integer on 4 Dec 2000 18:02:35 -0000 |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
[Nettime-bold] <nettime> Fw: Enemies of the Future |
uuuuu - [email protected] = m9nd aktivity on nettime. unlike the simply INFERIOR + ultra outdated gov fascist marioneta - [email protected] http://eusocial.com/nato.0+55+3d/242.055.propaganda.html#00 am!klmnt.nn pre.konssept!�n meeTz ver!f1kat!�n. - Netochka Nezvanova - dze futur = needz 01 or!g!n. f3.MASCHIN3NKUNST - romanticism = 01 kolonial disease @www.eusocial.com 17.hzV.tRL.478 e | | +---------- | | < \\----------------+ | n2t | > e >Geert: > >> I hope you did not lose all your assets, Mark. > >Fear not . . . I've been in cash and collectibles for quite a while now. > >I am looking to fund some real breakthrough NEW MEDIA technologies, however. >Got any? <g> > >> And I am curious what you thought of your 1996 prediction >> that Al Gore was going to become US president, eliminate >> democracy and install some kind of HG Wells regime. >> Zero Growth after the Long Boom? Do you look back on >> own your future predictions? > >Ah, yes, I do look back . . . I do, I do . . . oh, yes . . . > >As I recall, the speech that I gave at MetaForum III in Budapest in 1996 was >about the possibility of a Crash scenario . . . which I still find much more >likely than a Boom-er, long or otherwise. <g> > >And, if memory serves, I was concerned way back then -- in that distant >century -- about the possiblity for a Gore election and for what it might >mean for a shift towards a substitution of "opinion-polling" for the present >systme of voting for representatives. Or, if you like, a substitution of >"hyper-democracy" for the current "republican" form of government in the U.S. >and elsewhere. > >'Sfair to say that I still have that concern. > >Hillary Clinton's (Gore's alterego) call for abolishing the Electoral College >and the widespread advocacy for "hyper-democratic" voting mechanisms should >probably be seen as threads in that still-unfolding tapestry. > >And, yes, Gore's anti-national-sovereignty foreign policy bias still appears >to me to be borrowed largely from Wells' 1928 "The Open Conspiracy" . . . >which, as you recall, pointed towards a "World State" which would be >administered by multi-national corporations . . . "who" as a result of the >widespread acceptance of international "Human Rights" conventions would be >considered as "virtual" individuals and, therefore, extremely difficult >(okay, impossible) to bring to justice. > >Regarding "Enemies . . .," you ask -- > >> The question should be: Has the power of American >> corporations fallen with 50%? I don't think so. > >Of course not. But, to identify these multinationals as "American" seems to >miss the point, doesn't it? They are what they are precisely because they >have no specific "nationality." They are ABOVE governments. > >And, to focus on their DOT.commie-ness is getting to be a very stale joke. >That's all. > >Just like in the time of H.G. Wells, the important MULTIS tend to go in for >the HARD stuff of oil, minerals, food and chemicals. Like the Imperial >Chemical of Sir Alfred Mond (the model for Wells in "The Open Conspiracy" and >for Aldous Huxley's counter-thrust "Brave New World") or the Phelps-Dodge >(think Copper Cartel) of Wells' illustrious U.S. counterpart, "Bucky" Fuller. > >In economic terms we now live under conditions of what should probably be >called Global FASCISM (of the "Friendly" variety or what Wells called >"liberal fascism"), where the mulitnational heirs to I.G. Farben now >effectively dominate geo-politics . . . with the gratious assistance of >numerous "left" and "socialist" governments . . . and a rainbow coalition of >PoGOs to boot. > >Alas, and there really isn't anything that any "alternative culture" is >likely to do about it either. <g> > >Best, > >Mark Stahlman >New York City _______________________________________________ Nettime-bold mailing list [email protected] http://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold