell you to work hard and get a good job. ;-} Maybe this can help with \nthe analysis, seeing it all as the growing up of the 21st century. and \ndon't let them fool you, even though it's already feeling like \nmidlife-crisis, that's all just some youthful morosity.\nThere's more developments around the corner\n the dream of the open technological future is not over yet\n\nkeepitup,\nGabriel.\n-- \nGabriel Pickard\nwhat?\nhuman.\nhttp://werg.demokratica.de\nwerGf314\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "nettime-l <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
|
||
"date": "Tue, 05 Nov 2002 10:28:37 +0100",
|
||
"message-id": "200211051619.gA5GJfS28515 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00012",
|
||
"subject": "A Possible World is Virtual (was: <nettime> From Tactical Media toDigital Multitudes)"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "\"Kermit Snelson\" <ksnelson {AT} subjectivity.com>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00014.html",
|
||
"author_name": "Kermit Snelson",
|
||
"content": "\n \"As the situationists concluded, the true fulfillment of art ultimately\nimplies going beyond the boundaries of art, bringing creativity and\nadventure into the critique and liberation of every aspect of life; and\nfirst of all into challenging the submissive conditioning that prevents\npeople from creating their own adventures.\" -- Ken Knabb [1]\n\nNew media art must indeed fulfill and not simply continue to \"demo\" its\nalternative vision of human relations. Geert and Florian are right to ask\n\"what is to be done\" to bring this about. However, the passage I just\nquoted came to mind as I read their analysis, and I'm not sure whether it\nserves them better as a summary or as a rebuke.\n\nFirst of all, I don't see much in their post about \"challenging the\nsubmissive conditioning that prevents people from creating their own\nadventures.\" I see quite the opposite, in fact; namely, an emphasis on the\nuse of new media art as a tool for shaping mass psychology. In their own\nwords, they are looking for a \"solution to how alternative new media models\ncan be raised to the level of mass (pop) culture.\" They say that the most\nimportant lesson that artists and activists might have to learn from the\nfall of the '90s techno-libertarian dotcommania is the \"importance of\nmarketing.\" They speak of a \"virtual world\" as something consisting of\n\"software, interfaces and alternative standards\" that must be \"installed.\"\nAnd they strongly suggest that what's standing in way of such an\n\"installation\" is that the \"new media art\" discourse is now linked in the\npublic mind with a failed, obsolete and financially ruinous business fad\nthat \"no one wants know about [...] anymore.\" So that means only that it's\ntime to rebrand the product, eh?\n\nGeert and Florian propose such a rebranding in two forms. First, they say\nit's imperative that the new media art scene disassociate itself from the\nfailed '90s \"New Economy\" techno-libertarianism by radically critiquing it.\nWell, Geert co-founded nettime seven years ago to do just that. Apparently\nwith little success, if their analysis of the present state of new media art\nis correct.\n\nSecond, they call for the abandonment of radical left theory in favor of a\n\"new ethical-aesthetic paradigm\" that \"lives on in the pragmatic\nconsciousness of affective labour\" consisting of nerdiness, friendship and\npolitical action. This political action, in turn, is motivated by a very\nbroad conception of \"openness\" that makes a connection, by means of\nconsiderable sophistry, between open source and open borders. Geert and\nFlorian say that such a post-ideological, post-solidarity \"digital\nmultitude\" is already a reality brought about by tactical media, and that\n\"what is to be done\" now is to bring this new social form \"down to the level\nof production\" by viewing this \"multitude\" as a producer of \"experimental\nknowledge\" whose \"algorithms\" must be encoded and decoded, all based on the\ncore realization that \"everyone is an expert.\"\n\nBut it's simply not true that \"everyone is an expert\", certainly not in any\ncase at the \"level of production\", and it's in this conception of the\nmultitude where I believe Geert and Florian's argument breaks down. I have\nnever understood how the concept of \"multitude\" that Negri, joined by Geert\nand Florian, distinguishes from the \"masses\" by emphasizing the former's\nlack of a common trait, ideology or indeed any distinguishing idea at all\n[2], differs from the more traditional concept of \"mob\". McKenzie Wark in\nhis response seems to pick up on this problem with Geert and Florian's\nargument, arguing that no \"digital multitude\" will be able to do \"what is to\nbe done\" without first achieving class consciousness based on a common\nunderstanding of its relation to the currently emerging forms of\nintellectual property law. Whether or not MacKenzie's own rewrite of the\nCommunist Manifesto around IP law is the way forward, he is certainly right\nto insist that there's still something to the Marxist view that masses\ninfluence history only when formed by an idea. Certainly more than Geert\nand Florian seem willing to credit, anyway.\n\nBut MacKenzie also fails to reach the heart of what's wrong with Geert and\nFlorian's argument. Once again, I believe it lies near their idea that\n\"everyone is an expert.\" To be sure, everyone is _potentially_ an expert.\nBut no one, not even a genius, becomes an expert without the training,\neducation and discipline necessary for creative and critical thought.\nTraining and education involve the mastery of rules, techniques and ideas.\nThey are what any human culture is all about. On the other hand, it is\nimpossible to found a culture on despair, nihilism and a principled\nrejection of all ideas and debate, even if one chooses to call such an\napproach \"tactical media\", \"radical media pragmatism\" or even \"art\". A \"new\nethical-aesthetic paradigm\" that consists of only consumption, shopping,\nIndymedia-style parasitism, electronic vandalism and other forms of\n\"negative thinking\" [3] will never do anything but provide the motor force\nof Empire. This is what Hardt and Negri really meant by \"resistance is\nprior to power\" [4], concealing their real purpose in this instance not with\ntheir usual obfuscation, but with clarity.\n\nEmpire will be defeated not by applying the tools of mass psychology to\ncreate a \"multitude,\" but by educating ourselves and others so that such\ntools may be resisted. We must cultivate our ability to propose answers,\nmake distinctions, construct coherent arguments, refine our concepts, inform\nour judgments and, yes, make moral choices. Such abilities are the basis of\nany truly effective activism, just as they are the basis of any truly\neffective life. Renouncing all these things and calling that \"liberating\"\nwill only ensure our slavery.\n\nThere is no knowledge to be decoded in mindless action, just as there is no\nfreedom in license. Masses are creative and free; mobs are not. Konrad\nBecker's recent post to nettime notwithstanding, there's a radical\ndifference between propaganda and education. The difference is precisely\nthat education allows one to challenge \"the submissive conditioning that\nprevents people from creating their own adventures,\" as Ken Knabb writes in\nthe passage I chose to open this post. Mass propaganda techniques based on\na \"fascination for authoritarian models\" [5], even when wielded by\nwell-intentioned media activists, can accomplish only the opposite.\n\nKermit Snelson\n\nNotes:\n[1] Knabb, Ken; _The Relevance of Rexroth_, Bureau of Public Secrets,\nBerkeley, 1990, p.73\n[2] Cf. Hardt and Negri, _Empire_, p.103\n[3] Lovink, Geert, _Dark Fiber_, MIT, 2002, p.22; cf. Marcuse\n[4] Hardt and Negri, _op.cit._, p.360\n[5] Lovink, _op.cit._, p.26\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
|
||
"date": "Mon, 4 Nov 2002 13:40:35 -0800",
|
||
"message-id": "000b01c2844a$cee29f80$8956c33f {AT} pacbell.net",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00014",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> From Tactical Media to Digital Multitudes"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "\"McKenzie Wark\" <mckenziewark {AT} hotmail.com>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00003.html",
|
||
"author_name": "McKenzie Wark",
|
||
"content": "\n\nLovink and Schneider ask the right question in 'A Virtual World is\nPossible'. What is to be done? Unfortunately, they have not done it. Yes,\nthere is a need for a political position outside of the dialectic of the\nstreet and cyberspace. Yes, there is a need for a new position for new\nmedia outside of the dialectic of the media market and the art market. And\nyes, the place to look is in deconstructing the techno-libertarian\nideologies of the 90s. But what is required at this juncture is a tool\nwith which to prise it open to discover how it worked.\n\nHe was wrong about a lot of things, but Marx did enjoin us to ask what he\ncalled \"the property question\", and insisted that it was where the\ncritical spirit begins and ends. And what if we ask the \"property\nquestion\" of the jumble of symptoms with which Lovink & Schneider confront\nus? The network of power starts to reveal itself more clearly.\n\nDid the new movements arise out of thin air? Or did they arise out of a\nnew stage in the development of the commodity economy? At both the level\nof the tools it had at its disposal, and the range of issues it\nconfronted, the new movement confronts a new class power. Only rarely is\nthis class power named and identified at an abstract level. The symptoms\nof its (mis)rule have been charted by brave advocates and actvists. But we\nare all merely blind folks touching different parts of an elephant and\ntrying to describe the totality from the detail we sense before us, in our\nfragment of everyday life.\n\nSo let's ask the property question of all the fragments of resistance that\nappear to us in everyday life. Start in the underdeveloped world. How is\nit possible that the productive engines of commodity society find\nthemselves shipped, by and large, out of the overdeveloped world and into\nthe under- dveloped world? What new power makes it possible to consign the\nmanufacturing level of production to places deprived of technical and\nknowledge infrastructure? A new division of labour makes it possible to\ncut the mere making of things off from all of their other properties. The\nresearch, design and marketing will remain, on the whole, in the over-\ndeveloped world, and will be protected by a new and increasingly global\nregime of property, intellectual property. As for the rest, whole\ncontinents can compete for dubious honour of mere manufacturing.\n\nWhat makes this separation possible is at one and the same time a legal\nand a technical distinction. Information emerges as a separate realm, a\nworld apart as Lovink has perceptively argued for some time. But he has\nnot stopped to inquire is to how or why, and without first asking how or\nwhy we cannot get far with the big question,: what is to be done. So let's\nlook closely at the way the development of a *vectoral* technology has\nmade possible a relative separation from its materiality. Which is not to\nsay that information is immaterial. Rather, it has an *abstract* relation\nto the material. It no longer matters to its integrity as information\nwhether it is embodied in this cd-rom or that flashcard or that stack of\npaper.\n\nA virtual world is indeed possible, precisely because of this coming into\nexistence of abstract information. But what is information? The product of\na labor of encoding and decoding. Just as the commodity economy made\nmanual labor abstract in the machine age, so too it has made intellectual\nlabor abstract in the information age.\n\nBut the virtual world finds itself constrained by a form of property alien\nto it. No longer confine to a particular materiality, information really\ndoes yearn to be free. But it is not free, it is everywhere in chains. It\nis forced into the constraint of a very new creation -- intellectual\nproperty. On the ruins of the commons that copyright and patent were once\nsupposed to guarrantee arises an absolute privatisation of information as\nproperty.\n\nAnd so, with a whole new -- virtual -- continent to claim as its own,\nclass power finds a new basis, and remakes that other world, the everyday\nworld, in its image. The abstraction of information from materiality as a\nlegal and technical possibility becomes the shape of the world. A world in\nwhich the mere embodiment of a concept in a commodity can be consigned to\nbidding wars between the desperate.\n\nThis bifurcation affects both the agricultural and the manufacturing\neconomies. The patents on seed stocks are of a piece with the copyrights\non designer logos. Both are a means by which a new class power asserts its\nplace in the world, based not on the ownership of land or of physical\nmaunfacturing plant, but in the concepts and designs on which the world\nwill be set to labour.\n\nIn the overdeveloped world, one discovers symptoms of the same emerging\ntotality. Workers in manufacturing struggle to hang on to jobs in an\neconomy that they alone are no longer the only ones equipped to do. So\ncalled 'state monopoly capital' is a mere husk of its former self. The\nemerging class interest has a very different relation to the state.\n\nMeanwhile, there are the various phenomena of the 'new economy'. While the\nbubble may have burst, there is a risk in too low an evaluation of the\nsignificance of the media and communication revolution as an over reaction\nto the excessive optimism of the 90s. Just as railways and the telegraph\ncreated a boom and bust, but also created an enduring geography of\neconomic and strategic power, so too has the latest, digital, phase in the\ndevelopment of the vector.\n\nOne should not right off the military dimension to the new class power\nquite as readily as Lovink and Schneider do, either. On the one hand it is\nthe old oil-power politics. But there is a new dimension, a new confidence\nin the ability to use the new vectoral military technologies as a cheap\nand efficient way of achieving global redistirbutions of power. The same\nabstraction of information from materiality that happens in technology and\nis sanctioned by intellectual property law is happening in military\ntechnology. The military wing of the new class interest wants a 'new' new\nworld order to ratify its exercise.\n\nThis is not your grandparents ruling class we are confronting here. It is\na new entity, or a new entity in formation. Perhaps it is a new fraction\nof capital. Perhaps it is a new kind of ruling class altogether. Remember,\nthere have been two, not one but two, phases to rule in the commodity\neconmy era. It has already passed through an agricultural and a\nmanufacturing phase. In each case it developed out of the a distictive\nstep in the abstraction of property law. First came the privatisation of\nland, and out of it a landlord class. Then came the privatisation of\nproductive resources, a more mobile, labile kind of property, and a new\nruling class -- the capitalist class proper. And perhaps, with the\nemergence of the new global regime of intellectual property, we witness\nthe emergence of a new ruling class, what I would call the vectoralist\nclass.\n\nAs each ruling class is based on a more abstract form of property, and a\nmore flexible kind of vector, than its predecessor, its mode of ruling\nalso becomes more abstract, more intangible. Its ideologues would love to\npersuade us that the ruling class no longer even exists. And yet its\nhandiwork are everywhere, in the subordination of the underdeveloped world\nto new regimes of slavery, to the slow motion implosion of maunfacturing\neconomy in the overdeveloped world, to the deployment of ever faster, ever\nsleeker vectors along which ever more abstract flows of information\nshuttle, making the world over in the abstract image of the commodity.\n\nAnd what is to be done? One does not confront the new abstract totality\nwith rhetorics of multiplicity alone. Rather, one looks for the\nabstraction at work in the world that is capable of producing such a\nmultiplicity of everyday experiences of frustration, boredom and\nsuffering. One asks the property question, and in asking it is lef toward\na practice that constitutes the answer.\n\nThis is where so-called new media art has proven to be both so useful at\ntimes, but so willing to cooperate in its own cooptation. When artists\nexplore not just the technology, but its property dimension as well, then\nthey create work that has the capacity to point beyond the privatisation\nof information that forms the basis of the power of the vectoral class.\nThe new media art that matters is counter-vectoral. It offers itself as a\ntool for prising open the privatisation of information.\n\n\"Information merely circles in a parallel world of its own\", as Lovink and\nSchneider say, precisely because of the abstraction it undergoes when it\nbecomes vectoral. The counter-vectoral reconnects information to the\nmultiplicity by freeing it from the straightjacket of private property.\nIndeed, there can be no talk of 'multitude' until this aspect of its\nexistence is properly understood. Multitudes do not exist independently of\ntheir means of communication. The freeing of that means of communication\nfrom the abstraction of the commodity form is the necessary step towards\nrealising the counter-abstraction that is latent in the formal concept of\nthe multitude. A virtual world -- virtual in the true sense -- is indeed\npossible. It is what is to be done.\n\nMcKenzie Wark\nsee also:\nA hacker manifesto\nhttp://subsol.c3.hu/subsol_2/contributors0/warktext.html\n\n\n\n\n\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"follow-up": [
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "n_ik <fragments {AT} va.com.au>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00009.html",
|
||
"author_name": "n_ik",
|
||
"content": "\n<McKenzie Wark wrote>\n\n>He was wrong about a lot of things, but Marx did enjoin us to ask what he\n>called \"the property question\", and insisted that it was where the\n>critical spirit begins and ends. And what if we ask the \"property\n>question\" of the jumble of symptoms with which Lovink & Schneider confront\n>us? The network of power starts to reveal itself more clearly.\n>\n>Did the new movements arise out of thin air? Or did they arise out of a\n>new stage in the development of the commodity economy? At both the level\n>of the tools it had at its disposal, and the range of issues it\n>confronted, the new movement confronts a new class power. Only rarely is\n>this class power named and identified at an abstract level. The symptoms\n>of its (mis)rule have been charted by brave advocates and actvists. But we\n>are all merely blind folks touching different parts of an elephant and\n>trying to describe the totality from the detail we sense before us, in our\n>fragment of everyday life.\n\n\nI think the class struggle many 'counter-globalisation' protesters \nare engaged in is not so much a new class struggle but an age-old one.\n\nthe bulk of the actions that have taken place against the global \ninstitutions of capitalism in the last 5 or so years have taken place \nin the countries of the global South - Bolivia, South Africa, India, \nMexico - or in countries \"over the horizon\", out of site of CNN - \nSouth Korea etc. There isn't a single day where a protest, blockade, \noccupation, etc takes place against the array of institutions, \ncorporations and governments of the North.\n\nI would say that the overwhelming amount of protesters, activists, \nrevolutionaries, et al around the world are engaged with an old class \nworking through relatively new global mechanisms. The issues they \nhave been confronted with since the beginnings of colonisation and \nthen industrialisation are still very much the same - land, dignity, \nautonomy, freedom\n\nBut the main point I wanted to address is the question \"Did the new \nmovements arise out of thin air? Or did they arise out of a new stage \nin the development of the commodity economy?\". To which the short \nanswer is they arose out of a set of catalytic 'encuentro's' \norganised by the Zapatistas and then by string of international \nactions organised through the Peoples Global Action network=8A\n\n\n[from http://www/agp.prg]\n\n\"The sense of possibility that this uprising gave to millions of \npeople across the globe was extraordinary. In 1996, the Zapatistas, \nwith trepidation as they thought no-one might come, sent out an email \ncalling for a gathering, called an \"encuentro\" (encounter), of \ninternational activists and intellectuals to meet in specially \nconstructed arenas in the Chiapas jungle to discuss commontactics, \nproblems and solutions. Six thousand people attended, and spent days \ntalking and sharing their stories of struggle against the common \nenemy: capitalism.\n\nThis was followed a year later by a gathering in Spain, where the \nidea for the construction of a more action focused network, to be \nnamed Peoples' Global Action (PGA), was hatched by a group made up of \nactivists from ten of the largest and most innovative social \nmovements. They included the Zapatistas, Movimento Sem Terra, (the \nBrazilian Landless Peasants Movement who occupy and live on large \ntracts of unproductive land) and the Karnataka State Farmers Union \n(KRRS), renowned for their \"cremate Monsanto\" campaign which involved \nburning fields of Genetically Modified crops.\n\nThe group (who became the PGA convenors committee, a role that \nrotates every year) drafted a document outlining some of the primary \nobjectives and organisational principles of the emerging network. It \noutlined a firm rejection of appeals to those in power for reforms to \nthe present world order. A support for direct action as a means of \ncommunities reclaiming control over their lives, and an \norganisational philosophy based on autonomy and decentralisation. In \nFebruary 1998, Peoples' Global Action was born. For the first time \never the worlds grassroots movements were beginning to talk and share \nexperiences without the mediation of the media or Non Governmental \nOrganisations (NGO's).\"\n\nThe string of actions - that arguably gave birth the current 'wave' \nof actions and movements of movements - started in May 1998 with an \ninternational day of action against the world bank. This was quickly \nfollowed by an 'intercontinental caravan' that traveled through \nEurope, and he 'J18' international day of action [you can read the \nreports here: \nhttp://www.nadir.org/nadir/initiativ/agp/free/global/j18.htm]. The \nnext on the list of actions was N30 - or what CNN dubbed 'Seattle'\n\nNow, I'm not just nit-picking here. Its important to remember what \nhas come before - especially the histories of resistance. Its \nsaddening to note that the 'counter-globalisation' movements, with \ntheir histories bound up with those of the Zapatistas - the ones who \nreminded us that remembering is a weapon - can be turned from an \ninternational network and a series of projects based on decentralised \nand confrontational actions into 'Seattle' - into a singular movement \nborn from a city at the heart of Empire. Or at least that its \nmythology - one of its most potent weapons - can be so easily blunted \nby a TV camera, and that the faces of resistance can be so easily \nobscured.\n\nAnd I think its not just the richness of the histories that this \nchange obscures - it is also the vastness of the alternatives that it \nis throwing up that is obscured. Its not true that they don't offer \n'alternatives' the current order of things. From farming methods, to \ncommunal land use, to systems of regional autonomy to mixed economies \nand markets, new mythologies and way of interacting with each other, \nfrom new media forms, and rich systems of participatory decision \nmaking to the rediscoveries of ways of community /barrio governance - \nthe counter-globalisation movements, while not presenting programs \nfor change, are most definitely creating 'the new in the old'.\n\nThe question as I see it is \"can the strategy of the 'new in the old' \nwork on a large enough scale?\". Are the networks strong enough to \nfight these institutions, the corporations, and the governments of \nthe North and win? Or will it all have to collapse before change can \nbe made?\n-- \n\n\n + since I refuse 'reality' and since for me what is \npossible is already partly real, I am indeed a utopian ... a partisan \n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"date": "Mon, 4 Nov 2002 12:35:55 +1100",
|
||
"message-id": "f05111b08b9eb75bc5d98 {AT} [192.168.0.35]",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00009",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> From Tactical Media to Digital Multitudes"
|
||
}
|
||
],
|
||
"date": "Sat, 02 Nov 2002 01:26:33 -0500",
|
||
"message-id": "200211021411.gA2EBbV10122 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00003",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> From Tactical Media to Digital Multitudes"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "\"McKenzie Wark\" <mckenziewark {AT} hotmail.com>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00015.html",
|
||
"author_name": "McKenzie Wark",
|
||
"content": "\n\n\nn_ik makes the valuable point that class struggle in most\nof the world appears not to be about information, but to be\nabout land. Indeed, the *first*, not the second or the third,\nmoments of commodification is very much in progress. For\nmany people the expropriation of their communal land\nrights is their direct experience of commodification, in\nterms of what it takes from them.\n\nHowever, i think this process is overlaid by two other\nmoments of commodification: indistrialisation, or the\ncommodification of fungible productive resources, but\nalso vectoralisation, or the commodification of\ninformation and its means of abstraction, the vector.\n\nIf one breaks it down thus, one can use this distinction as\nan analytic for thinking about possible alliances, and\npossible conflicts, between the subordinated classes\nin each of the three distinct circuits of commodification.\n\nIt seems to me greatly clarifying to think about a\ncomplex articulation of class struggles, than to posit\na 'multitude' arraigned against 'globalisation', where\nneither of those terms have much historical analytic\nspecificity.\n\nOne can certianly trace a very significant movement that\narises out the Zapatista experience, but it might be a\nbit limiting to restrict one's sense of a counter history to\nthat one strand. Or to ignore how much that movement\nowed to an emergent information environment, both\nin terms of what it contronted and what it was able to\nuse as vector for 'counter-global' (call it what you like)\nformation.\n\nk\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"date": "Mon, 04 Nov 2002 13:38:26 -0500",
|
||
"message-id": "F430bxmZgvewuxCgB4H00012508 {AT} hotmail.com",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00015",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> From Tactical Media to Digital Multitudes"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "Are Flagan <areflagan {AT} artpanorama.com>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00020.html",
|
||
"author_name": "Are Flagan",
|
||
"content": "\nTo have multitudes, then, we need a gathering idea for them, which quickly\nbrings us back to the proverbial Catch 22. The first symptom of this\nstalemate conundrum is arguably how it is theorized here. Operatives like\nleft and right, mass and mob, network and empire are passive placeholders\nfor multitudes that are conveniently pushed around into pigeonholes carved\nby persuasive rhetoric, as if they were not already deeply conflicted\n\"multitudes\" themselves. This is of course how one traditionally arrives at\na general idea about the specific, tellingly called theory from its Greek\nroot. The first step toward the stated aims must surely be to cease this\nnonsense and interject on less grandiose terms. As one of the heralded beats\nremarked on leave from the asylum: \"A star is as far as the eye can see and\nas close as my eye is to me.\"\n\n-af\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
|
||
"date": "Tue, 05 Nov 2002 12:20:26 -0500",
|
||
"message-id": "200211060910.gA69A3S21824 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00020",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> From Tactical Media to Digital Multitudes"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "\"porculus\" <porculus {AT} wanadoo.fr>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00027.html",
|
||
"author_name": "porculus",
|
||
"content": "\n> I always pay particular attention to messages from Kermit Snelson and\n> Brian Holmes because I like where each of them is coming from. I have\n> pursued this sense of an affinity with each of them off the list. So when\n> Brian takes umbrage at Kermit's last post in this thread, I feel compelled\n> to enter the fray.\n\nbeing an heavy full of multitude beer earthling and dealing rather with fold\nkinda deleuzian one at chin & belly for recognizing my buds at the bar i am\npretty amusing by some intellectual folklorik description of some impalpable\nanima who are meeting around here. yes i speak about projective body you\nhave.. cause of course presently you 'see' me..& yes and see i am rather\nattracting and modeling by the apolinian lightning force, then kermit &\nbrian are rather twining in some laurel & hardy brain shape ok ok ! the\nworld is a vast land populated by so diverse knitting dark fiber female &\nmale parishioner. but what about yourz..i would say, dark fiber made panz\nfree ?\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "\"nettime\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
|
||
"date": "Fri, 8 Nov 2002 14:22:33 +0100",
|
||
"message-id": "200211090024.gA90OY113260 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00027",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> From Tactical Media to Digital Multitudes"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "Keith Hart <HART_KEITH {AT} compuserve.com>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00028.html",
|
||
"author_name": "Keith Hart",
|
||
"content": "\n\nI always pay particular attention to messages from Kermit Snelson and\nBrian Holmes because I like where each of them is coming from. I have\npursued this sense of an affinity with each of them off the list. So when\nBrian takes umbrage at Kermit's last post in this thread, I feel compelled\nto enter the fray.\n\nMax Weber wrote two great essays called \"Science as a vocation\" and\n\"Politics as a vocation\". He argued that a scientist must privilege\nreason, but good scientists are usually ethusiasts; whereas politicians\nmove people by passion, but their arguments are more persuasive if they\nare reasonable. Despite this overlap, it is hard to be both a scientist\nand a politician at the same time. Weber was chief organiser of German\nsociology, a failed Liberal MP and an adviser to the Kaiser's wartime\ncabinet. He was also a depressive who knew about the psychological\npresures of trying to unify the two sides of his personality.\n\nWhat I like about Kermit's messages is their intellectual clarity. It is\ntrue that there is scholarship in them, but what impresses me is their\nquality of reasoning. It does not seem fair to me to ask him to justify\nthese interventions in terms of a logic of political activism. I know that\nthe politics of Karl Marx and Walter Benjamin are long dead, unrealised.\nBut their contributions to the ongoing human conversation about a better\nworld still inspire us. Do I care about their skills in mobilising people\nto man the barrivcades? Not really. It is the quality of their thinking\nthat is moving.\n\nMaybe that makes me an intellectual more than a political activist. But it\nis clear that the people who matter were motivated by both concerns. I\ncan't imagine that Kermit would be on this list unless he cared about the\npolitical troubles of our day, whether or not he goes out into the streets\nto get people committed to a cause. Equally, having read and studied all\nof Brian's contributions to this list, I find his intellectual and\npolitical visions equally inspiring. He wants things to get better soon,\nbut he has put in some spadework on how to think about that. Maybe there\nis more feeling in his posts than Kermit's. But surely there is room for\nall of us in this game. Why attack a blatant intellectual for saying that\nhe sees some flaws in the arguments of Geert and Florian?\n\nI should add a footnote on Polanyi, since Brian brought him up, not for\nthe first time. This is not just a scholastic intervention. Polanyi, in\nThe Great Transformation (1944), said that land, labour and capital were\nfictitious commodities. A commodity is something produced and sold. But\nnature, humanity and society (money) are not produced and therefore cannot\nbe sold. If they are, something terrible happens to the relationship\nbetween society and nature, as formulated by Aristotle when he said that\nman is a political animal. The self-regulating market, as an utopian idea,\nijnevitably inflicts damage on nature, humanity and society. Particular\nclasses express resistance to that general damage.\n\nWhat this has to do with multitudes and mobs I cant guess. I prefer\nEnglish words of one syllable (expressing the idea of mobility) to Latin\nwords of three syllables (expressing the poetry of an intellectual class).\n\nKeith Hart\n\n\n\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
|
||
"date": "Thu, 7 Nov 2002 16:57:04 -0500",
|
||
"message-id": "200211081336.gA8DaxV30694 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00028",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> From Tactical Media to Digital Multitudes"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "Are Flagan <areflagan {AT} artpanorama.com>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00032.html",
|
||
"author_name": "Are Flagan",
|
||
"content": "\nOn 11/7/02 5:09, \"Brian Holmes\" <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr> wrote:\n\n> We \n> intellectual laborers definitely have some scores to settle with\n> finance capital and IP, and those are important struggles, for sure.\n> But let's try and keep our intellectual eyes open for the ways that\n> everyone else is living too.\n\nThe first score is of course how \"we\" are going to get paid for \"our\" work\nas \"intellectuals.\" Our plan of action must be to isolate certain points and\nmake them scarce by attributing them to the select few that pose as useful\nauthorities on worthwhile topics. Let us further form close links where we\nquote each other ad infinitum to create the domino effect where arguments\nfall real nice and everyone included in the chain reaction make perfect\nsense. Oh, and we will of course embrace everything and everyone in our\narguments, so the process should in no way be considered exclusive or\nexclusionary (although some _obvious_ exceptions will me made, based upon\nour consensus). This is not to say that I don't hungrily read or (dis)agree\nwith you, but not so deep down I know that theory is some bullshit corner I\npaint myself into and admire the view.\n\nWhat happened to AIDS activism (re: GB words)? If I may reinterpret some of\nthe sentiments about gay activism put forward by Crimp in Melancholia and\nMoralism; it is not just the case that it died as a result of gay\nneo-conservatives hijacking its agenda and thereby gaining the mainstream\nappeal that eventually defused it. The melancholia part relates to an inward\nmourning of its own potential; the loss of its own future as a culture of\nsexual possibility. Activism, in other words, grew to the point where it\nlost momentum and turned on itself as a melancholic impulse directed toward\nits past. My metaphoric guess is that the AIDS quilt can be seen as a\npivotal moment, where this particular movement reached a critical mass in\nthe west and individuation no longer mobilized but returned to alienation\nand loss. The from-to implications in the subject heading of this thread may\nsignal a similar moment for \"new media.\"\n\nJust listen to what people are saying; the post are infused with melancholy,\nfor what never was and what is taken away. There are reasonings for hope not\nimpulsive calls for action. So GB's invite for documentary and poetry to\nfuse, following the formula for a.g. intervention through formal invention,\nis the proven antidote to such a lethargic moment, and it deserves a little\nmore than an emoticon smirk, despite its predictability. It also asks for\ntheory to examine its boundaries and to think rather than quote. To\nrejuvenate the grassroots, we don't necessarily have to hose the lawn with\nanother dose of Empire. Activism moves from the specific to the general and\ndies.\n\nI know it scares me that some deadbeat drunk [sorry, Mr. Corso] with an\nasylum record can capture more insight in a few stanzas than a whole legion\nof decorated laureates can in a whole library. To overcome such fears is the\nbreach of theory. \"Our\" work as \"intellectuals\" is then done. \"We\" can move\non.\n\n-af \n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
|
||
"date": "Thu, 07 Nov 2002 13:37:33 -0500",
|
||
"message-id": "200211072325.gA7NPlu09767 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00032",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> From Tactical Media to Digital Multitudes"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "Brian Holmes <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00034.html",
|
||
"author_name": "Brian Holmes",
|
||
"content": "\nHere's some thoughts about various contributions to this thread, \nquite a useful one for me anyway, which David Garcia has now about \ncapped off by contributing Gregg Bordowitz's insightful and even \nrevolutionary reflections on AIDS and globalization. While awaiting \nthe fusion of documentary and poetry :)\n\n1.\nKermit really doesn't like the slogan \"everyone is an expert\":\n\n...no one, not even a genius, becomes an expert without the training, \neducation and discipline necessary for creative and critical thought. \nTraining and education involve the mastery of rules, techniques and \nideas.... it is impossible to found a culture on despair, nihilism \nand a principled rejection of all ideas and debate, even if one \nchooses to call such an approach \"tactical media\", \"radical media \npragmatism\" or even \"art\". [snip]\n\nKermit, sometimes I wonder if you do any political organizing? You \nknow, it might be great if leftists could only associate with people \nwho had a clear sense of self, sharply honed critical faculties, a \ngood background knowledge of all the issues, sound moral reflexes and \na sense of coherency in their actions. Trouble is, these days that \nlist of qualities probably better describes the majority of American \nvoters who just gave Bush a mandate for holy war. \"Negative thinking\" \nis a philosopher's word for the difficult attempt to resist a badly \noriented rationality, a predatory individualism, a malevolent \ndiscipline. But the sources of effective resistance don't just come \nfrom philosophy: they also come from the fringes of alienation and \nanger and despair, from the insights of artistic experience, from the \nsudden enthusiasms of technological change, sometimes from more \nobscure rejections of the status quo. One of the main issues today is \nthat the majority of the \"experts\" never question the holy mantra of \neconomic growth, or the unspoken credo of racist exclusion. Somehow \nthat expertise has to be challenged, it's urgent. What Geert and \nFlorian are doing is not just armchair resistance, they're trying to \ngive fairly large numbers of people a possible way into political \nlife, which is always about debate, even when that debate takes the \nform of a riot or a hacker attack. Did you ever stake your own \nphysical freedom on an issue? Do you think someone who does might \nalso have principles? The main thing right now is not to diss \neveryone off and claim the high ground. I mean, I appreciate your \nscholarship and also that you even take the time to apply it to what \nwe're talking about here. What's dismaying, generally, is that the \nminority concerned about something other than their own greed spend \nhalf their time fighting with the people on their own side. We could \nuse some subtler criticism.\n\n2.\nI really liked Nik's post in this thread, recalling the role that the \nPGA and all the social movements associated with it have played in \nputting a new critique of capitalism seriously on the table. In the \nabsence of that history and that continuing reality there would be no \nsocial forums, just a complicit center left waiting to cave in and \nabandon everything. Without a few principled riots the critique would \nhave remained so \"reasonable\" that it'd just be contemplative \nnostalgia from a bunch of well-heeled artists, old profs or has-been \ncommunists. If you have problems with armchairs and you're not \ntotally hooked on computer screens, check out the PGA for a change. \nI've found those meshworks to be the best way for me personally to \nexperience and develop the kind of global cooperativity and \nsolidarity that's going to be a broad basis of real resistance, as \nthe days get darker and all of this bullshit economic crisis goes on \nwrecking people's lives.\n\n3.\nI also liked the way that MacKenzie came back in his second post and \ntalked about three major types of resistance, against three forms of \ndomination, over land, the means of industrial production, and \nabstract or symbolic property. Those are actually Karl Polanyi's \nthree anthropological categories: land, labor and money (or the \nsocial institution of exchange). Polanyi showed how the liberal \nfiction of self-regulating markets destroys all three, leading to \nviolent conflict. The complexity and diversity of resistance, based \non differing relations to those three categories, is a key reality, \nit's one that you have to respect in order to understand why \ndifferent people stand up for their different struggles. Our job as \nintellectuals is to at least try to bridge the gap, whenever it's \npossible. But I don't think the \"vector\" thing adds much to the \nargument. Way back in the mid-eighties, people had analyzed what's \nstill unfortunately true: finance capital reigns supreme in this \nphase of capitalism. Before the World Wide Web, abstract dollars and \ndeutschmarks and yens were spinning madly around the planet in \nelectronic circuits, and doing the kind of damage they're still doing \ntoday. And they did it in the 20s too, before electronics. The great \ngrandaddy of intellectual property, the way of controlling land and \nlabor and even commerce at a distance, is big money, stock, financial \ninstruments, supported as always by national and international law \nthat favors owners over non-owners. IP is just a new twist in that \nvery old story. Again I agree with Nik.\n\n4.\nAll the above suggests the critique that I personally have of the \nconcept of \"multitudes.\" But first of all, to say it's a synonym of \nmob is just ridiculous. In all the autonomist texts the multitudes \narise from subjective processes of individuation, which are opposed \nto the consensual figure of the \"people\" within the normalizing \nframework of the nation-state. The notion of the multitudes is a \ndemand to go beyond the current premise of representative democracy: \nthat a virtuous, unimpeachable collective will can be derived from \njust counting up votes or polling opinions in frameworks that ask \nonly for knee-jerk reactions, and not for any kind of \nself-elaboration or collective participation (not even the kind you \ngo through when you take part in a big demo). Paolo Virno puts the \nwhole mob argument to rest in his article in the French journal \n_Multitudes_ #7, when he says that this singularizing process is \nactually an intensification of political sociality: \"Far from \nregressing, singularity is refined and reaches its peak in acting \ntogether, in the plurality of voices, in short, in the public \nsphere.\" OK, for every Virno there are lots of sloppy uses of the \nword, and I agree with Kermit that it's right to point them out. It's \nreally a word that needs to be kept at the level of philosophy, at \nleast for a while anyway. But the fundamental problem I have with \nmultitudes is the argument that says that we're all intellectual \nlaborers now, or even if we're not, that's the key process, the same \nway as Marx said that industrial labor was the key process giving \nrise to the proletariat in the 19th century. I think the danger there \nis taking your own navel for the whole orange, or worse, for the \nwhole planet. 6.25 billion post-fordists is just not yet reality. We \nintellectual laborers definitely have some scores to settle with \nfinance capital and IP, and those are important struggles, for sure. \nBut let's try and keep our intellectual eyes open for the ways that \neveryone else is living too.\n\nBrian Holmes\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
|
||
"date": "Thu, 7 Nov 2002 11:09:55 +0100",
|
||
"message-id": "200211071757.gA7Hvb701847 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00034",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> From Tactical Media to Digital Multitudes"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "\"David Garcia\" <davidg {AT} xs4all.nl>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00037.html",
|
||
"author_name": "David Garcia",
|
||
"content": "\n\nIn their article In their article Florian Schneider and Geert Lovink declare\nthat \"the new social movements (wrongly labeled anti-globalisation) are in\ndanger of \"getting stuck in self-satisfying protest mode, running the risk\n\"of getting stuck at the level of a global 'demo design,' no longer grounded\nin actual topics and local situations.\" They then ask the key question \"how\nto jump beyond the prototype?\"\n\nThe answer to their question lies above all in specificity. In being able to\ngeneralize effectively (with explanatory power) from the lived experience of\ninvolvement in *specific* campaigns. In December Gregg Bordowitz will be\nmoderating a session in the New York Tactical Media Lab\n<http://n5m4.org/index.shtml?118+120+2450> His text (below) suggests ways of\naddressing a number of the questions raised by Geert and Florian including\nthe function and meaning of art in relationship to politics. I hope this\nlist finds Gregg's text as useful as I did on the recurring art question as\nit takes us beyond the rather fruitless obsessing about the \"electronic arts\nsub-culture\" and the demise of the dot.com era. (David Garcia)\n\n\nI'm Gregg Bordowitz, AIDS activist, video maker, writer and teacher.\nI will be facilitating the discussion at the December TML on Sunday\nthe 15th. It will focus on HIV/AIDS media activism. Planning for that\nday is coming more into focus. Here are some of the ideas that I have\nbeen thinking about that could come up within the discussion.\n\nI am a long time activist who has made much work, both in video and\nin writing that addresses the organizing problems specific to AIDS\nactivism. Here are some of the presumptions I make going into our\ndiscussion. Be kind, these are rough working notes.\n\n1) The AIDS crisis is still beginning. In the US there is much\nfatigue around the issue of AIDS and a profound misconception that\nthe epidemic is contained. Around the world, in Africa, South\nAmerica, Eastern Europe and Asia, places where the epidemic is out of\ncontrol, there are growing activist movements. A particular hot spot\nto look at now is South Africa. The issues that internationalist AIDS\nactivism currently focuses upon have the potential to explode and\nalter a number of governing discursive and juridical regimes\nconcerning trade, industrial production and post-industrial\nproduction. International AIDS activists are questioning and applying\npressure regarding the production and distribution of generic\npharmaceuticals. This is interesting to us for a number of reasons.\nFirst, I am on the AIDS drug cocktail myself and so the issue is\npotentially central to my survival. Second, the juridical regimes\nthat govern international patent law are the same whether applied to\npharmaceuticals, software or feature films. (The TRIPS agreement\ncovers all this.) All of us have a stake in copyright law --\nacademics, media activists, software designers, people interested in\ndigital tech of all kinds. For media activists, the issue of\naffective labor and the management of the production and distribution\nof affective labor is an area of great concern in theory and practice.\n\n2) You can't understand the global AIDS crisis without a working\ntheory of globalization and analyzing the global AIDS crisis is a\nperfect way for forming a theory of globalization. You can get to\nalmost any issue by way of an analysis of global AIDS -- poverty,\nborders, modes of production, etc.\n\n3) Think about. There are millions of people with AIDS around the\nworld, in every corner of the planet. What would happen if every\nperson with AIDS demanded immediate care and access to lifesaving\ndrugs? At the Barcelona AIDS conference this passed July, Nelson\nMandela encouraged every person with AIDS, no matter where they are,\nwhat circumstances of poverty they live-in, to demand immediate care.\nThis was profound. Everyone else was talking about scaling-up --\nincreasing the scale of funding and infrastructure to meet the dire\nneeds of millions. That's an important discussion to have (\nunfortunately now weighed down by bureaucratic infighting and the\napathy of governments). BUT, Mandela gave a revolutionary message\nthat addressed the individual,potentially millions of individuals.\nThis is what Hardt and Negri are talking about in the book Empire,\nwhen they are trying to figure out \"how to capture the multitude as a\nsingularity.\" How can one come-up with an articulation available to\nindividual use, an open, improvisational code, if you will, that\nlinks millions around a common goal, but allows for differences of\ncontext. (Yes back to the old problem of the Internationale. The\nInternationale without the Internationale. Arise, ye prisoners of\ninternational trade regimes and structural inequity!)\n\n3) Politics and art. Media activist work must adopt the imperatives\nof a movement as its starting point, not its end. The work of media\nactivism is not supplemental to any cause. it is its own cause. Media\nactivist work does not earn its guarantee of relevance or truth from\nprotests and activist efforts. Media activism must provide its own\nguarantees through form. The politics in political art, are the\npolitics that occur when the work is encountered in real time. The\npolitics of media activism are not to be found anywhere but in the\nwork itself. Lastly, we must talk about aesthetics. Yes, as media\nactivists, in particular our work must address questions of form. I\nadvocate the cross breeding of documentary procedures with poetry and\nthe concerns of structure usually reserved for conversations about\nmusic.\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
|
||
"date": "Thu, 07 Nov 2002 07:36:41 +0100",
|
||
"message-id": "200211071154.gA7Bsc224446 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00037",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> From Tactical Media to Digital Multitudes"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "n_ik <fragments {AT} va.com.au>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00009.html",
|
||
"author_name": "n_ik",
|
||
"content": "\n<McKenzie Wark wrote>\n\n>He was wrong about a lot of things, but Marx did enjoin us to ask what he\n>called \"the property question\", and insisted that it was where the\n>critical spirit begins and ends. And what if we ask the \"property\n>question\" of the jumble of symptoms with which Lovink & Schneider confront\n>us? The network of power starts to reveal itself more clearly.\n>\n>Did the new movements arise out of thin air? Or did they arise out of a\n>new stage in the development of the commodity economy? At both the level\n>of the tools it had at its disposal, and the range of issues it\n>confronted, the new movement confronts a new class power. Only rarely is\n>this class power named and identified at an abstract level. The symptoms\n>of its (mis)rule have been charted by brave advocates and actvists. But we\n>are all merely blind folks touching different parts of an elephant and\n>trying to describe the totality from the detail we sense before us, in our\n>fragment of everyday life.\n\n\nI think the class struggle many 'counter-globalisation' protesters \nare engaged in is not so much a new class struggle but an age-old one.\n\nthe bulk of the actions that have taken place against the global \ninstitutions of capitalism in the last 5 or so years have taken place \nin the countries of the global South - Bolivia, South Africa, India, \nMexico - or in countries \"over the horizon\", out of site of CNN - \nSouth Korea etc. There isn't a single day where a protest, blockade, \noccupation, etc takes place against the array of institutions, \ncorporations and governments of the North.\n\nI would say that the overwhelming amount of protesters, activists, \nrevolutionaries, et al around the world are engaged with an old class \nworking through relatively new global mechanisms. The issues they \nhave been confronted with since the beginnings of colonisation and \nthen industrialisation are still very much the same - land, dignity, \nautonomy, freedom\n\nBut the main point I wanted to address is the question \"Did the new \nmovements arise out of thin air? Or did they arise out of a new stage \nin the development of the commodity economy?\". To which the short \nanswer is they arose out of a set of catalytic 'encuentro's' \norganised by the Zapatistas and then by string of international \nactions organised through the Peoples Global Action network=8A\n\n\n[from http://www/agp.prg]\n\n\"The sense of possibility that this uprising gave to millions of \npeople across the globe was extraordinary. In 1996, the Zapatistas, \nwith trepidation as they thought no-one might come, sent out an email \ncalling for a gathering, called an \"encuentro\" (encounter), of \ninternational activists and intellectuals to meet in specially \nconstructed arenas in the Chiapas jungle to discuss commontactics, \nproblems and solutions. Six thousand people attended, and spent days \ntalking and sharing their stories of struggle against the common \nenemy: capitalism.\n\nThis was followed a year later by a gathering in Spain, where the \nidea for the construction of a more action focused network, to be \nnamed Peoples' Global Action (PGA), was hatched by a group made up of \nactivists from ten of the largest and most innovative social \nmovements. They included the Zapatistas, Movimento Sem Terra, (the \nBrazilian Landless Peasants Movement who occupy and live on large \ntracts of unproductive land) and the Karnataka State Farmers Union \n(KRRS), renowned for their \"cremate Monsanto\" campaign which involved \nburning fields of Genetically Modified crops.\n\nThe group (who became the PGA convenors committee, a role that \nrotates every year) drafted a document outlining some of the primary \nobjectives and organisational principles of the emerging network. It \noutlined a firm rejection of appeals to those in power for reforms to \nthe present world order. A support for direct action as a means of \ncommunities reclaiming control over their lives, and an \norganisational philosophy based on autonomy and decentralisation. In \nFebruary 1998, Peoples' Global Action was born. For the first time \never the worlds grassroots movements were beginning to talk and share \nexperiences without the mediation of the media or Non Governmental \nOrganisations (NGO's).\"\n\nThe string of actions - that arguably gave birth the current 'wave' \nof actions and movements of movements - started in May 1998 with an \ninternational day of action against the world bank. This was quickly \nfollowed by an 'intercontinental caravan' that traveled through \nEurope, and he 'J18' international day of action [you can read the \nreports here: \nhttp://www.nadir.org/nadir/initiativ/agp/free/global/j18.htm]. The \nnext on the list of actions was N30 - or what CNN dubbed 'Seattle'\n\nNow, I'm not just nit-picking here. Its important to remember what \nhas come before - especially the histories of resistance. Its \nsaddening to note that the 'counter-globalisation' movements, with \ntheir histories bound up with those of the Zapatistas - the ones who \nreminded us that remembering is a weapon - can be turned from an \ninternational network and a series of projects based on decentralised \nand confrontational actions into 'Seattle' - into a singular movement \nborn from a city at the heart of Empire. Or at least that its \nmythology - one of its most potent weapons - can be so easily blunted \nby a TV camera, and that the faces of resistance can be so easily \nobscured.\n\nAnd I think its not just the richness of the histories that this \nchange obscures - it is also the vastness of the alternatives that it \nis throwing up that is obscured. Its not true that they don't offer \n'alternatives' the current order of things. From farming methods, to \ncommunal land use, to systems of regional autonomy to mixed economies \nand markets, new mythologies and way of interacting with each other, \nfrom new media forms, and rich systems of participatory decision \nmaking to the rediscoveries of ways of community /barrio governance - \nthe counter-globalisation movements, while not presenting programs \nfor change, are most definitely creating 'the new in the old'.\n\nThe question as I see it is \"can the strategy of the 'new in the old' \nwork on a large enough scale?\". Are the networks strong enough to \nfight these institutions, the corporations, and the governments of \nthe North and win? Or will it all have to collapse before change can \nbe made?\n-- \n\n\n + since I refuse 'reality' and since for me what is \npossible is already partly real, I am indeed a utopian ... a partisan \n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"date": "Mon, 4 Nov 2002 12:35:55 +1100",
|
||
"message-id": "f05111b08b9eb75bc5d98 {AT} [192.168.0.35]",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00009",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> From Tactical Media to Digital Multitudes"
|
||
}
|
||
],
|
||
"date": "Fri, 01 Nov 2002 23:43:27 +0100",
|
||
"message-id": "200211020317.gA23Ha118881 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00002",
|
||
"subject": "<nettime> From Tactical Media to Digital Multitudes",
|
||
"list": "nettime_l"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "Keith Hart <keith {AT} thememorybank.co.uk>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0606/msg00001.html",
|
||
"author_name": "Keith Hart",
|
||
"content": "Hi Brian,\n\nJackie Dugard did a Cambridge University PhD on informal economy\nand violence in post-apartheid South Africa a few years back. It\nwas specifically about the 'taxi wars' in Johannesburg/Pretoria\nand Cape Town, armed conflict between gangs for control of the\nminibus passenger transport industry. She starts off by tracing\nthe informalisation of violence to the state apparatus in the late\napartheid era. But the efforts of the post-apartheid state to deal\nwith the problem failed because bureaucrats were so much slower and\nmore rigid than gangsters. This is not news, I think.\n\nThe Rand Corporation produced a report not long ago 'Networks and\nNetwars: The Future of Terror, Crime, and Militancy\" that has chapters\nlike 'Transnational Criminal Networks' and 'Gangs, Hooligans, and\nAnarchists - the Vanguard of Netwar in the Streets'.\n\nhttp://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1382/\n\nIts conclusion, as I recall, was that the future lies with flexible\nnetwork organization and the governments and corporations will go down\nunless they find a way for transforming themselves into something like\ntheir opponents. But that has been a persistent twentieth century\ntactic, hasn't it, from British government terrorism in Ireland at the\ntime of Ken Loach's latest movie to the lawlessness openly embraced\nby the Bush regime today and John Perkins' revelations about his\ncareer as an 'economic hitman' for the corporations. So I guess one\nquestion might be whether something new is going on here? Maybe it's\nthe dissemination of news through these media.\n\nKeith\n\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"follow-up": [
|
||
{
|
||
"from": "\"Miguel Afonso Caetano\" <miguel.a.caetano {AT} gmail.com>",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0606/msg00002.html",
|
||
"author_name": "Miguel Afonso Caetano",
|
||
"content": "2006/5/31, Brian Holmes <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr>:\n> I'd be totally interested to read your dissertation Miguel,\n> is it online?\n>\n\nBrian,\n\nI forgot to say that the thesis is only in Portuguese. If you stil\nwant to read it and understand Portuguese I can send the PDF to you.\nI might translate some of the most interesting chapters into English\nlater, though.\n\n> > I think it would be good to start a debate here in My feeling is\n> that cooptation is an infinite process - part of social struggle,\n> which demands that every dissenting or antagonistic expression be\n> abandoned and reinvented soon after its first release into the\n> infosphere. I also think that the expression \"tactical media\" was\n> launched at a great moment of political weakness and under-the-radar\n> diffuse experimentation from the left/anarchist side of the cultural\n> and political spectrums - a moment coinciding with the massification\n> of a new communicational toolkit. That those days are gone is pretty\n> clear (the state of exception was definitely the turning point), but\n> what's interesting is all they produced, the new possibilities. The\n> questions of what at the time was called tactical media, and more,\n> the forms of experimentation with communicational politics from\n> below, are something you can only move through as it happens and\n> leave aside as it disappears. Still, histories are fascinating when\n> they're not confused with futures.\n\nThe problem is that, at the moment there seems to exist a vacuum left\nover in the place that tactical media occupied. It seems to me that at\nleast in the North of the globe, in the last two years there has been\nsome kind of resignation from that left/anarchist side that you talk\nabout regarding emancipatory uses of technology and media. Fear has\ngained terrain. There's no new ideas. But who am I to say anything? I\nlive in Portugal, a country where nothing ever happens...\n\n>\n> There's something to that. First of all, De Certeau was inspired\n> by Brazil and wrote about it, if I'm not mistaken. Second, the\n> massification of the Internet toolkit is still underway in Brazil\n> and India. Third, the state and therefore, the cooptation apparatus\n> is weak in Brazil, though as far as I can see (on short visits)\n> it still works all too well. Actually, I think people in Brazil\n> and India would be best off inventing new concepts to really drive\n> home the point that things are happening - and should happen, are\n> urgently needed - in those specific contexts.\n\nWell, I must say I never really went to Brazil. What i wrote comes\nfrom all the experiences I have collected from mailing-lists,\nwikis, blogs and other collaborative online tools, apart from email\ninterviews.\n\n>\n> The thing that amazed me on my last trip to Sao Paulo was hearing\n> about the PCC weekend. What does nettime think about that? A gang\n> that has totally dominated the prison system in Sao Paulo state,\n> that controls the drug trade in the cities of that state (including\n> the megalopolis itself), that has built up a very sophisticated\n> economy and a functioning leadership structure, and is able to\n> coordinate an attack on the police using cell-phones from inside\n> the prisons, burning 60 buses and assaulting reportedly a hundred\n> police stations (is that true?), carrying out what friends of\n> mine described as a \"subjective occupation\" of the minds and\n> emotions of one of the largest cities in the world! Talk about\n> tactics... It seems as though a networked criminal organization (the\n> Primeiro Commando da Capital) is able to run rings around a state\n> which cannot catch up to it, cannot install the kind of hi-tech\n> protection and distributed control mechanisms that the US and other\n> Western countries are working so deperately to perfect. This is\n> fantastically interesting, actually hopeful in some wierd respects\n> (if the state fails to that degree, must it not be reinvented?),\n> but mostly just astounding, with the great danger that a kind of\n> fascist electoral reaction will come out of it (as in the US), as\n> well as police death-squads which, I have been told, immediately\n> formed to exact repraisals. The whole thing is incredibly important\n> as a phenomenon of our times, I would be curious to know what others\n> think about it.\n>\n> best, BH\n>\n\nWell, as some people have been saying in brazilian mailing-lists,\nPCC acts just like another fascist organization, and in that way it\nis similar to the PM (Military Police). We must not see any hope in\nthese type of operations just because they compromise the structures\nof the State, as has been the error of many people in the left in\nthe last decades (century?). Even if it is a network, it is a mix of\na decentralized and a centralized network, where some central hubs\ncontrol the nodes but also where, ultimately, these hubs respond to\nthe leader, \"Marcola\". It only took a phone call from \"Marcola\" for\nthe main wave of the attacks to stop. The mainstream media have been\nsaying that he has read more than 3.000 books since he has been in\njail, and gave Sun Tzu's \"The Art of War\" to read to his highest\nranking \"officials\".\n\nAnd has you hinted, the police death-squads have already murdered\nmore than a hundred innocents who live in the \"favelas\" - slums. Not\nonly these people have to submit to the power structures of the drug\ngangs, they also are indirect victims of the war against the police.\nActually, the \"favelas\" are the terrain, the proper place of the PCC,\nand in De Certeau's sense, one can see the criminals as representing a\nstrategy and the people living there as some kind of tactics, because\nthey have to compromise with the ruling powers but, on the other\nhand, manage to escape to their control by engaging in collective and\ncooperative efforts, like Samba schools and \"mutir=F5es\" organized to\nexpand and paint their houses made of cardboard and wood.\n\nBest Regards,\n\nMiguel Caetano\n\n\n\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
|
||
"to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"date": "Fri, 2 Jun 2006 10:36:00 +0100",
|
||
"message-id": "E1Fm68k-0004wi-I5 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00002",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> Technologies of Resistance: Transgression and Solidarity in Tactical Media"
|
||
}
|
||
],
|
||
"date": "Fri, 02 Jun 2006 11:02:19 +0200",
|
||
"message-id": "E1Fm66o-0004vY-Hl {AT} bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"id": "00001",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> Technologies of Resistance: Transgression and Solidarity in Tactical Media",
|
||
"list": "nettime_l"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"author_name": "podinski",
|
||
"subject": "<nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!",
|
||
"content": "hello N-time, \n\nThis November INDYMEDIA – (( i )) – will be 20 years old !!\n\nApril Glaser writes a good short history of the pioneering\nnetwork/platform/newsfeed … for Logic Magazine ( here ). But there’s\nprobably many more things that need to be analyzed in the history of the\nInternet and digital culture to understand and assess whether “Another\nNetwork Is Possible“… and where + how tactical media can unite\ncommunities tomorrow…\n\nhttps://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n\n...\n\nXLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL that…\n\nhttp://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n\nexcerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n\n>\n\n( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing back in our\nheads as we write… )\n\nThis is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will take more than\na short essay to sort through all the angles and dilemmas we find\nourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias +\ntechnospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the military/corporate\ncommunication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through all the tissues\nand orifices of human + social organization like electro-shock +\ndoctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\nalready-anthropocene-driven madness… by accelerating it … like: Here\ntake this, it’s another anthropo-scenic downloading spiral into\nStephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress” Inc.\n\n>\n\n...\n\nOn a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some Indy-inspired type\ntactical media event...\n\nperhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary date...\n\nAny ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on that ? get in touch !\n\nThere is already something planned in Houston hosted by IMC folks there\n( at Rice U. ?) ...\n\nbut nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we know... and WHY\nBtropolis?\n\nOne of its IMC sites is still active,\n\nand its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown + kicked off\nthe webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n\nAnd there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S NEXT !!\n\n...\n\nliebegreetz !\n\npodinski\n\n\n0~~~~O-----o\nwww.xlterrestrials.org/plog
\n arts + praxis organisms\no-----O~~~~~0\n\n\n\n\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00038.html",
|
||
"to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
|
||
"from": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
|
||
"id": "00038",
|
||
"follow-up": [
|
||
{
|
||
"author_name": "Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid)",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!",
|
||
"content": "\n\n\n\nHello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n\n\n\n\nJust like to point out that https://www.indymedia.nl/ is still very much alive! I haven't been involved for many years now, but perhaps we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring that something in Berlin together\n with the Dutch ((i)) folks? I'd be happy to be involved somehow too!\n\n\n\n\nCheers, Ingrid.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>\nSent: 06 September 2019 15:42\nTo: nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\nSubject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!\n \n\n\nhello N-time, \n\nThis November INDYMEDIA – (( i )) – will be 20 years old !!\n\nApril Glaser writes a good short history of the pioneering\nnetwork/platform/newsfeed … for Logic Magazine ( here ). But there’s\nprobably many more things that need to be analyzed in the history of the\nInternet and digital culture to understand and assess whether “Another\nNetwork Is Possible“… and where + how tactical media can unite\ncommunities tomorrow…\n\nhttps://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n\n...\n\nXLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL that…\n\nhttp://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n\nexcerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n\n>\n\n( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing back in our\nheads as we write… )\n\nThis is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will take more than\na short essay to sort through all the angles and dilemmas we find\nourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias +\ntechnospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the military/corporate\ncommunication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through all the tissues\nand orifices of human + social organization like electro-shock +\ndoctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\nalready-anthropocene-driven madness… by accelerating it … like: Here\ntake this, it’s another anthropo-scenic downloading spiral into\nStephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress” Inc.\n\n>\n\n...\n\nOn a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some Indy-inspired type\ntactical media event...\n\nperhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary date...\n\nAny ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on that ? get in touch !\n\nThere is already something planned in Houston hosted by IMC folks there\n( at Rice U. ?) ...\n\nbut nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we know... and WHY\nBtropolis?\n\nOne of its IMC sites is still active,\n\nand its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown + kicked off\nthe webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n\nAnd there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S NEXT !!\n\n...\n\nliebegreetz !\n\npodinski\n\n\n0~~~~O-----o\nwww.xlterrestrials.org/plog
\n arts + praxis organisms\no-----O~~~~~0\n\n\n\n\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00041.html",
|
||
"to": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>, \"nettime-l@mail.kein.org\" <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>",
|
||
"from": "\"Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid)\" <I.M.Hoofd@uu.nl>",
|
||
"id": "00041",
|
||
"follow-up": [
|
||
{
|
||
"author_name": "podinski",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!",
|
||
"content": "\n \n \n Hi Ingrid et al,\n \n \n hmm, a little shocked that so few want to discuss the indymedia\n platform topic... and what it means for today's struggles... \n but na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently cubicled\n (un-)solidarities... \n \n \n On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M.\n (Ingrid) wrote:\n \n \n \n \n \n Hello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n \n \n \n \n Just like to point out that https://www.indymedia.nl/ is\n still very much alive! I haven't been involved for many years\n now, but perhaps we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring\n that something in Berlin together with the Dutch ((i)) folks?\n I'd be happy to be involved somehow too!\n \n sorry for slow reply... \n things have been a little overloaded... \n \n good to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe there are\n several still out there providing useful public channels ( as\n mentioned in the article, ie. Argentina ) !\n \n Not quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans for\n Nov.... or beyond. \n but happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who want to\n be involved...\n \n Should be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n \n but one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the\n arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism + praxis ...\n i will check in to see, if not already too late. \n \n my cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n \n podinski\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n Cheers, Ingrid.\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n From:\n nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org\n <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of\n podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>\n Sent: 06 September 2019 15:42\n To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org\n <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n Subject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where\n are we now ?!\n \n \n \n hello N-time, \n \n This November INDYMEDIA – (( i )) – will be 20 years old\n !!\n \n April Glaser writes a good short history of the\n pioneering\n network/platform/newsfeed … for Logic Magazine ( here ).\n But there’s\n probably many more things that need to be analyzed in\n the history of the\n Internet and digital culture to understand and assess\n whether “Another\n Network Is Possible“… and where + how tactical media can\n unite\n communities tomorrow…\n \n https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n \n ...\n \n XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL\n that…\n \n http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n \n excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n \n >\n \n ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing\n back in our\n heads as we write… )\n \n This is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will\n take more than\n a short essay to sort through all the angles and\n dilemmas we find\n ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias\n +\n technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the\n military/corporate\n communication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through\n all the tissues\n and orifices of human + social organization like\n electro-shock +\n doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\n already-anthropocene-driven madness… by accelerating it\n … like: Here\n take this, it’s another anthropo-scenic downloading\n spiral into\n Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress” Inc.\n \n >\n \n ...\n \n On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some\n Indy-inspired type\n tactical media event...\n \n perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary\n date...\n \n Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on\n that ? get in touch !\n \n There is already something planned in Houston hosted by\n IMC folks there\n ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n \n but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we\n know... and WHY\n Btropolis?\n \n One of its IMC sites is still active,\n \n and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown\n + kicked off\n the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n \n And there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S\n NEXT !!\n \n ...\n \n liebegreetz !\n \n podinski\n \n \n 0~~~~O-----o\n www.xlterrestrials.org/plog\n
\n arts + praxis organisms\n o-----O~~~~~0\n \n \n \n \n \n # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use\n without permission\n # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net\n criticism,\n # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of\n the nets\n # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n # archive: http://www.nettime.org\n contact: nettime@kein.org\n # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in\n Subject:\n \n \n \n \n \n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00048.html",
|
||
"to": "\"nettime-l@mail.kein.org\" <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>, \"Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid)\" <I.M.Hoofd@uu.nl>",
|
||
"from": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
|
||
"id": "00048",
|
||
"follow-up": [
|
||
{
|
||
"author_name": "tacira",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!",
|
||
"content": "hi pod! long time no see, hi ingrid, tatiana from abya yala :)\n\nas for a long time user and educator on free technologies for creative\nmedia production I was a bit skeptical on the article - we dont need to\ncreate one more leftist tool, but re-ocuppy with purpose and love all\ncollective maintained tools - perhaps more influenced by intersectional\npoltics (I am reading Ocalan :) but the networkS are alive, dormant\nbecause NOT dispersed and very much re-creating itself all the time.\nfree philosophy and ethics becomes just more urgent then ever! As Krenak\nan indigenous leader in brazil says we have been using \"colored\nparachutes\" in this fall \"being able to maintain our subjectivities, our\nvisions, our poetics about existence\". \n\nwe are in shock with the fire but its from the ashes that we create! \n\nhere a recent ongoing work from the brazilian cyberfeminists\nhttps://midiatatica.desarquivo.org/ tactical archives from the last\ndecade by collective perspectives. \n\nbest for all!\nt\n\n\nEm 2019-09-10 08:19, podinski escreveu:\n> Hi Ingrid et al, \n> \n> hmm, a little shocked that so few want to discuss the indymedia\n> platform topic... and what it means for today's struggles... \n> but na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently cubicled\n> (un-)solidarities... \n> \n> On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid) wrote:\n> \n>> Hello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n>>\n>> Just like to point out that https://www.indymedia.nl/ is still very\n>> much alive! I haven't been involved for many years now, but perhaps\n>> we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring that something in\n>> Berlin together with the Dutch ((i)) folks? I'd be happy to be\n>> involved somehow too!\n> sorry for slow reply... \n> things have been a little overloaded... \n> \n> good to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe there are\n> several still out there providing useful public channels ( as\n> mentioned in the article, ie. Argentina ) !\n> \n> Not quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans for\n> Nov.... or beyond. \n> but happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who want to\n> be involved...\n> \n> Should be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n> https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n> \n> but one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the\n> arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism + praxis ...\n> i will check in to see, if not already too late. \n> \n> my cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n> \n> podinski\n> \n>> Cheers, Ingrid.\n>>\n>> -------------------------\n>>\n>> From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org\n>> <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of podinski\n>> <podinski@mailbox.org>\n>> Sent: 06 September 2019 15:42\n>> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n>> Subject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!\n>>\n>> hello N-time,\n>>\n>> This November INDYMEDIA – (( i )) – will be 20 years old !!\n>>\n>> April Glaser writes a good short history of the pioneering\n>> network/platform/newsfeed … for Logic Magazine ( here ). But\n>> there’s\n>> probably many more things that need to be analyzed in the history of\n>> the\n>> Internet and digital culture to understand and assess whether\n>> “Another\n>> Network Is Possible“… and where + how tactical media can unite\n>> communities tomorrow…\n>>\n>> https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL that…\n>>\n>> http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n>>\n>> excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n>>\n>>>\n>>\n>> ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing back in our\n>> heads as we write… )\n>>\n>> This is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will take more\n>> than\n>> a short essay to sort through all the angles and dilemmas we find\n>> ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias +\n>> technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the\n>> military/corporate\n>> communication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through all the\n>> tissues\n>> and orifices of human + social organization like electro-shock +\n>> doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\n>> already-anthropocene-driven madness… by accelerating it … like:\n>> Here\n>> take this, it’s another anthropo-scenic downloading spiral into\n>> Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress” Inc.\n>>\n>>>\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some Indy-inspired\n>> type\n>> tactical media event...\n>>\n>> perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary date...\n>>\n>> Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on that ? get in\n>> touch !\n>>\n>> There is already something planned in Houston hosted by IMC folks\n>> there\n>> ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n>>\n>> but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we know... and WHY\n>> Btropolis?\n>>\n>> One of its IMC sites is still active,\n>>\n>> and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown + kicked\n>> off\n>> the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n>>\n>> And there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S NEXT !!\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> liebegreetz !\n>>\n>> podinski\n>>\n>> 0~~~~O-----o\n>> www.xlterrestrials.org/plog [1]
\n>> arts + praxis organisms\n>> o-----O~~~~~0\n>>\n>> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>> # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>> # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>> # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> \n> \n> \n> Links:\n> ------\n> [1] http://www.xlterrestrials.org/plog\n> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00049.html",
|
||
"to": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
|
||
"from": "tacira@riseup.net",
|
||
"id": "00049",
|
||
"message-id": "dd040be8c1c3fa9b3d539f1881a529fa@riseup.net",
|
||
"date": "Wed, 11 Sep 2019 05:38:06 -0700",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"author_name": "podinski",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!",
|
||
"content": "Hi Tati et al,\n\na pleasure to read some news from ya...\n\n+ thx for the link !\n\n...\n\nOn 9/11/19 2:38 PM, tacira@riseup.net wrote:\n> hi pod! long time no see, hi ingrid, tatiana from abya yala :)\n>\n> as for a long time user and educator on free technologies for creative\n> media production I was a bit skeptical on the article - we dont need to\n> create one more leftist tool, but re-ocuppy with purpose and love all\n> collective maintained tools - perhaps more influenced by intersectional\n> poltics (I am reading Ocalan :) but the networkS are alive, dormant\n> because NOT dispersed and very much re-creating itself all the time.\n> free philosophy and ethics becomes just more urgent then ever! As Krenak\n> an indigenous leader in brazil says we have been using \"colored\n> parachutes\" in this fall \"being able to maintain our subjectivities, our\n> visions, our poetics about existence\". \nyes, well it is not hard for me to be critical about More leftist tools...\nwe are getting very lost - and abused - in all the tooling around.\n\nAnd i think the article may point out clearly towards HOW we lost one\npossible road that the net could have taken to network our communities,\nsolidarities and resistance... \n\nI probably dont need to go into the details here of how that all got\nco-opted and used in the creepiest of ways to consolidate power and turn\nus all into its subjects and products. ( Neo-liberal + libertarian\nnetz, surveillance krapitalism and all that mess )\n\nIF the net can be reclaimed at all from the monstrous sprawl of\nill-intents...\nit would probably require new architectures that cannot be easily\nswallowed up by the Titans' toxic web.\n\nAs Rasmus Fleischer pointedly remarked at one of the recent\nTransmediales : this is what a failed rev looks like.\n\nI don't have any clear proposals for that, but that could be part of\nwhat would make sense with this ((i)) anniversary...\nto understand what we lost, and how we got where we are... and what\nrecourse makes sense now...\n\n...\n\nFrom an XLterrestrial perspective, it might be an important tactical\nmaneuver to get our feet back on the ground, locally... and \"shield\nourselves\" from the fallout of having \"lost the digital revolution\" ...\nand get more focused on our biological + ecological struggles.\n\n...\n\nXLt is perhaps far more optimistic about what we can achieve by learning\nfrom the cultures of resistance in the global south... and outside all\nthe tech hype !\nAnd not allowing the domination of tech environments to be our\nsurrogated means to imagining any new re-occupying strategies.\n\n...\n\nJust read yesterday an interesting story about Food Sovereignty and in\n2011 Russia... 40% of the food came from Dacha gardens... \n\n\"dacha gardens produced over 80% of the countries fruit and berries,\nover 66% of the vegetables, almost 80% of the potatoes and nearly 50% of\nthe nations milk, much of it consumed raw. \"\n\nhttp://naturalhomes.org/naturalliving/russian-dacha.htm?fbclid=IwAR1ia40bjy-j6-1H8DnGejakGBeg0Gn1VqED6sjk5A6sN8KOGg35hyn7pkE\n\nhavent checked out the accuracy of this, but the shift in topics +\norganizational objectives... seems very revelant !\n\n...\n\nJust last year Chaos Congress teamed up with FifF and others to put on a\nconference called Bits Und Baume ( and trees ) to finally take seriously\nthe ecological consequences of the poorly miscalculated unsustainability\nof all our endlessly expanding high tech cultures.\n\nIt only took 35 years for CCC to get around to this crucial topic... ;)\n... but i think some good things are coming together for further\ninvestigations into realistic terrestrial-based missions ... and less in\n\"hackers on the moon\".\n\nhttps://bits-und-baeume.org/en\n\n...\n\nLastly,\nto emphasize my points...\n\ni leave you all with this talk from Boaventura de Sousa Santos ...\nat HKW's Now is The Time Of Monsters : What comes after Nations... in\n2017...\n\n( which followed a talk from Felix Stadler on Protocols - and tech - for\nDemocracy? )\n\nAnd it might be a useful reminder to help put things into proper\nperspective and more productive debates...\nand more paying attention to what we don't necessarily see on our (Euro)\nscreens...\n\nthings that are working ... outside those corporate, futurist +\nindustrial hives !\n\nStaatstechnologien - Democracy | Boaventura de Sousa Santos\nhttps://www.hkw.de/de/app/mediathek/video/55789\n\n\"converting ruins into seeds\"\n\nand i love the last line...\n\n\"i want us to be competent rebels !\"\n\npodinski\n\n\n\n\n\n \n\n\n\n\n \n\n\n>\n> we are in shock with the fire but its from the ashes that we create! \n>\n> here a recent ongoing work from the brazilian cyberfeminists\n> https://midiatatica.desarquivo.org/ tactical archives from the last\n> decade by collective perspectives. \n>\n> best for all!\n> t\n>\n>\n> Em 2019-09-10 08:19, podinski escreveu:\n>> Hi Ingrid et al, \n>>\n>> hmm, a little shocked that so few want to discuss the indymedia\n>> platform topic... and what it means for today's struggles... \n>> but na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently cubicled\n>> (un-)solidarities... \n>>\n>> On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid) wrote:\n>>\n>>> Hello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n>>>\n>>> Just like to point out that https://www.indymedia.nl/ is still very\n>>> much alive! I haven't been involved for many years now, but perhaps\n>>> we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring that something in\n>>> Berlin together with the Dutch ((i)) folks? I'd be happy to be\n>>> involved somehow too!\n>> sorry for slow reply... \n>> things have been a little overloaded... \n>>\n>> good to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe there are\n>> several still out there providing useful public channels ( as\n>> mentioned in the article, ie. Argentina ) !\n>>\n>> Not quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans for\n>> Nov.... or beyond. \n>> but happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who want to\n>> be involved...\n>>\n>> Should be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n>> https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n>>\n>> but one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the\n>> arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism + praxis ...\n>> i will check in to see, if not already too late. \n>>\n>> my cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n>>\n>> podinski\n>>\n>>> Cheers, Ingrid.\n>>>\n>>> -------------------------\n>>>\n>>> From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org\n>>> <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of podinski\n>>> <podinski@mailbox.org>\n>>> Sent: 06 September 2019 15:42\n>>> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n>>> Subject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!\n>>>\n>>> hello N-time,\n>>>\n>>> This November INDYMEDIA – (( i )) – will be 20 years old !!\n>>>\n>>> April Glaser writes a good short history of the pioneering\n>>> network/platform/newsfeed … for Logic Magazine ( here ). But\n>>> there’s\n>>> probably many more things that need to be analyzed in the history of\n>>> the\n>>> Internet and digital culture to understand and assess whether\n>>> “Another\n>>> Network Is Possible“… and where + how tactical media can unite\n>>> communities tomorrow…\n>>>\n>>> https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n>>>\n>>> ...\n>>>\n>>> XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL that…\n>>>\n>>> http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n>>>\n>>> excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n>>>\n>>> ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing back in our\n>>> heads as we write… )\n>>>\n>>> This is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will take more\n>>> than\n>>> a short essay to sort through all the angles and dilemmas we find\n>>> ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias +\n>>> technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the\n>>> military/corporate\n>>> communication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through all the\n>>> tissues\n>>> and orifices of human + social organization like electro-shock +\n>>> doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\n>>> already-anthropocene-driven madness… by accelerating it … like:\n>>> Here\n>>> take this, it’s another anthropo-scenic downloading spiral into\n>>> Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress” Inc.\n>>>\n>>> ...\n>>>\n>>> On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some Indy-inspired\n>>> type\n>>> tactical media event...\n>>>\n>>> perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary date...\n>>>\n>>> Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on that ? get in\n>>> touch !\n>>>\n>>> There is already something planned in Houston hosted by IMC folks\n>>> there\n>>> ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n>>>\n>>> but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we know... and WHY\n>>> Btropolis?\n>>>\n>>> One of its IMC sites is still active,\n>>>\n>>> and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown + kicked\n>>> off\n>>> the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n>>>\n>>> And there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S NEXT !!\n>>>\n>>> ...\n>>>\n>>> liebegreetz !\n>>>\n>>> podinski\n>>>\n>>> 0~~~~O-----o\n>>> www.xlterrestrials.org/plog [1]
\n>>> arts + praxis organisms\n>>> o-----O~~~~~0\n>>>\n>>> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>>> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>>> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>>> # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>>> # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>>> # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n>> \n>>\n>> Links:\n>> ------\n>> [1] http://www.xlterrestrials.org/plog\n>> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>> # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>> # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>> # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00050.html",
|
||
"to": "\"nettime-l@mail.kein.org\" <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>",
|
||
"from": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
|
||
"id": "00050",
|
||
"message-id": "04c850bf-988b-7a06-ea4f-bed0c7dc9af8@mailbox.or",
|
||
"date": "Wed, 11 Sep 2019 19:40:15 +0200",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"author_name": "podinski",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!",
|
||
"content": "Hi Matze,\n\ni tried recently to follow and catch-up on the debacle of linksunten and\nstate censorship...\nand picked up the pamphlet :\nverboten ! zur Kriminalisierung von Indymedia linksunten\nvia Rote Hilfe e.v.\n\nbut havent yet had time to get thru it.\n\n...\n\nre: the issue of the liberated webs and copy left...\ni have begun to think that another unexpected + massive fallout has\noccurred with all this online free content falling into... the Titan\ngrip...\n\nand in the idealism of trying to \" common-ize\" and/or \"dismantle\ncapitalism\" on the net, but not in the AFK world... as the majority of\nus still live in the realms of landlord strangleholds...\n \nprotection of labor and the livelihoods of content producers and indy\npublishers + DIY distro merchants was not very well considered... in the\neco-systems of books, media, data, small business and shop owners... \nand people's having to make their money to survive... pay rent.... or\nrecoup their production budgets ( see Astra Taylor's The People's\nPlatform )...\n\nCopyright is a completely re-openable subject... of hot debate....\n\nwhich HKW is also being revisited again this year ( 100 Years Of\nCopyright and Part 2 : Right the Right... this Nov. )\n... but i am not so hopeful they will handle the topic radically enough,\nbecause in the end they are already looking for tech solutionism to fill\nin the grim situations... ie blockchain in the music industry ?\n\nbut no time to get very sophisticated in that beastly and tedious topic.\n\n...\n\ncheers,\np.\n\n\n \nOn 9/10/19 5:40 PM, Matze Schmidt wrote:\n> One more:\n>\n> Sebastian Luetgert in an interview mit textz.com (in German): \n> https://de.indymedia.org/2004/03/76975.shtml\n>\n> Am 10.09.2019 um 16:12 schrieb Matze Schmidt <matzeschmidt@matzeschmidt.de>:\n>\n> Hi,\n>\n> I remember when topics died. Esp. when Sebasian Luetgert 10?, 15? years ago was about sceptical talking about indymedia some years after the beginning of this platform. The radical pragmatists in Berlin sat there with a shrug.\n>\n> What's more important now is a struggle by a left against a state as a censor amidst the general new swing to the right, see here in German:\n>\n> https://twitter.com/zineworkshop/status/1161884759364198400?s=20\n>\n> Matze\n>\n> Am 10.09.2019 um 13:19 schrieb podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>:\n>\n> Hi Ingrid et al,\n>\n> hmm, a little shocked that so few want to discuss the indymedia platform topic... and what it means for today's struggles... \n> but na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently cubicled (un-)solidarities... \n>\n>\n> On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid) wrote:\n>> Hello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n>>\n>> Just like to point out that https://www.indymedia.nl/ is still very much alive! I haven't been involved for many years now, but perhaps we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring that something in Berlin together with the Dutch ((i)) folks? I'd be happy to be involved somehow too!\n> sorry for slow reply... \n> things have been a little overloaded... \n>\n> good to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe there are several still out there providing useful public channels ( as mentioned in the article, ie. Argentina ) !\n>\n> Not quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans for Nov.... or beyond. \n> but happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who want to be involved...\n>\n> Should be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n> https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n>\n> but one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism + praxis ...\n> i will check in to see, if not already too late. \n>\n> my cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n>\n> podinski\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>> Cheers, Ingrid.\n>>\n>>\n>> From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>\n>> Sent: 06 September 2019 15:42\n>> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n>> Subject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!\n>>\n>> hello N-time, \n>>\n>> This November INDYMEDIA – (( i )) – will be 20 years old !!\n>>\n>> April Glaser writes a good short history of the pioneering\n>> network/platform/newsfeed … for Logic Magazine ( here ). But there’s\n>> probably many more things that need to be analyzed in the history of the\n>> Internet and digital culture to understand and assess whether “Another\n>> Network Is Possible“… and where + how tactical media can unite\n>> communities tomorrow…\n>>\n>> https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL that…\n>>\n>> http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n>>\n>> excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n>>\n>> ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing back in our\n>> heads as we write… )\n>>\n>> This is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will take more than\n>> a short essay to sort through all the angles and dilemmas we find\n>> ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias +\n>> technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the military/corporate\n>> communication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through all the tissues\n>> and orifices of human + social organization like electro-shock +\n>> doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\n>> already-anthropocene-driven madness… by accelerating it … like: Here\n>> take this, it’s another anthropo-scenic downloading spiral into\n>> Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress” Inc.\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some Indy-inspired type\n>> tactical media event...\n>>\n>> perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary date...\n>>\n>> Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on that ? get in touch !\n>>\n>> There is already something planned in Houston hosted by IMC folks there\n>> ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n>>\n>> but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we know... and WHY\n>> Btropolis?\n>>\n>> One of its IMC sites is still active,\n>>\n>> and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown + kicked off\n>> the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n>>\n>> And there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S NEXT !!\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> liebegreetz !\n>>\n>> podinski\n>>\n>>\n>> 0~~~~O-----o\n>> www.xlterrestrials.org/plog \n>>\n>> arts + praxis organisms\n>> o-----O~~~~~0\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>> # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>> # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>> # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n>\n>\n\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00051.html",
|
||
"to": "\"nettime-l@mail.kein.org\" <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>",
|
||
"from": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
|
||
"id": "00051",
|
||
"message-id": "e57376de-eed7-c87b-6434-f039d6c4f9ea@mailbox.or",
|
||
"date": "Wed, 11 Sep 2019 22:07:48 +0200",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai"
|
||
}
|
||
],
|
||
"message-id": "c8775943-36f7-2d7f-180b-ce248ab0ee2b@mailbox.or",
|
||
"date": "Tue, 10 Sep 2019 13:19:58 +0200",
|
||
"content-type": "multipart/mixed"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"author_name": "tacira",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!",
|
||
"content": "hi pod! long time no see, hi ingrid, tatiana from abya yala :)\n\nas for a long time user and educator on free technologies for creative\nmedia production I was a bit skeptical on the article - we dont need to\ncreate one more leftist tool, but re-ocuppy with purpose and love all\ncollective maintained tools - perhaps more influenced by intersectional\npoltics (I am reading Ocalan :) but the networkS are alive, dormant\nbecause NOT dispersed and very much re-creating itself all the time.\nfree philosophy and ethics becomes just more urgent then ever! As Krenak\nan indigenous leader in brazil says we have been using \"colored\nparachutes\" in this fall \"being able to maintain our subjectivities, our\nvisions, our poetics about existence\". \n\nwe are in shock with the fire but its from the ashes that we create! \n\nhere a recent ongoing work from the brazilian cyberfeminists\nhttps://midiatatica.desarquivo.org/ tactical archives from the last\ndecade by collective perspectives. \n\nbest for all!\nt\n\n\nEm 2019-09-10 08:19, podinski escreveu:\n> Hi Ingrid et al, \n> \n> hmm, a little shocked that so few want to discuss the indymedia\n> platform topic... and what it means for today's struggles... \n> but na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently cubicled\n> (un-)solidarities... \n> \n> On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid) wrote:\n> \n>> Hello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n>>\n>> Just like to point out that https://www.indymedia.nl/ is still very\n>> much alive! I haven't been involved for many years now, but perhaps\n>> we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring that something in\n>> Berlin together with the Dutch ((i)) folks? I'd be happy to be\n>> involved somehow too!\n> sorry for slow reply... \n> things have been a little overloaded... \n> \n> good to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe there are\n> several still out there providing useful public channels ( as\n> mentioned in the article, ie. Argentina ) !\n> \n> Not quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans for\n> Nov.... or beyond. \n> but happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who want to\n> be involved...\n> \n> Should be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n> https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n> \n> but one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the\n> arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism + praxis ...\n> i will check in to see, if not already too late. \n> \n> my cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n> \n> podinski\n> \n>> Cheers, Ingrid.\n>>\n>> -------------------------\n>>\n>> From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org\n>> <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of podinski\n>> <podinski@mailbox.org>\n>> Sent: 06 September 2019 15:42\n>> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n>> Subject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!\n>>\n>> hello N-time,\n>>\n>> This November INDYMEDIA – (( i )) – will be 20 years old !!\n>>\n>> April Glaser writes a good short history of the pioneering\n>> network/platform/newsfeed … for Logic Magazine ( here ). But\n>> there’s\n>> probably many more things that need to be analyzed in the history of\n>> the\n>> Internet and digital culture to understand and assess whether\n>> “Another\n>> Network Is Possible“… and where + how tactical media can unite\n>> communities tomorrow…\n>>\n>> https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL that…\n>>\n>> http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n>>\n>> excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n>>\n>>>\n>>\n>> ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing back in our\n>> heads as we write… )\n>>\n>> This is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will take more\n>> than\n>> a short essay to sort through all the angles and dilemmas we find\n>> ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias +\n>> technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the\n>> military/corporate\n>> communication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through all the\n>> tissues\n>> and orifices of human + social organization like electro-shock +\n>> doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\n>> already-anthropocene-driven madness… by accelerating it … like:\n>> Here\n>> take this, it’s another anthropo-scenic downloading spiral into\n>> Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress” Inc.\n>>\n>>>\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some Indy-inspired\n>> type\n>> tactical media event...\n>>\n>> perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary date...\n>>\n>> Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on that ? get in\n>> touch !\n>>\n>> There is already something planned in Houston hosted by IMC folks\n>> there\n>> ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n>>\n>> but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we know... and WHY\n>> Btropolis?\n>>\n>> One of its IMC sites is still active,\n>>\n>> and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown + kicked\n>> off\n>> the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n>>\n>> And there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S NEXT !!\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> liebegreetz !\n>>\n>> podinski\n>>\n>> 0~~~~O-----o\n>> www.xlterrestrials.org/plog [1]
\n>> arts + praxis organisms\n>> o-----O~~~~~0\n>>\n>> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>> # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>> # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>> # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> \n> \n> \n> Links:\n> ------\n> [1] http://www.xlterrestrials.org/plog\n> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00049.html",
|
||
"to": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
|
||
"from": "tacira@riseup.net",
|
||
"id": "00049",
|
||
"message-id": "dd040be8c1c3fa9b3d539f1881a529fa@riseup.net",
|
||
"date": "Wed, 11 Sep 2019 05:38:06 -0700",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"author_name": "podinski",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!",
|
||
"content": "Hi Tati et al,\n\na pleasure to read some news from ya...\n\n+ thx for the link !\n\n...\n\nOn 9/11/19 2:38 PM, tacira@riseup.net wrote:\n> hi pod! long time no see, hi ingrid, tatiana from abya yala :)\n>\n> as for a long time user and educator on free technologies for creative\n> media production I was a bit skeptical on the article - we dont need to\n> create one more leftist tool, but re-ocuppy with purpose and love all\n> collective maintained tools - perhaps more influenced by intersectional\n> poltics (I am reading Ocalan :) but the networkS are alive, dormant\n> because NOT dispersed and very much re-creating itself all the time.\n> free philosophy and ethics becomes just more urgent then ever! As Krenak\n> an indigenous leader in brazil says we have been using \"colored\n> parachutes\" in this fall \"being able to maintain our subjectivities, our\n> visions, our poetics about existence\". \nyes, well it is not hard for me to be critical about More leftist tools...\nwe are getting very lost - and abused - in all the tooling around.\n\nAnd i think the article may point out clearly towards HOW we lost one\npossible road that the net could have taken to network our communities,\nsolidarities and resistance... \n\nI probably dont need to go into the details here of how that all got\nco-opted and used in the creepiest of ways to consolidate power and turn\nus all into its subjects and products. ( Neo-liberal + libertarian\nnetz, surveillance krapitalism and all that mess )\n\nIF the net can be reclaimed at all from the monstrous sprawl of\nill-intents...\nit would probably require new architectures that cannot be easily\nswallowed up by the Titans' toxic web.\n\nAs Rasmus Fleischer pointedly remarked at one of the recent\nTransmediales : this is what a failed rev looks like.\n\nI don't have any clear proposals for that, but that could be part of\nwhat would make sense with this ((i)) anniversary...\nto understand what we lost, and how we got where we are... and what\nrecourse makes sense now...\n\n...\n\nFrom an XLterrestrial perspective, it might be an important tactical\nmaneuver to get our feet back on the ground, locally... and \"shield\nourselves\" from the fallout of having \"lost the digital revolution\" ...\nand get more focused on our biological + ecological struggles.\n\n...\n\nXLt is perhaps far more optimistic about what we can achieve by learning\nfrom the cultures of resistance in the global south... and outside all\nthe tech hype !\nAnd not allowing the domination of tech environments to be our\nsurrogated means to imagining any new re-occupying strategies.\n\n...\n\nJust read yesterday an interesting story about Food Sovereignty and in\n2011 Russia... 40% of the food came from Dacha gardens... \n\n\"dacha gardens produced over 80% of the countries fruit and berries,\nover 66% of the vegetables, almost 80% of the potatoes and nearly 50% of\nthe nations milk, much of it consumed raw. \"\n\nhttp://naturalhomes.org/naturalliving/russian-dacha.htm?fbclid=IwAR1ia40bjy-j6-1H8DnGejakGBeg0Gn1VqED6sjk5A6sN8KOGg35hyn7pkE\n\nhavent checked out the accuracy of this, but the shift in topics +\norganizational objectives... seems very revelant !\n\n...\n\nJust last year Chaos Congress teamed up with FifF and others to put on a\nconference called Bits Und Baume ( and trees ) to finally take seriously\nthe ecological consequences of the poorly miscalculated unsustainability\nof all our endlessly expanding high tech cultures.\n\nIt only took 35 years for CCC to get around to this crucial topic... ;)\n... but i think some good things are coming together for further\ninvestigations into realistic terrestrial-based missions ... and less in\n\"hackers on the moon\".\n\nhttps://bits-und-baeume.org/en\n\n...\n\nLastly,\nto emphasize my points...\n\ni leave you all with this talk from Boaventura de Sousa Santos ...\nat HKW's Now is The Time Of Monsters : What comes after Nations... in\n2017...\n\n( which followed a talk from Felix Stadler on Protocols - and tech - for\nDemocracy? )\n\nAnd it might be a useful reminder to help put things into proper\nperspective and more productive debates...\nand more paying attention to what we don't necessarily see on our (Euro)\nscreens...\n\nthings that are working ... outside those corporate, futurist +\nindustrial hives !\n\nStaatstechnologien - Democracy | Boaventura de Sousa Santos\nhttps://www.hkw.de/de/app/mediathek/video/55789\n\n\"converting ruins into seeds\"\n\nand i love the last line...\n\n\"i want us to be competent rebels !\"\n\npodinski\n\n\n\n\n\n \n\n\n\n\n \n\n\n>\n> we are in shock with the fire but its from the ashes that we create! \n>\n> here a recent ongoing work from the brazilian cyberfeminists\n> https://midiatatica.desarquivo.org/ tactical archives from the last\n> decade by collective perspectives. \n>\n> best for all!\n> t\n>\n>\n> Em 2019-09-10 08:19, podinski escreveu:\n>> Hi Ingrid et al, \n>>\n>> hmm, a little shocked that so few want to discuss the indymedia\n>> platform topic... and what it means for today's struggles... \n>> but na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently cubicled\n>> (un-)solidarities... \n>>\n>> On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid) wrote:\n>>\n>>> Hello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n>>>\n>>> Just like to point out that https://www.indymedia.nl/ is still very\n>>> much alive! I haven't been involved for many years now, but perhaps\n>>> we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring that something in\n>>> Berlin together with the Dutch ((i)) folks? I'd be happy to be\n>>> involved somehow too!\n>> sorry for slow reply... \n>> things have been a little overloaded... \n>>\n>> good to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe there are\n>> several still out there providing useful public channels ( as\n>> mentioned in the article, ie. Argentina ) !\n>>\n>> Not quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans for\n>> Nov.... or beyond. \n>> but happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who want to\n>> be involved...\n>>\n>> Should be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n>> https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n>>\n>> but one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the\n>> arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism + praxis ...\n>> i will check in to see, if not already too late. \n>>\n>> my cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n>>\n>> podinski\n>>\n>>> Cheers, Ingrid.\n>>>\n>>> -------------------------\n>>>\n>>> From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org\n>>> <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of podinski\n>>> <podinski@mailbox.org>\n>>> Sent: 06 September 2019 15:42\n>>> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n>>> Subject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!\n>>>\n>>> hello N-time,\n>>>\n>>> This November INDYMEDIA – (( i )) – will be 20 years old !!\n>>>\n>>> April Glaser writes a good short history of the pioneering\n>>> network/platform/newsfeed … for Logic Magazine ( here ). But\n>>> there’s\n>>> probably many more things that need to be analyzed in the history of\n>>> the\n>>> Internet and digital culture to understand and assess whether\n>>> “Another\n>>> Network Is Possible“… and where + how tactical media can unite\n>>> communities tomorrow…\n>>>\n>>> https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n>>>\n>>> ...\n>>>\n>>> XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL that…\n>>>\n>>> http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n>>>\n>>> excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n>>>\n>>> ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing back in our\n>>> heads as we write… )\n>>>\n>>> This is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will take more\n>>> than\n>>> a short essay to sort through all the angles and dilemmas we find\n>>> ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias +\n>>> technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the\n>>> military/corporate\n>>> communication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through all the\n>>> tissues\n>>> and orifices of human + social organization like electro-shock +\n>>> doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\n>>> already-anthropocene-driven madness… by accelerating it … like:\n>>> Here\n>>> take this, it’s another anthropo-scenic downloading spiral into\n>>> Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress” Inc.\n>>>\n>>> ...\n>>>\n>>> On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some Indy-inspired\n>>> type\n>>> tactical media event...\n>>>\n>>> perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary date...\n>>>\n>>> Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on that ? get in\n>>> touch !\n>>>\n>>> There is already something planned in Houston hosted by IMC folks\n>>> there\n>>> ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n>>>\n>>> but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we know... and WHY\n>>> Btropolis?\n>>>\n>>> One of its IMC sites is still active,\n>>>\n>>> and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown + kicked\n>>> off\n>>> the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n>>>\n>>> And there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S NEXT !!\n>>>\n>>> ...\n>>>\n>>> liebegreetz !\n>>>\n>>> podinski\n>>>\n>>> 0~~~~O-----o\n>>> www.xlterrestrials.org/plog [1]
\n>>> arts + praxis organisms\n>>> o-----O~~~~~0\n>>>\n>>> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>>> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>>> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>>> # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>>> # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>>> # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n>> \n>>\n>> Links:\n>> ------\n>> [1] http://www.xlterrestrials.org/plog\n>> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>> # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>> # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>> # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00050.html",
|
||
"to": "\"nettime-l@mail.kein.org\" <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>",
|
||
"from": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
|
||
"id": "00050",
|
||
"message-id": "04c850bf-988b-7a06-ea4f-bed0c7dc9af8@mailbox.or",
|
||
"date": "Wed, 11 Sep 2019 19:40:15 +0200",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"author_name": "podinski",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!",
|
||
"content": "Hi Matze,\n\ni tried recently to follow and catch-up on the debacle of linksunten and\nstate censorship...\nand picked up the pamphlet :\nverboten ! zur Kriminalisierung von Indymedia linksunten\nvia Rote Hilfe e.v.\n\nbut havent yet had time to get thru it.\n\n...\n\nre: the issue of the liberated webs and copy left...\ni have begun to think that another unexpected + massive fallout has\noccurred with all this online free content falling into... the Titan\ngrip...\n\nand in the idealism of trying to \" common-ize\" and/or \"dismantle\ncapitalism\" on the net, but not in the AFK world... as the majority of\nus still live in the realms of landlord strangleholds...\n \nprotection of labor and the livelihoods of content producers and indy\npublishers + DIY distro merchants was not very well considered... in the\neco-systems of books, media, data, small business and shop owners... \nand people's having to make their money to survive... pay rent.... or\nrecoup their production budgets ( see Astra Taylor's The People's\nPlatform )...\n\nCopyright is a completely re-openable subject... of hot debate....\n\nwhich HKW is also being revisited again this year ( 100 Years Of\nCopyright and Part 2 : Right the Right... this Nov. )\n... but i am not so hopeful they will handle the topic radically enough,\nbecause in the end they are already looking for tech solutionism to fill\nin the grim situations... ie blockchain in the music industry ?\n\nbut no time to get very sophisticated in that beastly and tedious topic.\n\n...\n\ncheers,\np.\n\n\n \nOn 9/10/19 5:40 PM, Matze Schmidt wrote:\n> One more:\n>\n> Sebastian Luetgert in an interview mit textz.com (in German): \n> https://de.indymedia.org/2004/03/76975.shtml\n>\n> Am 10.09.2019 um 16:12 schrieb Matze Schmidt <matzeschmidt@matzeschmidt.de>:\n>\n> Hi,\n>\n> I remember when topics died. Esp. when Sebasian Luetgert 10?, 15? years ago was about sceptical talking about indymedia some years after the beginning of this platform. The radical pragmatists in Berlin sat there with a shrug.\n>\n> What's more important now is a struggle by a left against a state as a censor amidst the general new swing to the right, see here in German:\n>\n> https://twitter.com/zineworkshop/status/1161884759364198400?s=20\n>\n> Matze\n>\n> Am 10.09.2019 um 13:19 schrieb podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>:\n>\n> Hi Ingrid et al,\n>\n> hmm, a little shocked that so few want to discuss the indymedia platform topic... and what it means for today's struggles... \n> but na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently cubicled (un-)solidarities... \n>\n>\n> On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid) wrote:\n>> Hello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n>>\n>> Just like to point out that https://www.indymedia.nl/ is still very much alive! I haven't been involved for many years now, but perhaps we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring that something in Berlin together with the Dutch ((i)) folks? I'd be happy to be involved somehow too!\n> sorry for slow reply... \n> things have been a little overloaded... \n>\n> good to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe there are several still out there providing useful public channels ( as mentioned in the article, ie. Argentina ) !\n>\n> Not quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans for Nov.... or beyond. \n> but happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who want to be involved...\n>\n> Should be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n> https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n>\n> but one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism + praxis ...\n> i will check in to see, if not already too late. \n>\n> my cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n>\n> podinski\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>> Cheers, Ingrid.\n>>\n>>\n>> From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>\n>> Sent: 06 September 2019 15:42\n>> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n>> Subject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!\n>>\n>> hello N-time, \n>>\n>> This November INDYMEDIA – (( i )) – will be 20 years old !!\n>>\n>> April Glaser writes a good short history of the pioneering\n>> network/platform/newsfeed … for Logic Magazine ( here ). But there’s\n>> probably many more things that need to be analyzed in the history of the\n>> Internet and digital culture to understand and assess whether “Another\n>> Network Is Possible“… and where + how tactical media can unite\n>> communities tomorrow…\n>>\n>> https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL that…\n>>\n>> http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n>>\n>> excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n>>\n>> ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing back in our\n>> heads as we write… )\n>>\n>> This is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will take more than\n>> a short essay to sort through all the angles and dilemmas we find\n>> ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias +\n>> technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the military/corporate\n>> communication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through all the tissues\n>> and orifices of human + social organization like electro-shock +\n>> doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\n>> already-anthropocene-driven madness… by accelerating it … like: Here\n>> take this, it’s another anthropo-scenic downloading spiral into\n>> Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress” Inc.\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some Indy-inspired type\n>> tactical media event...\n>>\n>> perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary date...\n>>\n>> Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on that ? get in touch !\n>>\n>> There is already something planned in Houston hosted by IMC folks there\n>> ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n>>\n>> but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we know... and WHY\n>> Btropolis?\n>>\n>> One of its IMC sites is still active,\n>>\n>> and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown + kicked off\n>> the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n>>\n>> And there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S NEXT !!\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> liebegreetz !\n>>\n>> podinski\n>>\n>>\n>> 0~~~~O-----o\n>> www.xlterrestrials.org/plog \n>>\n>> arts + praxis organisms\n>> o-----O~~~~~0\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>> # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>> # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>> # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n>\n>\n\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00051.html",
|
||
"to": "\"nettime-l@mail.kein.org\" <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>",
|
||
"from": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
|
||
"id": "00051",
|
||
"message-id": "e57376de-eed7-c87b-6434-f039d6c4f9ea@mailbox.or",
|
||
"date": "Wed, 11 Sep 2019 22:07:48 +0200",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai"
|
||
}
|
||
],
|
||
"message-id": "DB6PR0502MB2997DC2BE4D8353627EA9750B8B50@DB6PR0502MB2997.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com",
|
||
"date": "Sat, 7 Sep 2019 08:05:33 +0000",
|
||
"content-type": "multipart/mixed"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"author_name": "podinski",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!",
|
||
"content": "\n \n \n Hello nettime,\n and Tish, thx for posting the link to the indy event in Houston !\n reposting here below... \n \n because your post is not showing up in the list archives.\n ( perhaps because it's a reply To me, and Then cc'd to list...\n not sure )\n will be in touch, if we get something happening in Berlin... \n \n all the best,\n p.\n \n \n \n -------- Forwarded Message --------\n \n \n \n Subject:\n \n Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we\n now ?!\n \n \n Date: \n Tue, 10 Sep 2019 11:51:54 -0500\n \n \n From: \n tish stringer <tish@rice.edu>\n \n \n To: \n podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>\n \n \n CC: \n nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>,\n Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid) <I.M.Hoofd@uu.nl>, indymedia\n encuentro <indyat20@dangerousmedia.org>\n \n \n \n \n \n \n Hello Nettime!\n \n \n I’m one of the organizers of the indy20 encuentro\n event in Houston, Texas. We are having an art show, film\n festival and panels to celebrate indymedia. We would LOVE to do\n some type of simulcast on N30 if any other groups are gathering.\n We know of some events in Argentina and Seattle we are hoping to\n coordinate with. We are hoping there will be loads of\n decentralized celebrations but of course all are welcome at our\n event. I threw up a very rough website this weekend that will\n improve in the coming days with the full schedule etc. but feel\n free to pass it along if others are looking to get in touch with\n us. \n \n \n http://indy20.dangerousmedia.org/\n \n \n Cheers!\n Tish\n \n \n \n \n \n On Sep 10, 2019, at 6:19 AM, podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>\n wrote:\n \n \n Hi\n Ingrid et al,\n \n \n hmm,\n a little shocked that so few want to discuss the\n indymedia platform topic... and what it means for\n today's struggles... \n but\n na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently\n cubicled (un-)solidarities... \n \n \n On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid) wrote:\n \n \n Hello ex-((i))\n and ex-N5M3 folks,\n \n \n Just like to\n point out that https://www.indymedia.nl/ is\n still very much alive! I haven't been involved for\n many years now, but perhaps we could do something in\n Amsterdam, or barring that something in Berlin\n together with the Dutch ((i)) folks? I'd be happy to\n be involved somehow too!\n \n sorry\n for slow reply... \n things\n have been a little overloaded... \n \n good\n to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe\n there are several still out there providing useful\n public channels ( as mentioned in the article, ie.\n Argentina ) !\n \n Not\n quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans\n for Nov.... or beyond. \n but\n happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who\n want to be involved...\n \n Should\n be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n \n but\n one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the\n arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism +\n praxis ...\n i\n will check in to see, if not already too late. \n \n my\n cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n \n podinski\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n Cheers, Ingrid.\n \n \n \n \n \n \n From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf\n of podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>\n Sent: 06\n September 2019 15:42\n To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n Subject: <nettime>\n 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!\n \n \n \n hello N-time, \n \n This November INDYMEDIA – (( i )) – will be 20\n years old !!\n \n April Glaser writes a good short history of\n the pioneering\n network/platform/newsfeed … for Logic Magazine\n ( here ). But there’s\n probably many more things that need to be\n analyzed in the history of the\n Internet and digital culture to understand and\n assess whether “Another\n Network Is Possible“… and where + how tactical\n media can unite\n communities tomorrow…\n \n https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n \n ...\n \n XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post\n about ALL that…\n \n http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n \n excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n \n >\n \n ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune\n is playing back in our\n heads as we write… )\n \n This is an extremely complicated discussion,\n and it will take more than\n a short essay to sort through all the angles\n and dilemmas we find\n ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic\n technodystopias +\n technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of\n the military/corporate\n communication industries, now oozing\n ubiquitous through all the tissues\n and orifices of human + social organization\n like electro-shock +\n doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our\n inherited\n already-anthropocene-driven madness… by\n accelerating it … like: Here\n take this, it’s another anthropo-scenic\n downloading spiral into\n Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress” Inc.\n \n >\n \n ...\n \n On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on\n some Indy-inspired type\n tactical media event...\n \n perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this\n anniversary date...\n \n Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play\n with us on that ? get in touch !\n \n There is already something planned in Houston\n hosted by IMC folks there\n ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n \n but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far\n as we know... and WHY\n Btropolis?\n \n One of its IMC sites is still active,\n \n and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the\n crackdown + kicked off\n the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n \n And there's been heated discussions here about\n WHAT'S NEXT !!\n \n ...\n \n liebegreetz !\n \n podinski\n \n \n 0~~~~O-----o\n www.xlterrestrials.org/plog
\n arts + praxis organisms\n o-----O~~~~~0\n \n \n \n \n \n # distributed via <nettime>: no\n commercial use without permission\n # <nettime> is a moderated mailing\n list for net criticism,\n # collaborative text filtering and cultural\n politics of the nets\n # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless\n #ANON is in Subject:\n \n \n \n \n #\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use\n without permission\n #\n <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net\n criticism,\n #\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of\n the nets\n #\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n #\n archive: http://www.nettime.org\n contact: nettime@kein.org\n #\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in\n Subject:\n \n \n \n \n Dr. Tish Stringer\n Lecturer and Film Program Manager\n Department of Visual and Dramatic Arts\n Rice University \n \n mail: Rice Media Center\n 6100 Main St. MS- 549\n Houston, Texas 77005\n \n email: tish@rice.edu\n Phone: 713-348-3136\n Fax: 713-348-5910\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00054.html",
|
||
"to": "\"nettime-l@mail.kein.org\" <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>",
|
||
"from": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
|
||
"id": "00054",
|
||
"message-id": "30c9bc7d-e1fe-3dd7-086c-c5a085c58d94@mailbox.or",
|
||
"date": "Fri, 13 Sep 2019 16:18:17 +0200",
|
||
"content-type": "multipart/mixed"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"author_name": "podinski",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!",
|
||
"content": "\n \n \n Hi Ingrid et al,\n \n \n hmm, a little shocked that so few want to discuss the indymedia\n platform topic... and what it means for today's struggles... \n but na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently cubicled\n (un-)solidarities... \n \n \n On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M.\n (Ingrid) wrote:\n \n \n \n \n \n Hello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n \n \n \n \n Just like to point out that https://www.indymedia.nl/ is\n still very much alive! I haven't been involved for many years\n now, but perhaps we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring\n that something in Berlin together with the Dutch ((i)) folks?\n I'd be happy to be involved somehow too!\n \n sorry for slow reply... \n things have been a little overloaded... \n \n good to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe there are\n several still out there providing useful public channels ( as\n mentioned in the article, ie. Argentina ) !\n \n Not quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans for\n Nov.... or beyond. \n but happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who want to\n be involved...\n \n Should be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n \n but one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the\n arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism + praxis ...\n i will check in to see, if not already too late. \n \n my cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n \n podinski\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n Cheers, Ingrid.\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n From:\n nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org\n <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of\n podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>\n Sent: 06 September 2019 15:42\n To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org\n <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n Subject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where\n are we now ?!\n \n \n \n hello N-time, \n \n This November INDYMEDIA – (( i )) – will be 20 years old\n !!\n \n April Glaser writes a good short history of the\n pioneering\n network/platform/newsfeed … for Logic Magazine ( here ).\n But there’s\n probably many more things that need to be analyzed in\n the history of the\n Internet and digital culture to understand and assess\n whether “Another\n Network Is Possible“… and where + how tactical media can\n unite\n communities tomorrow…\n \n https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n \n ...\n \n XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL\n that…\n \n http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n \n excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n \n >\n \n ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing\n back in our\n heads as we write… )\n \n This is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will\n take more than\n a short essay to sort through all the angles and\n dilemmas we find\n ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias\n +\n technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the\n military/corporate\n communication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through\n all the tissues\n and orifices of human + social organization like\n electro-shock +\n doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\n already-anthropocene-driven madness… by accelerating it\n … like: Here\n take this, it’s another anthropo-scenic downloading\n spiral into\n Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress” Inc.\n \n >\n \n ...\n \n On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some\n Indy-inspired type\n tactical media event...\n \n perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary\n date...\n \n Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on\n that ? get in touch !\n \n There is already something planned in Houston hosted by\n IMC folks there\n ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n \n but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we\n know... and WHY\n Btropolis?\n \n One of its IMC sites is still active,\n \n and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown\n + kicked off\n the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n \n And there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S\n NEXT !!\n \n ...\n \n liebegreetz !\n \n podinski\n \n \n 0~~~~O-----o\n www.xlterrestrials.org/plog\n
\n arts + praxis organisms\n o-----O~~~~~0\n \n \n \n \n \n # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use\n without permission\n # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net\n criticism,\n # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of\n the nets\n # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n # archive: http://www.nettime.org\n contact: nettime@kein.org\n # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in\n Subject:\n \n \n \n \n \n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00048.html",
|
||
"to": "\"nettime-l@mail.kein.org\" <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>, \"Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid)\" <I.M.Hoofd@uu.nl>",
|
||
"from": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
|
||
"id": "00048",
|
||
"follow-up": [
|
||
{
|
||
"author_name": "tacira",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!",
|
||
"content": "hi pod! long time no see, hi ingrid, tatiana from abya yala :)\n\nas for a long time user and educator on free technologies for creative\nmedia production I was a bit skeptical on the article - we dont need to\ncreate one more leftist tool, but re-ocuppy with purpose and love all\ncollective maintained tools - perhaps more influenced by intersectional\npoltics (I am reading Ocalan :) but the networkS are alive, dormant\nbecause NOT dispersed and very much re-creating itself all the time.\nfree philosophy and ethics becomes just more urgent then ever! As Krenak\nan indigenous leader in brazil says we have been using \"colored\nparachutes\" in this fall \"being able to maintain our subjectivities, our\nvisions, our poetics about existence\". \n\nwe are in shock with the fire but its from the ashes that we create! \n\nhere a recent ongoing work from the brazilian cyberfeminists\nhttps://midiatatica.desarquivo.org/ tactical archives from the last\ndecade by collective perspectives. \n\nbest for all!\nt\n\n\nEm 2019-09-10 08:19, podinski escreveu:\n> Hi Ingrid et al, \n> \n> hmm, a little shocked that so few want to discuss the indymedia\n> platform topic... and what it means for today's struggles... \n> but na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently cubicled\n> (un-)solidarities... \n> \n> On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid) wrote:\n> \n>> Hello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n>>\n>> Just like to point out that https://www.indymedia.nl/ is still very\n>> much alive! I haven't been involved for many years now, but perhaps\n>> we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring that something in\n>> Berlin together with the Dutch ((i)) folks? I'd be happy to be\n>> involved somehow too!\n> sorry for slow reply... \n> things have been a little overloaded... \n> \n> good to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe there are\n> several still out there providing useful public channels ( as\n> mentioned in the article, ie. Argentina ) !\n> \n> Not quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans for\n> Nov.... or beyond. \n> but happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who want to\n> be involved...\n> \n> Should be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n> https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n> \n> but one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the\n> arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism + praxis ...\n> i will check in to see, if not already too late. \n> \n> my cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n> \n> podinski\n> \n>> Cheers, Ingrid.\n>>\n>> -------------------------\n>>\n>> From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org\n>> <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of podinski\n>> <podinski@mailbox.org>\n>> Sent: 06 September 2019 15:42\n>> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n>> Subject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!\n>>\n>> hello N-time,\n>>\n>> This November INDYMEDIA – (( i )) – will be 20 years old !!\n>>\n>> April Glaser writes a good short history of the pioneering\n>> network/platform/newsfeed … for Logic Magazine ( here ). But\n>> there’s\n>> probably many more things that need to be analyzed in the history of\n>> the\n>> Internet and digital culture to understand and assess whether\n>> “Another\n>> Network Is Possible“… and where + how tactical media can unite\n>> communities tomorrow…\n>>\n>> https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL that…\n>>\n>> http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n>>\n>> excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n>>\n>>>\n>>\n>> ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing back in our\n>> heads as we write… )\n>>\n>> This is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will take more\n>> than\n>> a short essay to sort through all the angles and dilemmas we find\n>> ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias +\n>> technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the\n>> military/corporate\n>> communication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through all the\n>> tissues\n>> and orifices of human + social organization like electro-shock +\n>> doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\n>> already-anthropocene-driven madness… by accelerating it … like:\n>> Here\n>> take this, it’s another anthropo-scenic downloading spiral into\n>> Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress” Inc.\n>>\n>>>\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some Indy-inspired\n>> type\n>> tactical media event...\n>>\n>> perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary date...\n>>\n>> Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on that ? get in\n>> touch !\n>>\n>> There is already something planned in Houston hosted by IMC folks\n>> there\n>> ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n>>\n>> but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we know... and WHY\n>> Btropolis?\n>>\n>> One of its IMC sites is still active,\n>>\n>> and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown + kicked\n>> off\n>> the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n>>\n>> And there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S NEXT !!\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> liebegreetz !\n>>\n>> podinski\n>>\n>> 0~~~~O-----o\n>> www.xlterrestrials.org/plog [1]
\n>> arts + praxis organisms\n>> o-----O~~~~~0\n>>\n>> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>> # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>> # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>> # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> \n> \n> \n> Links:\n> ------\n> [1] http://www.xlterrestrials.org/plog\n> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00049.html",
|
||
"to": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
|
||
"from": "tacira@riseup.net",
|
||
"id": "00049",
|
||
"message-id": "dd040be8c1c3fa9b3d539f1881a529fa@riseup.net",
|
||
"date": "Wed, 11 Sep 2019 05:38:06 -0700",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"author_name": "podinski",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!",
|
||
"content": "Hi Tati et al,\n\na pleasure to read some news from ya...\n\n+ thx for the link !\n\n...\n\nOn 9/11/19 2:38 PM, tacira@riseup.net wrote:\n> hi pod! long time no see, hi ingrid, tatiana from abya yala :)\n>\n> as for a long time user and educator on free technologies for creative\n> media production I was a bit skeptical on the article - we dont need to\n> create one more leftist tool, but re-ocuppy with purpose and love all\n> collective maintained tools - perhaps more influenced by intersectional\n> poltics (I am reading Ocalan :) but the networkS are alive, dormant\n> because NOT dispersed and very much re-creating itself all the time.\n> free philosophy and ethics becomes just more urgent then ever! As Krenak\n> an indigenous leader in brazil says we have been using \"colored\n> parachutes\" in this fall \"being able to maintain our subjectivities, our\n> visions, our poetics about existence\". \nyes, well it is not hard for me to be critical about More leftist tools...\nwe are getting very lost - and abused - in all the tooling around.\n\nAnd i think the article may point out clearly towards HOW we lost one\npossible road that the net could have taken to network our communities,\nsolidarities and resistance... \n\nI probably dont need to go into the details here of how that all got\nco-opted and used in the creepiest of ways to consolidate power and turn\nus all into its subjects and products. ( Neo-liberal + libertarian\nnetz, surveillance krapitalism and all that mess )\n\nIF the net can be reclaimed at all from the monstrous sprawl of\nill-intents...\nit would probably require new architectures that cannot be easily\nswallowed up by the Titans' toxic web.\n\nAs Rasmus Fleischer pointedly remarked at one of the recent\nTransmediales : this is what a failed rev looks like.\n\nI don't have any clear proposals for that, but that could be part of\nwhat would make sense with this ((i)) anniversary...\nto understand what we lost, and how we got where we are... and what\nrecourse makes sense now...\n\n...\n\nFrom an XLterrestrial perspective, it might be an important tactical\nmaneuver to get our feet back on the ground, locally... and \"shield\nourselves\" from the fallout of having \"lost the digital revolution\" ...\nand get more focused on our biological + ecological struggles.\n\n...\n\nXLt is perhaps far more optimistic about what we can achieve by learning\nfrom the cultures of resistance in the global south... and outside all\nthe tech hype !\nAnd not allowing the domination of tech environments to be our\nsurrogated means to imagining any new re-occupying strategies.\n\n...\n\nJust read yesterday an interesting story about Food Sovereignty and in\n2011 Russia... 40% of the food came from Dacha gardens... \n\n\"dacha gardens produced over 80% of the countries fruit and berries,\nover 66% of the vegetables, almost 80% of the potatoes and nearly 50% of\nthe nations milk, much of it consumed raw. \"\n\nhttp://naturalhomes.org/naturalliving/russian-dacha.htm?fbclid=IwAR1ia40bjy-j6-1H8DnGejakGBeg0Gn1VqED6sjk5A6sN8KOGg35hyn7pkE\n\nhavent checked out the accuracy of this, but the shift in topics +\norganizational objectives... seems very revelant !\n\n...\n\nJust last year Chaos Congress teamed up with FifF and others to put on a\nconference called Bits Und Baume ( and trees ) to finally take seriously\nthe ecological consequences of the poorly miscalculated unsustainability\nof all our endlessly expanding high tech cultures.\n\nIt only took 35 years for CCC to get around to this crucial topic... ;)\n... but i think some good things are coming together for further\ninvestigations into realistic terrestrial-based missions ... and less in\n\"hackers on the moon\".\n\nhttps://bits-und-baeume.org/en\n\n...\n\nLastly,\nto emphasize my points...\n\ni leave you all with this talk from Boaventura de Sousa Santos ...\nat HKW's Now is The Time Of Monsters : What comes after Nations... in\n2017...\n\n( which followed a talk from Felix Stadler on Protocols - and tech - for\nDemocracy? )\n\nAnd it might be a useful reminder to help put things into proper\nperspective and more productive debates...\nand more paying attention to what we don't necessarily see on our (Euro)\nscreens...\n\nthings that are working ... outside those corporate, futurist +\nindustrial hives !\n\nStaatstechnologien - Democracy | Boaventura de Sousa Santos\nhttps://www.hkw.de/de/app/mediathek/video/55789\n\n\"converting ruins into seeds\"\n\nand i love the last line...\n\n\"i want us to be competent rebels !\"\n\npodinski\n\n\n\n\n\n \n\n\n\n\n \n\n\n>\n> we are in shock with the fire but its from the ashes that we create! \n>\n> here a recent ongoing work from the brazilian cyberfeminists\n> https://midiatatica.desarquivo.org/ tactical archives from the last\n> decade by collective perspectives. \n>\n> best for all!\n> t\n>\n>\n> Em 2019-09-10 08:19, podinski escreveu:\n>> Hi Ingrid et al, \n>>\n>> hmm, a little shocked that so few want to discuss the indymedia\n>> platform topic... and what it means for today's struggles... \n>> but na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently cubicled\n>> (un-)solidarities... \n>>\n>> On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid) wrote:\n>>\n>>> Hello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n>>>\n>>> Just like to point out that https://www.indymedia.nl/ is still very\n>>> much alive! I haven't been involved for many years now, but perhaps\n>>> we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring that something in\n>>> Berlin together with the Dutch ((i)) folks? I'd be happy to be\n>>> involved somehow too!\n>> sorry for slow reply... \n>> things have been a little overloaded... \n>>\n>> good to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe there are\n>> several still out there providing useful public channels ( as\n>> mentioned in the article, ie. Argentina ) !\n>>\n>> Not quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans for\n>> Nov.... or beyond. \n>> but happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who want to\n>> be involved...\n>>\n>> Should be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n>> https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n>>\n>> but one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the\n>> arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism + praxis ...\n>> i will check in to see, if not already too late. \n>>\n>> my cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n>>\n>> podinski\n>>\n>>> Cheers, Ingrid.\n>>>\n>>> -------------------------\n>>>\n>>> From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org\n>>> <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of podinski\n>>> <podinski@mailbox.org>\n>>> Sent: 06 September 2019 15:42\n>>> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n>>> Subject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!\n>>>\n>>> hello N-time,\n>>>\n>>> This November INDYMEDIA – (( i )) – will be 20 years old !!\n>>>\n>>> April Glaser writes a good short history of the pioneering\n>>> network/platform/newsfeed … for Logic Magazine ( here ). But\n>>> there’s\n>>> probably many more things that need to be analyzed in the history of\n>>> the\n>>> Internet and digital culture to understand and assess whether\n>>> “Another\n>>> Network Is Possible“… and where + how tactical media can unite\n>>> communities tomorrow…\n>>>\n>>> https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n>>>\n>>> ...\n>>>\n>>> XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL that…\n>>>\n>>> http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n>>>\n>>> excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n>>>\n>>> ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing back in our\n>>> heads as we write… )\n>>>\n>>> This is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will take more\n>>> than\n>>> a short essay to sort through all the angles and dilemmas we find\n>>> ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias +\n>>> technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the\n>>> military/corporate\n>>> communication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through all the\n>>> tissues\n>>> and orifices of human + social organization like electro-shock +\n>>> doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\n>>> already-anthropocene-driven madness… by accelerating it … like:\n>>> Here\n>>> take this, it’s another anthropo-scenic downloading spiral into\n>>> Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress” Inc.\n>>>\n>>> ...\n>>>\n>>> On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some Indy-inspired\n>>> type\n>>> tactical media event...\n>>>\n>>> perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary date...\n>>>\n>>> Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on that ? get in\n>>> touch !\n>>>\n>>> There is already something planned in Houston hosted by IMC folks\n>>> there\n>>> ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n>>>\n>>> but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we know... and WHY\n>>> Btropolis?\n>>>\n>>> One of its IMC sites is still active,\n>>>\n>>> and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown + kicked\n>>> off\n>>> the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n>>>\n>>> And there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S NEXT !!\n>>>\n>>> ...\n>>>\n>>> liebegreetz !\n>>>\n>>> podinski\n>>>\n>>> 0~~~~O-----o\n>>> www.xlterrestrials.org/plog [1]
\n>>> arts + praxis organisms\n>>> o-----O~~~~~0\n>>>\n>>> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>>> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>>> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>>> # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>>> # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>>> # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n>> \n>>\n>> Links:\n>> ------\n>> [1] http://www.xlterrestrials.org/plog\n>> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>> # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>> # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>> # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00050.html",
|
||
"to": "\"nettime-l@mail.kein.org\" <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>",
|
||
"from": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
|
||
"id": "00050",
|
||
"message-id": "04c850bf-988b-7a06-ea4f-bed0c7dc9af8@mailbox.or",
|
||
"date": "Wed, 11 Sep 2019 19:40:15 +0200",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"author_name": "podinski",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!",
|
||
"content": "Hi Matze,\n\ni tried recently to follow and catch-up on the debacle of linksunten and\nstate censorship...\nand picked up the pamphlet :\nverboten ! zur Kriminalisierung von Indymedia linksunten\nvia Rote Hilfe e.v.\n\nbut havent yet had time to get thru it.\n\n...\n\nre: the issue of the liberated webs and copy left...\ni have begun to think that another unexpected + massive fallout has\noccurred with all this online free content falling into... the Titan\ngrip...\n\nand in the idealism of trying to \" common-ize\" and/or \"dismantle\ncapitalism\" on the net, but not in the AFK world... as the majority of\nus still live in the realms of landlord strangleholds...\n \nprotection of labor and the livelihoods of content producers and indy\npublishers + DIY distro merchants was not very well considered... in the\neco-systems of books, media, data, small business and shop owners... \nand people's having to make their money to survive... pay rent.... or\nrecoup their production budgets ( see Astra Taylor's The People's\nPlatform )...\n\nCopyright is a completely re-openable subject... of hot debate....\n\nwhich HKW is also being revisited again this year ( 100 Years Of\nCopyright and Part 2 : Right the Right... this Nov. )\n... but i am not so hopeful they will handle the topic radically enough,\nbecause in the end they are already looking for tech solutionism to fill\nin the grim situations... ie blockchain in the music industry ?\n\nbut no time to get very sophisticated in that beastly and tedious topic.\n\n...\n\ncheers,\np.\n\n\n \nOn 9/10/19 5:40 PM, Matze Schmidt wrote:\n> One more:\n>\n> Sebastian Luetgert in an interview mit textz.com (in German): \n> https://de.indymedia.org/2004/03/76975.shtml\n>\n> Am 10.09.2019 um 16:12 schrieb Matze Schmidt <matzeschmidt@matzeschmidt.de>:\n>\n> Hi,\n>\n> I remember when topics died. Esp. when Sebasian Luetgert 10?, 15? years ago was about sceptical talking about indymedia some years after the beginning of this platform. The radical pragmatists in Berlin sat there with a shrug.\n>\n> What's more important now is a struggle by a left against a state as a censor amidst the general new swing to the right, see here in German:\n>\n> https://twitter.com/zineworkshop/status/1161884759364198400?s=20\n>\n> Matze\n>\n> Am 10.09.2019 um 13:19 schrieb podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>:\n>\n> Hi Ingrid et al,\n>\n> hmm, a little shocked that so few want to discuss the indymedia platform topic... and what it means for today's struggles... \n> but na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently cubicled (un-)solidarities... \n>\n>\n> On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid) wrote:\n>> Hello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n>>\n>> Just like to point out that https://www.indymedia.nl/ is still very much alive! I haven't been involved for many years now, but perhaps we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring that something in Berlin together with the Dutch ((i)) folks? I'd be happy to be involved somehow too!\n> sorry for slow reply... \n> things have been a little overloaded... \n>\n> good to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe there are several still out there providing useful public channels ( as mentioned in the article, ie. Argentina ) !\n>\n> Not quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans for Nov.... or beyond. \n> but happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who want to be involved...\n>\n> Should be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n> https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n>\n> but one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism + praxis ...\n> i will check in to see, if not already too late. \n>\n> my cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n>\n> podinski\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>> Cheers, Ingrid.\n>>\n>>\n>> From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>\n>> Sent: 06 September 2019 15:42\n>> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n>> Subject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!\n>>\n>> hello N-time, \n>>\n>> This November INDYMEDIA – (( i )) – will be 20 years old !!\n>>\n>> April Glaser writes a good short history of the pioneering\n>> network/platform/newsfeed … for Logic Magazine ( here ). But there’s\n>> probably many more things that need to be analyzed in the history of the\n>> Internet and digital culture to understand and assess whether “Another\n>> Network Is Possible“… and where + how tactical media can unite\n>> communities tomorrow…\n>>\n>> https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL that…\n>>\n>> http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n>>\n>> excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n>>\n>> ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing back in our\n>> heads as we write… )\n>>\n>> This is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will take more than\n>> a short essay to sort through all the angles and dilemmas we find\n>> ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias +\n>> technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the military/corporate\n>> communication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through all the tissues\n>> and orifices of human + social organization like electro-shock +\n>> doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\n>> already-anthropocene-driven madness… by accelerating it … like: Here\n>> take this, it’s another anthropo-scenic downloading spiral into\n>> Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress” Inc.\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some Indy-inspired type\n>> tactical media event...\n>>\n>> perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary date...\n>>\n>> Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on that ? get in touch !\n>>\n>> There is already something planned in Houston hosted by IMC folks there\n>> ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n>>\n>> but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we know... and WHY\n>> Btropolis?\n>>\n>> One of its IMC sites is still active,\n>>\n>> and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown + kicked off\n>> the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n>>\n>> And there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S NEXT !!\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> liebegreetz !\n>>\n>> podinski\n>>\n>>\n>> 0~~~~O-----o\n>> www.xlterrestrials.org/plog \n>>\n>> arts + praxis organisms\n>> o-----O~~~~~0\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>> # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>> # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>> # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n>\n>\n\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00051.html",
|
||
"to": "\"nettime-l@mail.kein.org\" <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>",
|
||
"from": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
|
||
"id": "00051",
|
||
"message-id": "e57376de-eed7-c87b-6434-f039d6c4f9ea@mailbox.or",
|
||
"date": "Wed, 11 Sep 2019 22:07:48 +0200",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai"
|
||
}
|
||
],
|
||
"message-id": "c8775943-36f7-2d7f-180b-ce248ab0ee2b@mailbox.or",
|
||
"date": "Tue, 10 Sep 2019 13:19:58 +0200",
|
||
"content-type": "multipart/mixed"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"author_name": "tacira",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!",
|
||
"content": "hi pod! long time no see, hi ingrid, tatiana from abya yala :)\n\nas for a long time user and educator on free technologies for creative\nmedia production I was a bit skeptical on the article - we dont need to\ncreate one more leftist tool, but re-ocuppy with purpose and love all\ncollective maintained tools - perhaps more influenced by intersectional\npoltics (I am reading Ocalan :) but the networkS are alive, dormant\nbecause NOT dispersed and very much re-creating itself all the time.\nfree philosophy and ethics becomes just more urgent then ever! As Krenak\nan indigenous leader in brazil says we have been using \"colored\nparachutes\" in this fall \"being able to maintain our subjectivities, our\nvisions, our poetics about existence\". \n\nwe are in shock with the fire but its from the ashes that we create! \n\nhere a recent ongoing work from the brazilian cyberfeminists\nhttps://midiatatica.desarquivo.org/ tactical archives from the last\ndecade by collective perspectives. \n\nbest for all!\nt\n\n\nEm 2019-09-10 08:19, podinski escreveu:\n> Hi Ingrid et al, \n> \n> hmm, a little shocked that so few want to discuss the indymedia\n> platform topic... and what it means for today's struggles... \n> but na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently cubicled\n> (un-)solidarities... \n> \n> On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid) wrote:\n> \n>> Hello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n>>\n>> Just like to point out that https://www.indymedia.nl/ is still very\n>> much alive! I haven't been involved for many years now, but perhaps\n>> we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring that something in\n>> Berlin together with the Dutch ((i)) folks? I'd be happy to be\n>> involved somehow too!\n> sorry for slow reply... \n> things have been a little overloaded... \n> \n> good to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe there are\n> several still out there providing useful public channels ( as\n> mentioned in the article, ie. Argentina ) !\n> \n> Not quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans for\n> Nov.... or beyond. \n> but happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who want to\n> be involved...\n> \n> Should be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n> https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n> \n> but one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the\n> arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism + praxis ...\n> i will check in to see, if not already too late. \n> \n> my cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n> \n> podinski\n> \n>> Cheers, Ingrid.\n>>\n>> -------------------------\n>>\n>> From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org\n>> <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of podinski\n>> <podinski@mailbox.org>\n>> Sent: 06 September 2019 15:42\n>> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n>> Subject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!\n>>\n>> hello N-time,\n>>\n>> This November INDYMEDIA – (( i )) – will be 20 years old !!\n>>\n>> April Glaser writes a good short history of the pioneering\n>> network/platform/newsfeed … for Logic Magazine ( here ). But\n>> there’s\n>> probably many more things that need to be analyzed in the history of\n>> the\n>> Internet and digital culture to understand and assess whether\n>> “Another\n>> Network Is Possible“… and where + how tactical media can unite\n>> communities tomorrow…\n>>\n>> https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL that…\n>>\n>> http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n>>\n>> excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n>>\n>>>\n>>\n>> ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing back in our\n>> heads as we write… )\n>>\n>> This is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will take more\n>> than\n>> a short essay to sort through all the angles and dilemmas we find\n>> ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias +\n>> technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the\n>> military/corporate\n>> communication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through all the\n>> tissues\n>> and orifices of human + social organization like electro-shock +\n>> doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\n>> already-anthropocene-driven madness… by accelerating it … like:\n>> Here\n>> take this, it’s another anthropo-scenic downloading spiral into\n>> Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress” Inc.\n>>\n>>>\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some Indy-inspired\n>> type\n>> tactical media event...\n>>\n>> perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary date...\n>>\n>> Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on that ? get in\n>> touch !\n>>\n>> There is already something planned in Houston hosted by IMC folks\n>> there\n>> ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n>>\n>> but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we know... and WHY\n>> Btropolis?\n>>\n>> One of its IMC sites is still active,\n>>\n>> and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown + kicked\n>> off\n>> the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n>>\n>> And there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S NEXT !!\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> liebegreetz !\n>>\n>> podinski\n>>\n>> 0~~~~O-----o\n>> www.xlterrestrials.org/plog [1]
\n>> arts + praxis organisms\n>> o-----O~~~~~0\n>>\n>> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>> # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>> # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>> # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> \n> \n> \n> Links:\n> ------\n> [1] http://www.xlterrestrials.org/plog\n> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00049.html",
|
||
"to": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
|
||
"from": "tacira@riseup.net",
|
||
"id": "00049",
|
||
"message-id": "dd040be8c1c3fa9b3d539f1881a529fa@riseup.net",
|
||
"date": "Wed, 11 Sep 2019 05:38:06 -0700",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"author_name": "podinski",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!",
|
||
"content": "Hi Tati et al,\n\na pleasure to read some news from ya...\n\n+ thx for the link !\n\n...\n\nOn 9/11/19 2:38 PM, tacira@riseup.net wrote:\n> hi pod! long time no see, hi ingrid, tatiana from abya yala :)\n>\n> as for a long time user and educator on free technologies for creative\n> media production I was a bit skeptical on the article - we dont need to\n> create one more leftist tool, but re-ocuppy with purpose and love all\n> collective maintained tools - perhaps more influenced by intersectional\n> poltics (I am reading Ocalan :) but the networkS are alive, dormant\n> because NOT dispersed and very much re-creating itself all the time.\n> free philosophy and ethics becomes just more urgent then ever! As Krenak\n> an indigenous leader in brazil says we have been using \"colored\n> parachutes\" in this fall \"being able to maintain our subjectivities, our\n> visions, our poetics about existence\". \nyes, well it is not hard for me to be critical about More leftist tools...\nwe are getting very lost - and abused - in all the tooling around.\n\nAnd i think the article may point out clearly towards HOW we lost one\npossible road that the net could have taken to network our communities,\nsolidarities and resistance... \n\nI probably dont need to go into the details here of how that all got\nco-opted and used in the creepiest of ways to consolidate power and turn\nus all into its subjects and products. ( Neo-liberal + libertarian\nnetz, surveillance krapitalism and all that mess )\n\nIF the net can be reclaimed at all from the monstrous sprawl of\nill-intents...\nit would probably require new architectures that cannot be easily\nswallowed up by the Titans' toxic web.\n\nAs Rasmus Fleischer pointedly remarked at one of the recent\nTransmediales : this is what a failed rev looks like.\n\nI don't have any clear proposals for that, but that could be part of\nwhat would make sense with this ((i)) anniversary...\nto understand what we lost, and how we got where we are... and what\nrecourse makes sense now...\n\n...\n\nFrom an XLterrestrial perspective, it might be an important tactical\nmaneuver to get our feet back on the ground, locally... and \"shield\nourselves\" from the fallout of having \"lost the digital revolution\" ...\nand get more focused on our biological + ecological struggles.\n\n...\n\nXLt is perhaps far more optimistic about what we can achieve by learning\nfrom the cultures of resistance in the global south... and outside all\nthe tech hype !\nAnd not allowing the domination of tech environments to be our\nsurrogated means to imagining any new re-occupying strategies.\n\n...\n\nJust read yesterday an interesting story about Food Sovereignty and in\n2011 Russia... 40% of the food came from Dacha gardens... \n\n\"dacha gardens produced over 80% of the countries fruit and berries,\nover 66% of the vegetables, almost 80% of the potatoes and nearly 50% of\nthe nations milk, much of it consumed raw. \"\n\nhttp://naturalhomes.org/naturalliving/russian-dacha.htm?fbclid=IwAR1ia40bjy-j6-1H8DnGejakGBeg0Gn1VqED6sjk5A6sN8KOGg35hyn7pkE\n\nhavent checked out the accuracy of this, but the shift in topics +\norganizational objectives... seems very revelant !\n\n...\n\nJust last year Chaos Congress teamed up with FifF and others to put on a\nconference called Bits Und Baume ( and trees ) to finally take seriously\nthe ecological consequences of the poorly miscalculated unsustainability\nof all our endlessly expanding high tech cultures.\n\nIt only took 35 years for CCC to get around to this crucial topic... ;)\n... but i think some good things are coming together for further\ninvestigations into realistic terrestrial-based missions ... and less in\n\"hackers on the moon\".\n\nhttps://bits-und-baeume.org/en\n\n...\n\nLastly,\nto emphasize my points...\n\ni leave you all with this talk from Boaventura de Sousa Santos ...\nat HKW's Now is The Time Of Monsters : What comes after Nations... in\n2017...\n\n( which followed a talk from Felix Stadler on Protocols - and tech - for\nDemocracy? )\n\nAnd it might be a useful reminder to help put things into proper\nperspective and more productive debates...\nand more paying attention to what we don't necessarily see on our (Euro)\nscreens...\n\nthings that are working ... outside those corporate, futurist +\nindustrial hives !\n\nStaatstechnologien - Democracy | Boaventura de Sousa Santos\nhttps://www.hkw.de/de/app/mediathek/video/55789\n\n\"converting ruins into seeds\"\n\nand i love the last line...\n\n\"i want us to be competent rebels !\"\n\npodinski\n\n\n\n\n\n \n\n\n\n\n \n\n\n>\n> we are in shock with the fire but its from the ashes that we create! \n>\n> here a recent ongoing work from the brazilian cyberfeminists\n> https://midiatatica.desarquivo.org/ tactical archives from the last\n> decade by collective perspectives. \n>\n> best for all!\n> t\n>\n>\n> Em 2019-09-10 08:19, podinski escreveu:\n>> Hi Ingrid et al, \n>>\n>> hmm, a little shocked that so few want to discuss the indymedia\n>> platform topic... and what it means for today's struggles... \n>> but na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently cubicled\n>> (un-)solidarities... \n>>\n>> On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid) wrote:\n>>\n>>> Hello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n>>>\n>>> Just like to point out that https://www.indymedia.nl/ is still very\n>>> much alive! I haven't been involved for many years now, but perhaps\n>>> we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring that something in\n>>> Berlin together with the Dutch ((i)) folks? I'd be happy to be\n>>> involved somehow too!\n>> sorry for slow reply... \n>> things have been a little overloaded... \n>>\n>> good to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe there are\n>> several still out there providing useful public channels ( as\n>> mentioned in the article, ie. Argentina ) !\n>>\n>> Not quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans for\n>> Nov.... or beyond. \n>> but happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who want to\n>> be involved...\n>>\n>> Should be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n>> https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n>>\n>> but one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the\n>> arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism + praxis ...\n>> i will check in to see, if not already too late. \n>>\n>> my cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n>>\n>> podinski\n>>\n>>> Cheers, Ingrid.\n>>>\n>>> -------------------------\n>>>\n>>> From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org\n>>> <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of podinski\n>>> <podinski@mailbox.org>\n>>> Sent: 06 September 2019 15:42\n>>> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n>>> Subject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!\n>>>\n>>> hello N-time,\n>>>\n>>> This November INDYMEDIA – (( i )) – will be 20 years old !!\n>>>\n>>> April Glaser writes a good short history of the pioneering\n>>> network/platform/newsfeed … for Logic Magazine ( here ). But\n>>> there’s\n>>> probably many more things that need to be analyzed in the history of\n>>> the\n>>> Internet and digital culture to understand and assess whether\n>>> “Another\n>>> Network Is Possible“… and where + how tactical media can unite\n>>> communities tomorrow…\n>>>\n>>> https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n>>>\n>>> ...\n>>>\n>>> XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL that…\n>>>\n>>> http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n>>>\n>>> excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n>>>\n>>> ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing back in our\n>>> heads as we write… )\n>>>\n>>> This is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will take more\n>>> than\n>>> a short essay to sort through all the angles and dilemmas we find\n>>> ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias +\n>>> technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the\n>>> military/corporate\n>>> communication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through all the\n>>> tissues\n>>> and orifices of human + social organization like electro-shock +\n>>> doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\n>>> already-anthropocene-driven madness… by accelerating it … like:\n>>> Here\n>>> take this, it’s another anthropo-scenic downloading spiral into\n>>> Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress” Inc.\n>>>\n>>> ...\n>>>\n>>> On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some Indy-inspired\n>>> type\n>>> tactical media event...\n>>>\n>>> perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary date...\n>>>\n>>> Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on that ? get in\n>>> touch !\n>>>\n>>> There is already something planned in Houston hosted by IMC folks\n>>> there\n>>> ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n>>>\n>>> but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we know... and WHY\n>>> Btropolis?\n>>>\n>>> One of its IMC sites is still active,\n>>>\n>>> and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown + kicked\n>>> off\n>>> the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n>>>\n>>> And there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S NEXT !!\n>>>\n>>> ...\n>>>\n>>> liebegreetz !\n>>>\n>>> podinski\n>>>\n>>> 0~~~~O-----o\n>>> www.xlterrestrials.org/plog [1]
\n>>> arts + praxis organisms\n>>> o-----O~~~~~0\n>>>\n>>> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>>> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>>> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>>> # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>>> # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>>> # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n>> \n>>\n>> Links:\n>> ------\n>> [1] http://www.xlterrestrials.org/plog\n>> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>> # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>> # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>> # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00050.html",
|
||
"to": "\"nettime-l@mail.kein.org\" <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>",
|
||
"from": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
|
||
"id": "00050",
|
||
"message-id": "04c850bf-988b-7a06-ea4f-bed0c7dc9af8@mailbox.or",
|
||
"date": "Wed, 11 Sep 2019 19:40:15 +0200",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"author_name": "podinski",
|
||
"subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!",
|
||
"content": "Hi Matze,\n\ni tried recently to follow and catch-up on the debacle of linksunten and\nstate censorship...\nand picked up the pamphlet :\nverboten ! zur Kriminalisierung von Indymedia linksunten\nvia Rote Hilfe e.v.\n\nbut havent yet had time to get thru it.\n\n...\n\nre: the issue of the liberated webs and copy left...\ni have begun to think that another unexpected + massive fallout has\noccurred with all this online free content falling into... the Titan\ngrip...\n\nand in the idealism of trying to \" common-ize\" and/or \"dismantle\ncapitalism\" on the net, but not in the AFK world... as the majority of\nus still live in the realms of landlord strangleholds...\n \nprotection of labor and the livelihoods of content producers and indy\npublishers + DIY distro merchants was not very well considered... in the\neco-systems of books, media, data, small business and shop owners... \nand people's having to make their money to survive... pay rent.... or\nrecoup their production budgets ( see Astra Taylor's The People's\nPlatform )...\n\nCopyright is a completely re-openable subject... of hot debate....\n\nwhich HKW is also being revisited again this year ( 100 Years Of\nCopyright and Part 2 : Right the Right... this Nov. )\n... but i am not so hopeful they will handle the topic radically enough,\nbecause in the end they are already looking for tech solutionism to fill\nin the grim situations... ie blockchain in the music industry ?\n\nbut no time to get very sophisticated in that beastly and tedious topic.\n\n...\n\ncheers,\np.\n\n\n \nOn 9/10/19 5:40 PM, Matze Schmidt wrote:\n> One more:\n>\n> Sebastian Luetgert in an interview mit textz.com (in German): \n> https://de.indymedia.org/2004/03/76975.shtml\n>\n> Am 10.09.2019 um 16:12 schrieb Matze Schmidt <matzeschmidt@matzeschmidt.de>:\n>\n> Hi,\n>\n> I remember when topics died. Esp. when Sebasian Luetgert 10?, 15? years ago was about sceptical talking about indymedia some years after the beginning of this platform. The radical pragmatists in Berlin sat there with a shrug.\n>\n> What's more important now is a struggle by a left against a state as a censor amidst the general new swing to the right, see here in German:\n>\n> https://twitter.com/zineworkshop/status/1161884759364198400?s=20\n>\n> Matze\n>\n> Am 10.09.2019 um 13:19 schrieb podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>:\n>\n> Hi Ingrid et al,\n>\n> hmm, a little shocked that so few want to discuss the indymedia platform topic... and what it means for today's struggles... \n> but na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently cubicled (un-)solidarities... \n>\n>\n> On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid) wrote:\n>> Hello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n>>\n>> Just like to point out that https://www.indymedia.nl/ is still very much alive! I haven't been involved for many years now, but perhaps we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring that something in Berlin together with the Dutch ((i)) folks? I'd be happy to be involved somehow too!\n> sorry for slow reply... \n> things have been a little overloaded... \n>\n> good to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe there are several still out there providing useful public channels ( as mentioned in the article, ie. Argentina ) !\n>\n> Not quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans for Nov.... or beyond. \n> but happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who want to be involved...\n>\n> Should be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n> https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n>\n> but one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism + praxis ...\n> i will check in to see, if not already too late. \n>\n> my cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n>\n> podinski\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>> Cheers, Ingrid.\n>>\n>>\n>> From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>\n>> Sent: 06 September 2019 15:42\n>> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n>> Subject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!\n>>\n>> hello N-time, \n>>\n>> This November INDYMEDIA – (( i )) – will be 20 years old !!\n>>\n>> April Glaser writes a good short history of the pioneering\n>> network/platform/newsfeed … for Logic Magazine ( here ). But there’s\n>> probably many more things that need to be analyzed in the history of the\n>> Internet and digital culture to understand and assess whether “Another\n>> Network Is Possible“… and where + how tactical media can unite\n>> communities tomorrow…\n>>\n>> https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL that…\n>>\n>> http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n>>\n>> excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n>>\n>> ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing back in our\n>> heads as we write… )\n>>\n>> This is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will take more than\n>> a short essay to sort through all the angles and dilemmas we find\n>> ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias +\n>> technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the military/corporate\n>> communication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through all the tissues\n>> and orifices of human + social organization like electro-shock +\n>> doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\n>> already-anthropocene-driven madness… by accelerating it … like: Here\n>> take this, it’s another anthropo-scenic downloading spiral into\n>> Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress” Inc.\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some Indy-inspired type\n>> tactical media event...\n>>\n>> perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary date...\n>>\n>> Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on that ? get in touch !\n>>\n>> There is already something planned in Houston hosted by IMC folks there\n>> ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n>>\n>> but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we know... and WHY\n>> Btropolis?\n>>\n>> One of its IMC sites is still active,\n>>\n>> and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown + kicked off\n>> the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n>>\n>> And there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S NEXT !!\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> liebegreetz !\n>>\n>> podinski\n>>\n>>\n>> 0~~~~O-----o\n>> www.xlterrestrials.org/plog \n>>\n>> arts + praxis organisms\n>> o-----O~~~~~0\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>> # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>> # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>> # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n>\n>\n\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00051.html",
|
||
"to": "\"nettime-l@mail.kein.org\" <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>",
|
||
"from": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
|
||
"id": "00051",
|
||
"message-id": "e57376de-eed7-c87b-6434-f039d6c4f9ea@mailbox.or",
|
||
"date": "Wed, 11 Sep 2019 22:07:48 +0200",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai"
|
||
}
|
||
],
|
||
"message-id": "92b86cf7-4696-cde0-1218-beecefbe2bf5@mailbox.or",
|
||
"date": "Fri, 6 Sep 2019 15:42:24 +0200",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"list": "nettime_l"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"date": "Thu, 19 Oct 2000 10:58:57 +0200",
|
||
"to": "nettime-l@bbs.thing.net",
|
||
"author_name": "Eric Kluitenberg",
|
||
"content-type": "text/plai",
|
||
"message-id": "v03007803b6146824d4e6@[194.109.161.195]",
|
||
"from": "Eric Kluitenberg <epk@xs4all.nl>",
|
||
"subject": "[Nettime-bold] Media without an Audien",
|
||
"url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0010/msg00383.html",
|
||
"content": "dear nettimers,\n\nPlease note: This text is an expanded version of a talk given at the Banff\nCentre for the Arts Interactive Screen 0.0 workshop (August 2000), and the\nintroduction to the <target.audience=0> panel at net.congestion -\nInternational Festival of Streaming Media, in Amsterdam, October 2000. The\ntext will appear shortly in the third Acoustic Space issue, published by\nthe E-lab artist organisation in Riga, Latvia.\n\n_______________________\n\n\nMedia without an Audience\n\nby Eric Kluitenberg\n\n\n\nPresence in the mediated environment of digital networks is probably one of\nthe most complex phenomena of the new types of social interaction that have\nemerged in these environments. In the current phase of radical deployment\n(or penetration) of the internet, various attempts are made to come to\nterms with the social dynamics of networked communication spaces. It seems\nthat traditional media theory is not able to contextualise these social\ndynamics, as it remains stuck on a meta-level discourse of media and power\nstructures (Virilio), hyperreality (Baudrillard), or on a retrograde\nanalysis of media structures deeply rooted in the functionality and\nstructural characteristics of broadcast media (McLuhan).\n\nAttempts to come to terms with networked communication environments from\nthe field of social theory, are generally shallow, ill informed about\nactual practices, and sometimes to straightforwardly biased. Psychology\ndoes not contribute in any significant way to an understanding of these\nsocial dynamics either. The rather popular idea, for instance, that the\nscreen is a projection screen for personal pre-occupations, and that social\nrelations that emerge through the interactions via networked media are\nmostly imaginary for lack of negative feedback or corrections, is deeply\ncontentious. The idea that absence of corrective feedback stimulates the\ncreation of fictitious relationships is an interesting one, but one that\ncan apply equally well off-line as it can on-line. It illuminates certain\npatterns of human behaviour, but it does not tell us much of what makes\npresence in the networks specific.\n\nOne of the greatest fallacies of current attempts to understand the social\ndynamics of networked media is the tendency to see these media as an\nextension of the broadcast media system. This idea has become more popular\nas the internet is extended with audio-visual elements. Interactive\naudio-visual structures, streaming media, downloadable sound and video, all\ncontribute to the notion that the internet is the next evolution of\nbroadcast media. But this vision applies only partially, and is driven\nprimarily by vested interests of the media industry. It is often not\nreflected in how people actually use the net.\n\nThe predication of the conception of media on the broadcast model based on\na division of roles of the active sender <> passive receiver / audience\nrelationship, is the greatest barrier to understanding what goes down in a\nnetworked media environment. The networked environment should primarily be\nseen as a social space, in which active relationships are pursued and\ndeployed. Activities that often seem completely useless, irrational,\nerratic, or even autistic. The active sender and the passive audience/\nreceiver, seems to have been replaced by a multitude of unguided\ntransmission that seem to lack a designated receiver. Thus the net is seen\nas an irrelevant, chaotic, and useless infosphere, a waste of resources, a\ntransitory phase of development that will soon be replaced by professional\nstandards of quality, entertainment, information, media-professionalism,\nand above all respect for the audience.\n\nLet me be clear, I do not believe in this vision, and I am convinced that\nthe net will not evolve into the ultimate entertainment and information\nmedium. Instead it seems more likely that the seemingly unstructured mess\nof random transmissions will prevail.\n\n\nInto the Soup....\n\nThe ideal of seeing the media environment as a social space has a\nconsiderable history. Already in the late twenties Bertold Brecht\nformulated his now famous radio theory in which he envisions radio as\nmedium for direct two-way communication, and the media space as a\nconnective network of decentralised nodes.\n\t\t\t\t\t( use of cyber rhetoric deliberate\nhere! )\n\nThis idea heralds strong resonances of early cyber-utopian discourses such\nas \"The Virtual Community\" of Howard Rheingold. J.P. Barlow, one of the\nother great cyber utopians talked extensively about \"the great\nconversation\", emphasising the kinship of network communication to the\ntraditional meeting places, the street, the square, the agora, the theatre,\nthe café.. This early utopian phase of the net is over, cyberspace turned\nout not to be independent. It's sovereign existence is threatened by mega\nfusions of the AOl/TimeWarner type, but there is one aspect where these\nearly stories are right, and that is in pointing beyond the\nsender<>audience dichotomy of broadcasting.\n\n\n\n\tA progression of media phenomenologies\n\n\t\t\tbeyond the broadcast dichotomy...\n\n\n\nIntimate media\n\nThe first step towards a micro-politics of resistance against the broadcast\nhegemony was introduced with the notion of \"intimate media\". I was\nintroduced myself for the first time to this concept at the second Next 5\nMinutes conference on tactical media in 1996.\n\nIntimate media have a high degree of audience feedback. Typically the\ndistance between the sender and its remote audience is enormous in\nbroadcast media, if only because of the ratio of active senders and the\noverload of passive audience. Feedback mechanism are necessarily\ncomplicated and bureaucratic; the letter to the editors, phone-in time\navailable for only a tiniest fraction of the audience. Intimate media\ninstead are micro-media, there is a close relationship between sender and\naudience. Ideally the sender and the audience all know each other, while\nthe relationship is still more than a one on one conversation (as in a\ntelephone call).\n\nIntimate media are spontaneous media. They emerge at the grass roots\nlevel. They cut across all available media, all available technologies.\nIntimate media can be low-tech, they can also be high-tech. What\ncharacterises them is an attitude. Intimate media range from micro-print to\npirate radio, to hacked tv, web casting, satellite amateurs, micro-fm or\nhigh-bandwidth networks. Intimate media can be organised in a professional\nway, though usually they are not. Most common is their appearance as\namateur media - their audience reach is generally economically not viable.\nIntimate media are generally not a good stock option.\n\nPeople often do know each other personally in these media networks. A\ncurious incident at the second Art + Communication festival in Riga\n(Latvia) illustrates this beautifully. All the discussion were sent out\nlive via audio streams over the net, and a few people were even listening\nat the other end. During one of the breaks the stream continued and one of\nthe artists decided to take the mobile microphone used by the presenters\ninto the coffee room. He placed the microphone silently on a coffee table,\nwhere a lively conversation (gossip) was going on. As it turned out later,\nabout the only person listening (in London) to this conversation at the\ntime, was the person the conversation (i.e. the gossip) was about, and she\nprotested via a chat channel within minutes. This type of media-intimacy is\nvirtually unthinkable in the broadcast model.\n\n\nSocialised Media\n\nMedia used in the context of a specified social group or in a specific\nregional context, are best described as \"community media\". Common forms of\ncommunity media that belong to a geographically situated community are\ncommunity-radio and -television. The use of the internet in a\ngeographically situated community is mostly referred to as community\nnetworking. Community networking has become very popular in the US, but\nalso has some importance in Europe.\n\nSpecial interest communities are usually organised around a topic, a theme,\nor a shared interest. They are essentially translocal in nature, hooking up\nlocal interest groups or even shattered individuals, who can be dispersed\nover different regions and countries.\n\nNetworked communications can be highly beneficial for the process of\ncommunity building and for strengthening the cohesion of such communities.\nIt is obvious that translocal (special-interest) communities benefit most\nfrom networked communication, since it offers a low-cost and fairly\neffective means to stay in touch and exchange ideas. But the high degree of\naudience feedback, and peer to peer interaction also makes networked\ncommunication technology an invaluable tool for social interaction within a\ngeographically situated community.\n\nTypical forms of networked communication are the newsgroups that emerged\nfrom Usenet, text-based fora where people exchange ideas and opinions\nabout the topic of the newsgroup. MUDs & MOOs, or generically on-line\nmulti-user environments, where people can interact directly on-line in a\ncommunications environment. MUDs and MOOs started out as text-environments\nand became popular as role playing environments, but they have become\nvisual and subsequently also integrated live speech and 3D environments\nthat can be navigated in a more visceral way than the point and click\nnavigation of traditional web pages. Multi-user environments enhance the\nfeeling of sharing a communications space with others. The mode of\ninteraction has to be active, otherwise it doesn't work.\n\nAnother important aspect of socialised media are the collaborative networks\nthat have emerged as a result of these low-cost translocal communication\ntools. Especially e-mail has helped tremendously in this regard. Mailing\nlists are easy to set up and can help to distribute information evenly and\neffectively to a very large base of subscribers, while offering each\nsubscriber also the opportunity to react to the sender as well as to the\nwhole list. \"Audience\" feedback here is immediate, distributed and\nnon-hierarchical. It is far removed from the letter to the editor that most\nlikely never makes it through the editorial filters. The practices of micro\nmedia in the arts and net.casting have benefited enormously from the\navailability of mailing lists such as Syndicate, Xchange, nettime, Nice,\nand others, and have been tools to establish co-operation, a sense of\ncommunity and a discourse that is more open than what any print magazine\nwould have been able to support.\n\n\nCreate Your Own Solutions!\n\nOne of the most notable collaborative networks, still in becoming, has been\nthe Interfund. The Interfund is \"a co-operative, decentralised,\nnon-located, virtual but real, self-support structure for small and\nindependent initiatives in the field of culture and digital media.\" The\nInterfund proposes to become a shared resource pool, a \"Bureaucracy\nProtection Shield\", a forum for the critique of (the inefficiency of) large\ninstitutions, a pool of shared skills.\n\nBeyond that the Interfund stimulates individuals to \"create your own\nsolutions\". One of the more ingenious of these self-help solutions was the\nself-funding scheme! This scheme addresses the nasty fact that cultural\nfunding agencies generally want to support projects only if they are\nalready supported by other funding bodies. The Interfund therefore came up\nwith the idea of a micro-funding scheme where projects from within the\nInterfund community (which itself is an open structure) would be\nimmediately eligible for official support by the Interfund - in an amount\nof either 1 or 10 US$ per project.\n\nWith the official letter of acknowledgement new funding applications to\nlocal agencies could be given extra credibility. \"Look, our project is\nalready supported by the Interfund!\" - \"what, really?? Well in that case...\"\nIf by any chance the Interfund office is far away, or there is no time for\na surface mail exchange, the entire Interfund would be down-loadable in the\nform of PDF files and other downloadable design-elements. Thus allowing\neach individual member to establish their own Interfund.\n\nAll of these types of media practices still have an attachment to the\nfunctional. There is an idea that something has to be communicated - a\nfallacy of course. What mostly distinguishes intimate and socialised media\nfrom the broadcast model, is that the media-infrastructures here primarily\nact as support structures for certain intricate social figurations to\nemerge. There is a highly specific sub-set of these media phenomenologies,\nhowever, that seems to have emancipated itself from even those basic\nfunctional demands of use and has entered into a kind of 'phatic' state;\nthe sovereign media.\n\n\nSovereign Media or 'The Joy of Emptiness'\n\nSovereign media are first of all media that simply exist for the sake of\nnothing else. Sovereign media produce signals *with* an origin / sender /\nauthor, but *without* a designated receiver. The term 'Sovereign Media'\nalludes to the notion of the sovereign as developed by Georges Bataille in\nThe Accursed Share.\n\nAs a media phenomenology it has first been identified by BILWET (a.k.a.\nADILKNO - Foundation for the Advancement of Illegal Knowledge). For Bilwet\nthe sovereign media are a bewildering new UTO - Unidentified Theoretical\nObject, which they studied with great curiosity and leisurely pleasure. Let\nme first share some of the early Bilwet/Adilkno observations about this UTO\nwith you:\n\n\"The sovereign media are the cream of the missionary work performed in the\nmedia galaxy. They have cut all surviving imaginary ties with truth,\nreality and representation. They no longer concentrate on the wishes of a\nspecific target group, as the 'inside' media still do. They have\nemancipated themselves from any potential audience, and thus they do not\napproach their audience as a mouldable market segment, but offer it the\n'sovereign space' it deserves. Their goal and legitimacy lie not outside\nthe media, but in practising (practicable) 'total decontrol'. Their\napparently narcissistic behaviour bears witness to their self-confidence,\nwhich is not broadcast. The signal is there; you only have to pick it up.\nSovereign media invite us to hop right onto the media bus.\n\n(...)\nSovereign media insulate themselves against the hyperculture. They seek no\nconnection; they disconnect. This is their point of departure. They leave\nthe media surface and orbit the multimedia network as satellites. These\ndo-it-yourselfers shut themselves up inside a self-built monad, and\n\"invisible unit\" of introverted technologies, which, like a room without\ndoors or windows, wishes to deny the existence of the world. This act is a\ndenial of the maxim \"I am connected therefore I am.\" It conceals no longing\nfor a return to nature. They do not criticise baroque data environments, or\nexperience them as threats, but consider them material, to use as they\nplease. They operate beyond clean and dirty, in the garbage system ruled by\nchaos pur sang.\n\nTheir carefree rummaging in the universal media archive is not a management\nstrategy for jogging jammed creativity. These negative media refuse to be\npositively defined and are good for nothing. They demand no attention and\nconstitute no enrichment for the existing media landscape. Once detached\nfrom every meaningful context, they switch over in fits and starts from one\naudio-video collection to the next. The autonomously multiplying\nconnections generate a sensory space which is relaxing as well as\nnerve-racking.\"\n\n( from the Bilwet Media Archive )\n\n\nPresence Beyond Utility\n\nIn \"The Accursed Share\", Bataille defines the sovereign in opposition to\nthe servile, in opposition to all activities subordinate to the demands of\nusefulness. The demands of usefulness, the basis of any kind of economic or\nproductive activity, rule out the experience of sovereignty. By deriving\nits meaning and purpose from what it is useful for , the activity itself\nbecomes intrinsically meaningless. The sovereign experience on the contrary\nis meaningful independent of its consequence. It always refers to the\nmoment of its consumption, never beyond.\n\n\"Life beyond utility is the domain of sovereignty\", Bataille writes. Only\nwhen experience is no longer subordinate to the demands of use is it\npossible to connect to what is 'supremely' (\"souverainement\") important to\nus. Sovereign media then should be understood as media beyond use. They\nshould not be understood as 'useless' but rather as 'without use'. The\nsovereign media are media that have emancipated themselves from the demands\nof functionality or usefulness to exist in their own right.\n\n\nQuality is irrelevant!\n\nFreed from the demands of usefulness, quality becomes an irrelevant\ncriterion for these media signals. The signals exist, how they are\ninterpreted, what the framework and the demands are that are projected upon\nthem, is not a consideration in the process of their production. The\nsignals can be beautiful and brilliantly clear, or amateurish and oblique.\nThe traditional criteria of media professionalism have long been left\nbehind in the universe of the sovereign media.\n\nOne of the most beautiful examples of a supremely sovereign media practice\nis the net.radio.night, a global micro jam in net.audio, regularly hosted\nby the xchange network. Typically for a net.radio.night a call is put out\non the mailing list, inviting net.casters to join on irc and listen to a\nlive stream originating from location one. Other locations listen and pick\nup the stream till someone announces on the irc channel that the live\nstream will move from its original location to theirs. The next stream is a\nremix of the original, some things added, others taken away. The process\nstarts anew and the stream moves to the next location and the next re-mix.\nThis process can go on for hours, and very soon the origin of any specific\nsound is lost. What the net.radio.night imprints on the participants is a\nstrong feeling of being in the network, where the relationship between\norigin and destination has been dissolved. Also the traditional audience\ncan tune in and listen, but is no consideration in the structure of the\nevent.\n\nA distinctive characteristic of sovereign media is their hybridity. Any\nmedium can be combined with any medium. Sovereign media have a\ncross-media-platform-strategy, but this time not to reach a new audience,\nbut simply to extend the media space. Examples are the Virtual Media Lab,\nan intersection of all available media [at: http://live.media.nu] in\nAmsterdam, combining cable television with web casting, with radio, and\neven at times with satellite transmissions.\n\nAnother interesting cross breed are automated media such as the Frequency\nClock of r a d I o q u a l i a, or Remote TV of TwenFM, allowing\nautomatic scheduling of live streams from the internet on local radio and\ncable tv infrastructures. Or the project Agent Radio of the Institute of\nArtificial Art in Amsterdam that automatically and randomly selects sounds\nsources from the Internet and schedules them in the ether.\n\nAll these media operate beyond the body count of viewer statistics.\n\n\nPrivate Media\n\nIn the Digital City Amsterdam the personal home pages of its 'citizens' are\ncalled 'Houses'. For some years already the personal home pages on the\nworld-wide web in general, and the success of initiatives such as\nGeoCities, prevail in the face of adversity, while big-budget entertainment\nnetworks such as DEN (Digital Entertainment Network), collapse even before\nanyone really got to know about them. The deeply respectable weekly economy\nmagazine The Economist recently put a sad smiley on its cover, testifying\nto \"what the Internet cannot do\". Inside the issue a careful analysis is\nmade why the Internet has such a hard time taking of as an entertainment\nmedium, and is not living up to its promises at all.\n\nThe kind of private media formations such as GeoCities, the Digital City in\nAmsterdam, and others, mostly do not deal with the communication of a\nspecific message at all. They have no target-audience, and are not part of\nthe attention economy, but still they are highly successful as private\nmedia. More than the failed attempts to establish the ultimate\nentertainment medium, the net has flourished as the ultimate\npersonalisation of the media space. The endless stacks of private home\npages are the icons of these truly privatised media. Their private\nmessages, beyond anything else, simply state \"I am here\", but this simple\nmessage should not be discarded as a banal statement.\n\n\nPhatic Media\n\nIn their final phase of evolution media become phatic. The term derives\nfrom linguistics. In linguistics phatic language relates to \"speech used\nfor social or emotive purposes rather than for communicating information\".\nThe typical, though admittedly somewhat stereotypical example, is the daily\nspeech of house wives meeting every single day in the garden while hanging\nwash or taking care of domestic tasks. The exchanges of apparently\nmeaningless phrases such as \"how are you?\", \"How are your children doing in\nschool?\", etc.. communicate something beyond the semantics of the\nindividual words.\n\nAn amazing image: A test channel of a satellite tv transmitter, operated by\nsatellite tv amateurs - an international network. One central image\nsurrounded by smaller screens. They show what looks to most of us\n\"nothing\". A small room, an attic, a technical workshop, equipment,\nsomebody sitting around, no apparent communication. The image is, it does\nnot speak. One of our civilisation's most highly developed high-tech\ninfrastructures, utilised to celebrate the joy of emptiness...\n\nThis type of media appears to be completely useless within the traditional\n(broadcast) media scheme. It is a mistake to take this view for granted,\nhowever. There is indeed nothing banal about this media behaviour. The\nmedia sphere is treated here as a new type of environment, 'in' which\npeople create presences, but without a desire or aim to communicate a\nspecific message.\n\nIn fact I understand this as a fundamental anthropological principle - a\nway of inhabiting a new environment, and one that is, after all, primarily\na hostile environment for most of us.\n\n\nEric Kluitenberg\nAmsterdam, October 2000\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n",
|
||
"id": "00383",
|
||
"list": "nettime_bold"
|
||
}
|
||
]
|
||
}
|
||
} |