“Inspired by cybernetics and LSD, Stewart Brand creates the Whole Earth Catalog as a how-to manual for the commune movement. The catalog articulates a philosophy of tech idealism and individual empowerment. Guests: Fred Turner, John Markoff, and Kevin Kelly.” https://www.moma.org/interactives/exhibitions/2011/AccesstoTools/
for a more ’68 version of world vs state:
“Now more than ever, nature cannot be separated from culture; in order to comprehend the interactions between eco-systems, the mechanosphere and the social and individual Universes of reference, we must learn to think ‘transversally’. Just as monstrous and mutant algae invade the lagoon of Venice, so our television screens are populated, saturated, by ‘degenerate’ images and statements [énoncés]. In the field of social ecology, men like Donald Trump are permitted to proliferate freely, like another species of algae, taking over entire districts of New York and Atlantic City; he ‘redevelops’ by raising rents, thereby driving out tens of thousands of poor families, most of whom are condemned to homelessness, becoming the equivalent of the dead fish of environmental ecology.” http://atlasofplaces.com/filter/Essay/The-Three-Ecologies-Felix-Guattarih/t Claire @cebabz
In historical phenomena such as the revolution of 1789, the Commune, the revolution of 1917, there is always one part of the event that is irreducible to any social determinism, or to causal chains. Historians are not very fond of this point: they restore causality after the fact. Yet the event itself is a splitting off from, a breaking with causality; it is a bifurcation, a lawless deviation, an unstable condition that opens up a new field of the possible. In physics, Ilya Prigogine spoke of states in which the slightest differences persist rather than cancel themselves out, and where independent phenomena inter-resonate. An event can be turned around, repressed, co-opted, betrayed, but still something survives that cannot be outdated. Only traitors could say it’s outdated. Even ancient, an event can never be outdated. It is an opening onto the possible. It enters as much into the interior of individuals…
Abstract Although overarching if not foundational conceptualizations of digital governance in the field of critical data studies aptly account for and explain subjection, calculated resistance is left conceptually unattended despite case studies that document instances of resistance. I ask at the outset why conceptualizations of digital governance are so bleak, and I argue that all are underscored implicitly by a Deleuzian theory of desire that overlooks agency, defined here in Foucauldian terms. I subsequently conceptualize digital governance as encompassing subjection as well as resistance, and I cast the two in relational perspective by making use of the concepts ‘‘affordance’’ and ‘‘assemblage’’ in conjunction with multiple subjectivities and Foucault’s view of power as productive as well as his view of resistance as an ‘‘antagonism of strategies’’ in his late scholarship on resistance, ethics, and…
“Accelerationism and wages for housework : In my course on Whitehead and Deleuze we’re discussing the Anti-Oedipus. Discussing accelerationism (it is hard to read the book without seeing it coming from more or less everywhere) lead us to compare Deleuze and Guattari’s emphasis on the limits to schizophrenization that capital has to maintain – it is not a body without organs and the Oedipus separates it from a full schiza – with the idea, that Land (and others) have defended, that capital is the ultimate decoder of flows and therefore that the limits of capital can only be overcome by capital itself. The main issue is then whether the Oedipus – nuclear family-oriented desire, private life, the individual, reproduction placed outside the socius where production and distribution takes place – is really a limit of capitalism (D&G talk about relative limits…). This is the main contention that separates their position from a full-blown capitalist accelerationism (or unconditional accelerationism) that understands that decoding the flows is what capital itself is. In other words, the Oedipus is the difference between a capitalist and an anti-capitalist accelerationism (or left and right accelerationism…).
Silvia Federici’s book Caliban and the Witch offers, in my view, a compelling view of capitalism that is thoroughly anti-accelerationist (or, rather, non-accelerationism). Yet, the movement for wages for housework that she championed in the 1970s could be seen as an interesting accelerationist strategy against capitalism if we consider it with the idea that the Oedipus is the limit of capital in mind. The idea is to place the reproduction of labor back to the socius, back to the domain of capital. To do that, it is asked from capital (i.e. the bosses) that pay wages to women doing the reproduction work. That entails a decoder of flows – what was flowing within codes alien to capital becomes a flow of capital – but one that makes the capital extend beyond its limits – the Oedipus. It would enter family life and by doing that it would deterritorialize something that according to the Anti-Oedipus, it needs to keep in place. If families are decoded, there is nothing to assure capital’s concentric structure: it can flow and never come back. To be sure it is at least a strategy to derange the established structure of a structure for reproduction – the family – outside capital that is crucial for capitalism to maintain the limits that define it as an unchallenged territorial machine.” http://anarchai.blogspot.com/2018/05/accelerationism-and-wages-for-housework.html https://libcom.org/files/Caliban%20and%20the%20Witch.pdf