<nettime> networked.despotism (scene i)

[bc <human@electronetwork.org>]

(1) == Architecture of Networked.Despotism == (1)

the primary characters in this operatic performance:

A. narrator/sasquatch/bigfoot/architectural researcher

B. architectural educator/theorist/thinker/ambassador

  [disclaimer: this is to be assumed a work of fiction.
  all association with real or imaginary people, places,
  or events is totally coincidental. it is just a mirage.]

# AS A WORK OF NET.ART/ARCHITECTURE/THEORY,
# and so in the way of Tradition, this work can in no
# way be construed with any real, actual, or factual
# events. it is an OPERA. and these, its various scenes.
# THUS, this is a work to be interpreted as artwork,
# a myth if you will, if you wish it to be, and which
# might show archetypal characters during 'playtime.'
#
# this post is not written in literality, that is, direct
# correlation to what is seen. it is sublime. and being
# so, the audience is assumed to be able to interpret
# it within these limits. this Opera would not be now
# written if it was thought or believe to be any type
# of threat to the health or safety of others, beyond
# academic infighting. dealing with it, in house, so to
# speak, operatic. therefore, it is assumed that there
# are no connections to governments, industries, nor
# planned plots of social engineering, but rather the
# loss of agency in education, learning, and thinking.

	-= virtual stage setting =-

  oh, exposes, they are tedious notes of individual grandeur,
  a farse most likely, in the celebratory competition to rise
  to the top of Warhol's egoist mountain of commercial art,
  and yell, i exist, see me, hear me, i exist, then, in fatal
  consumption, mountain pushes you off the edge, joking at
  how fame can be so cruel, and people's lust and desire is
  equally so. that is one interpretation of life, liberty, and
  happiness, if one 'buys' the culture hook, line, and sinker.

  sometimes there are still Loch Ness monsters around, that
  do not fit the clean-cut, modernist Empire of 2000 years
  and growing, a final solution of totalitarian architecture,
  of thought, of action, of building a solid state of affairs.
  all you have to do, themepark-style, is pay for the ticket,
  enjoy the pre-programmed ride and its experiences, and
  never want to be let out, as it is so addictive, reality is.

  reality is a dirty word, compared to theory. so is morality.
  ethics. evil. good. all the rest of the old standards. we are
  well beyond that, it is said in chorus. we are beyond any
  type of reproach for our actions: We Are The Guardians!


	 -= critically wrong assumption =-

  as an individual human being, being somewhat like Big Foot
  aesthetically, or the Sasquatch, whatever one may judge
  another by their image, it has been a learning experience
  to realize how much judgement occurs via visualizations.
  via what is seen. it prejudges and predetermines situations,
  at times, a lot of prejudice can happen based on any prior
  experience to the negative. but when there is no easy way
  to deal with a situation, things get funny, out of control...
  there is no precedent, and the visual is incomprehensible
  to a certain way of seeing, through special industrialized
  modernist spectacles, they fog up, and doubt arises that
  an-other could even exist, as everything plays with the
  same rules in the pyramid game in operating systematic.

  empathy, it is hard to know that while one may disagree
  with another vehemently, they can still see things from
  their perspective, and understand why and how and for
  what reasons and rationales they make their decisions.
  sometimes, the ones inside opposite cloisters of mind
  cannot imagine, see, guess, trust, but only doubt that
  the other has good intentions, comes in peace, is about
  something else, and is doing the work it takes to make
  an effort towards those ends. instead, they can become
  the enemy. happens all the time. if a system is out of
  balance, things need to be brought back into balance.
  one way is war, another is change. one is inhumane in
  the extreme, the other is of peace and of new learning.
  one is about private interests and competition primarily,
  and another is also about public interests and cooperating.
  these things need to come together, into the fold at some
  point. hopefully others wish the same. yet, all efforts are
  made towards opposition, specialization, differentiation,
  multiplying the multiplicities of difference, dividing all
  of the houses of individual peoples, so that traditional
  architectures can strong-arm control over a situation,
  securing the homeland of mind, in a major offensive.
  that is, US and them. it is hoped nobody really wants
  this, as it is a predictable disaster. bad for everyone.
  yet, working in oppositions, is to work in warfaring.

  so, one might 'trust' a person in the working system,
  yet, find out that their agreed upon principles get the
  tables-turned on them, they become forced into ways
  of engaging that get more and more unbearable, and
  more and more absurd. insecurity is my guess, not
  knowing oneself, thus unable to trust anyone else.

  in any case, here's a tale from one serial break-fast:

	 -= architectural theory heroism =-

  once built a site about architectural research and theory.
  could not continue it as i lost all hope that anything in
  architecture will change. at the same time, was given
  an opportunity in the .eu to publish a work, based on an
  earlier thesis which is a bit more direct about Empire
  than the theorization of the aesthetics of camouflage:

  --> the architecture of electricity (y2k)
  http://www.electronetwork.org/works/ae/

  was asked to expand on this in writing. which i did. and
  while the state of California was having its electricity
  being turned on and off from many a power corporation,
  one of the notables being Enron. so i included this angle
  in the essay. and made some graphics to this effect, in
  mid-2001, and earlier, wrote about that company's odd
  election night TV commercials during the Presidential
  race for the national office which would guide futures.
  about that time i was having some odd things with my
  computer. i expanded the essay online, and that was a
  bit more to the point about the conflicts of interest
  between economics and energy and architecture, and
  the politics involved, being matter-of-fact and hope-
  fully not biased in presenting basic connections. of this
  effort, some maps came out, which showed architectural
  connections between the newly appointed President, and
  the industrial energy industry. Also, a connection to the
  work of Lewis Mumford who wrote extensively about
  the end-game of bureaucracy, and how this was quite
  accurate in its modeling of a future systemic evolution.

  the maps which i distributed to cryptome.org as a back-
  up, in case of getting hacked, are part of the 'Seeing
  Cyberspace' online project, and can be seen at the URLs:

  - Geopolitics of Cyberspace (~mid-2001)
  http://www.electronetwork.org/works/seeing/photos/diagrams/map2a.gif

  - The Inter-national Security State (~mid-2001)
http://www.electronetwork.org/works/seeing/photos/diagrams/map2b.gif

  The reasons these were sent to the US Government, to
  the press, to others, was that my computer was under
  attack. my website had eventually been altered, and a
  lot of odd stuff was happening, which ultimately became
  an autobiography, not of myself as a private person, but
  of one human individual trying to work on ideas that are
  in the public interest, and yet, like others, completely
  destroyed in their fantasia that such madness can occur.
  but, it was thought, anyone looking at the essay could at
  least see how an idea, the substance of the content, the
  intentions of the ideas, the public goals, harsh failures,
  and all the rest might show not that of one person, but
  a general futility, in that, like L. Mumford, things may
  have gone from one phase to another, where those very
  institutions humans had in the past set up, have now be-
  come the things the humans work for, adapt to, and not
  vice versa. meaning, the goals are those of a machine,
  automatism, at that, but without the humanity inside it.
  Lewis Mumford is not widely read. rebuffed in academics
  as it 'has already been tried'. and it is not something one
  may be in total agreement with (Communism as end-goal),
  but in its totality, it is a major philosophical work of great
  merit and insight and questioning, and awaits debate. yet it
  is worthless. and can be seen as a weapon, even, maybe.

  also, prior to this, a public announcement was online
  about 'mapping critical infrastructure', and so having
  made a multilinear map which is partly like a relational
  database, but sublimely different in its design, the URL
  of the map was sent to the US.gov agency, as it seemed
  to be for a purpose which would not harm, and is in basic
  principle with connecting the dots in complex systems if
  one thing starts failing, and to see how it spreads. the
  prototype was not advanced, but in any case, sent the
  URL, and after the electronetwork.org website had its
  page altered, an odd public announcement about mapping
  electrical infrastructures was sent out online, which
  said that governments do hack, and to be careful if one
  is doing such mapping, as it could be considered war.

  well, between this and Enron, it might be reasonable in
  some sense, that when all things bureaucratic are in total
  chaos (mail lost, bank accounts messed with, e-mail read,
  phone calls, etc etc) that the stupid hack of the website
  for electromagnetic research i was working on _might
  be related to these rather large and completely risky
  territories at those times, prior to the scandals. so as
  one might, it was presumed but not explicitly stated
  that the strange 'censoring' of the research was in some
  way done by one of these groups, shaking in boots scary.
  yet, the hack was absurd, non-political, and stupid. and
  it was always odd why it was what it was. didn't make
  any sense. and i still cannot say who did this to the site:

  --> the welcome hack / electronetwork log
  http://www.electronetwork.org/log/

  it is now possible, that this hack may not have been the
  work of the largest players in government and industry,
  but instead some merry prankster holdouts from the
  art-theory-architecture crowd. it is a possibility that
  is still unknown. and yet it could be a viable psychographic
  given experiences with a very sad group of networked
  artists, architects, and theorists who are in the back-
  ground, where this hack was a reprisal for questioning
  their theories in a public forum, or daring to do so. i am
  not sure. and do not understand. it is more to say that
  it is not clear it is 'them' and not 'us' who also need to
  do some house cleaning, before going to the table. yet,
  if people in academia exhibit absolute power and control
  over democratic ideals and freedom of thought, then it
  is to these people this post is written, as fair warning.

  it is very 'pyramid of power'-like, in that educators in
  the field can become authoritarians, and democracy, or
  free thought or inquiry, and truth even, a much farther
  secondary consideration rather than groups who hoard
  all of the resources available to thinking and questioning
  students who could and would and want to do something
  to make the world a better place. but there is a mental
  roadblock, pyscho-logical, in that it is win and lose and
  with a position of power, the teacher is always right,
  and with the book of theory (subjectivity par excellence)
  in their hands, they can refute the advancement of any-
  ideas that are not in their own heads, their own images,
  their own value systems. thus, a type of private despot
  can hold back public ideas, public thought, and action for
  our common issues, like global warming, or sustainability.
  they cannot do it easily in public forums, as they cannot
  debate such corruptions of thought. but they could work
  and destroy others works who challenge theirs instead.

  similar to this is Star Architecture, those who have
  all the 'right' answers to their own questions, their
  own theories, their own books, their own students,
  and positions of power in the pyramidal structure of
  disciplinarian punishment and pavlovian rewarding.

  this is where those who deal with architecture on the
  terms presented to them by the academics, within a
  limited amount of questioning, are allowed to proceed
  and also go to the head of the class, rise up, and then
  compete with the other stars, just like all the various
  brands of toothpastes which compete for marketshare.
  all about aesthetics, really. not grounded in any fact,
  that could be peer reviewed outside of the closed and
  self-reinforcing academic system, total architecture.

  Star Architects are the heroes of Global Architecture.
  they are the patriots of unfettered global capitalization.
  funny thing is, most of the lefty academics are the ones
  who produce these peoples, and glorify them and include
  them in their work, it is easy to see, they make stuff
  overly complex, hard to understand, is assumed in some
  serious way as meaningful, and yet, it is a private club.

  and as long as they let you in, you're part of it, at the
  same time as you are being consumed for connecting
  to their liquidity, to their naive ideologies, and to a
  political philosophy that is as dangerous as it is crazy.
  and it is the followers of these people, as an academic
  cult/ure, that do their dirty work, taking out anything
  that challenges them on their own ground.  the Stars
  are otherwise not to be found, but hiding in Big Media.

  this seems off track. but please bear with this context,
  as it will enable a fuller explication to take place in time.

  -= Ambassador of Establishment Architecture =-

  having made notice that my interest was no longer in
  pursuing architecture, as it was futile, mentioned on
  the design-list for art and architecture, volunteers
  were requested and someone who had great interest
  over the years in the goals came forward and i trusted
  that this person had the drive and understood what the
  purpose of such a project is, that it felt to be a good
  decision, even though there was problems dealing with
  this person, which one might chalk up to cultural mis-
  understanding or miscommunication. sure enough, they
  came from another continent, not the .eu, but they did
  present themselves as deeply embedded in the circles
  of all things architecture, in the .eu and beyond. they
  had great goals, multi-lingual site, etc. and i agreed
  to help in the transition. yet, at very precise moments
  of extreme pressure, as described in the AutoMadness
  autobiography, this person would do the exact opposite
  of what was agreed upon. the very day arriving in an-
  other country looking for work, a future basically, it
  was this person who would create chaos regarding
  this project. they would keep my old e-mail address
  from the old architectural website, and forward posts
  to me, saying they could not shut it down, although being
  experts and in self-proclamation: 'i'm a hacker' as was
  said to me with great glee and hubris. funny thing is, it
  was i who was getting hacked. but not successfully so.

  so all of the sudden this persona comes to the bay City
  from across an ocean or two, and i tell them things are
  bad, that my work is getting screwed around with, and
  i am concerned. near the day this person arrived, there
  was a 'white collar crime' division at my website. in the
  near temporal proximity, a $1,000 US was put into my
  bank account by unknowns, which i had to deal with. hang
  up calls, the usual. funny things eventually happened
  during this visit which popped up later, after they left.
  problems with an online purchase that architect later
  knew about by reading private e-mail, and forwarding
  it to a public list as a way to discredit public work.

  well, at the same time, this person was accusing me
  of lying in public forums about what they wrote to me,
  said i forged headers on e-mails to make them look as
  if they was lying, would play various people against one
  another to wreak havoc in public and private forums,
  and all the while when in public would be sophisticated,
  unscathed, above-it-all, while doing backroom agitation.

  this person met with me while i was working at a large
  University in the City. i was working for them when
  the architectural person was in town. they came to the
  conference on wireless technology, which, whose web-
  site page was hacked/cracked the morning of the event.

  it was strange, as my computer at home was being
  attacked and i had no idea by who, could only guess,
  yet it seemed that there is no way that the same people
  would hack the University's conference. it must be some
  different people. the people at the school did not want to
  believe it, yet it was reasonably a hack, as a page was
  altered to load in an old/outdated wireless protocol. this
  very person, this architect, EDUCATOR at Universities,
  who i told (probably frantically, in stress) that the
  conference's page had been hacked said something to
  the effect: "Don't worry about it (with a smile)." and
  then either, "I know who it is" or "I know people who
  know who it is" and said he could ask them to stop. and
  all the while, being stuck in a conundrum, wondering if
  the events going on at home (Enron/US Energy Policy
  prior to those issues becoming public) and the University
  being manipulated were related or separate events, i.e.
  done by the same people, or different people. one group
  The Architect stated they knew of with certain surety.

  -= hacking and cracking Architectural Ideologies =-

  don't know about others, but when someone is messing
  around with my employer's website, which i maintained
  and yet knowing there are other, bigger fish out there,
  it is a difficult position. ultimately, whatever happened,
  it was upsetting. primarily because of loyalty to those
  who helped me stay afloat in very turbulent times, and
  secondarily, the morality behind hacking an educational
  seminar and its website.  add all this up, and it became
  a bit too scary, at work, at home, in the way of stress.
  shut me up. but prior to this, in retrospect, something
  of a tidbit offers additional threads of mystery to it all.

  one side was with the collapse of Enron. not to imply any
  of my work had anything to do with that, but very scary.
  at the same time knew it was bad, but to see how bad, is,
  well, it may be too difficult for the media to look into it.

  on the other side of things, an Architectural Ambassador,
  who began to try controlling me after an attempt to re-
  instate a private egoism, which one loses when outside
  of the established cult/ure of architecture. i trusted this
  person although they were very difficult to take, and it
  was done for the good of open-sourcing architectural
  ideas. else, if that was not the aim, and will die on its
  own as an aesthetic idea, as it is not what it says it is,
  it is only a window dressing for another agenda.

  that is, aesthetics are facades. visualizing of a belief.
  so, assuming the best, gave the project over to this
  architect, the domain, which i paid for as a subsidy
  to keep the project online while waiting for a handoff,
  so it could be rebuilt. and then i wanted out. was in
  turn offered money, a weekly salary to make it into
  a viable commercial site. was offered dreams of
  being in europe, being able to discuss architecture,
  a thing i have not been able to do offline forever
  in the USA as my work is shut out of the system of
  established ideas about modernist architecturality.

  was told of the romance of the 'bum' architecture
  students in europe, how they are looked upon by
  others in a romantic light, and transitory. and
  was told how i was the domain, the website, the
  project. i was the institution. the website, the
  thing could not continue without me. it was all
  and only about me. i had the power. i was in no
  uncertain terms a celebrity online, like it or not
  this person said, in so many words. and that i
  could use that, it would be foolish if i didn't, for
  it is integral to my future career in architecture.

  only problem being, i do not want a future career
  in architecture as it now is. i reject it, dissent it,
  and seek to dismantle those who prop up its sadly
  meaningless structure of power over ideas. it has
  to go. my reply to all of the praise of the project
  was that i am not an institution, the ideas are
  what matters, the content, the meaning, it is all
  about ideas, an opening up of architectural-ideas,
  and i am equal with others, it is not about me, etc.
  it is about change. which i no longer believe can or
  will happen in architecture, the way it remains.

  at this time, i was also told that my work was read
  by people in 'significant positions' in the .eu scene
  of architectural theory and practitioners. names-
  were-dropping as if glasses of dollar champagne.
  that is, the Architecture of Electricity thesis. on
  one of these events, discussion went something
  similar but not exactly like this, give or take:

  Theorist: "V________ has read your work."

  Researcher: "really?... what'd (V) think?"

  Theorist: "it is not there yet."

  Researcher: "what?"

  Theorist: "V________  said it isn't good enough."

  Theorist: (may have said (V) said it needs to be re-
  written/reworked. and-or it was not understood.)

  Researcher:  "fuck V________. tell (V) to read it again.
  (V) doesn't know what (V) is talking about. if (V) doesn't
  understand it, have (V) read it again. it is written for a child.

  Theorist: "You'd need experts to prove everything. like,
  a nuclear physicist.

  Researcher: "bullshit. these are basic ideas, facts, that
  anyone could reason with. but fine, get a particle physicist
  and they will tell you this" (may have said something like,
  how simple the science in the thesis is, or how ludicrous
  an idea this is, but fine.)

  Researcher: "fine, get all the experts you want, and all
  the architectural theorists you know up on a public stage,
  and i will debate them on each point of the thesis." (it is
  meant to be done that way, anyways. although theorists
  in architecture have refuted the idea of a public forum).

  Theorist: "it (the idea) has already been done before."

  Researcher: "exactly."

  Theorist: "there is nothing new in it."

  Researcher: "what do you mean? it is all new, there is not
  one book on the subject. (positing the electrical infrastructure
  as a new architectural order in the environment.)"

  Theorist: (forget what led to this response, as follows)

  Researcher: "this is different in that it relates technology
  to the beginning of architecture, as modernism did ((with
  Le Corbusier, who this person is an expert and collector
  of their works).  it can be the (holy grail of) architecture
  (hacking and cracking the idea of architecture, present to
  ancient past, finding continuity in today's built environment.))

Theorist: 'a lot of people want to help you but don't know how'

  Researcher: 'i have not met anyone. they have not contacted me.'

  that was an equivalent sample of the conversation, if it could
  be called that. heated exchange would be better said. as the
  pompous egotism is hard to bear in any realm, but especially
  if one is insulted by it when they are already knocked down.


-= freely handing over the public codebook =-

  with a third party as witness, the open-source architecture
  was handed over, no monetary connections, and with one
  condition on my part: friendship comes first. all else does
  not matter and will not work without it. this, to me, meant
  that no matter what the troubles, that things need to be on
  good terms to work, and this is what is of highest value.

  well, sad sappy person (United Statesian, as i was instructed
  to say, politically corrected), i trusted the person, and wanted
  to believe the best in their intentions. but, as time went on,
  little disturbances would happen, prior and after our meeting,
  which made me question my helping this website transition but
  still kept with it, so as to leave it on good terms, and let go.

  ultimately, blame was placed on me for trying to control the
  project, which was unfounded (wanted nothing to do with it,
  as i am uninterested in the games of architectural academics),
  and at the same time, hearing remarks from the Architect in
  private e-mails about (despicable social positions) from the
  inclusion of others into the new clubhouse. it can cause the
  brain to twist, when so near to greed, lying, and cheating.

  so, instead of taking the project offline, which would have been
  fine with me, i wanted to help it become their work, the ideas
  to be freed, and yet, when it was their work, and it was under
  their control, their authority, their power, their name, they
  now have blamed me for plotting to destroy it to make them
  look bad, to delegitimize me and my intentions, as if i had an
  ulterior motive. for anyone who has met me, and this person,
  i ask you, whose words do you trust... friendship was the
  first thing that is of value, it was the first thing to go, and
  like they said: do not give gifts to humanity. their motto.

  well, to demonstrate my ignorance in human nature, this
  person who took on the project, and for which i was glad
  to help move it forward, was the 2nd person my the C.V.
  i sent along with a grant application for my new research
  on electromagnetism and education. i knew in advance that
  they saw nothing of value in my own work, they as much
  said so, but were excited about the architectural project,
  and at that point, it seemed like a questionable choice, but
  worth it, as a public library of architectural texts can be
  a good thing for some, and it was both in thanks and also
  in regonition that someone else found value in such work.

  the Architect has now threatened to sue me with their
  lawyers should i continue this. they are not poor. they
  are cosmopolitan. they are said, or say of themselves,
  to be well-known with big-name architects like J.N. and
  others from France, and beyond. this person is not a bad
  person. very nice, in some ways. yet, their agenda is
  different than how they presented themselves, and as
  such, have agitated and sabotaged my work, it an effort
  to control what i can and cannot do in architectural, and
  also in academia, a type of privatized authoritarianism
  and its connections to other such actions, a network of it.

  this person is very talented. a good person. the point is,
  this person also is an ambassador of the old order and
  its seek and destroy mission, unless one submits, all
  the while they praise and preach the word of Theorists,
  while seeking to delegitimize any questioning of their
  work or intentions or the work in the books they hold,
  classes they teach. it is a common situation in academia.

  a very talented person, yet in a position of power, as
  a political operative, as dangerous as they come. talk
  was of another theory book, to put the newest and latest
  ideas in the pyramid to keep things rolling along as usual.
  but the final end is a closed system where they control
  outcomes, and these people are not good representatives.
  they are from the old, industrial, manufacturing era. of
  big money, big power, big media, big egos, and big bubbles.
  it may have been Empire, that i was unaware of at the
  time, and yet, it is the reason i write this, as it is this
  type of theorization of politics which, when used with
  the same tactics by established academicians, can turn
  into mechanisms to stop all thought, and purge the ranks.

  all of this chaos has spilled over into the internetwork,
  and to show a bit of what is at stake, i am prepared and
  may very likely lose my chance at an opportunity to work
  on public ideas, while this person and others, may have not
  intended this to happen, but as a result, it may indeed be
  that these public ideas do not happen as a result of this
  attempt to question the motives behind academia today.

  i would rather risk my future, and deal with what is now
  before me, and lose later on, than wait, be safe, and play
  to the tune of whoever is pulling the strings. as it must
  stop for peaceful change to happen. and if it does not, well,
  i would rather have tried to do something about it, and i
  would rather suffer misery and have tried than looked the
  other way and denied any ability to change the course of
  events, and, if enough were to do so, our common future.

  thus, these words may seem uncouth, unsophicated, out-
  side of protocol, yet at the same time, i would rather be
  using my freedom and taking whatever humiliation is to
  be thrown back, than to sit back and pretend this dirty-
  trickery is really not happening, as one could easily
  theorize is so, if they were that delusional as to believe
  their own bullshit, as the saying goes. still, i do doubt
  my reasoning, up to a point. and at that point is where
  i am writing. i try not to write about what i do not know.
  it is disastrous. but if one knows something, and may be
  able to state something is going on, in a way that aids in
  the transformation, even if some people are uncomfortable
  for a moment and may believe they are immune from life's
  pettier problems, well, this is especially written for those
  who feel these words are beneath their professional consi-
  deration, judged, a priori, as being heretically profane.]

  		~*~

  all of this has been written to provide the context for the
  following ethical issues that remain before me this day:

  - non-architectural research website hacked
  - university website hacked during seminar

  IT needs to be mentioned:

  - architect is a human being
  - architect is an admirable person overall
  - architect was generous in their efforts
  - architect made special care to take on public project
  - architect is very imaginative, creative, talented
  - architect is doing unique and innovative works
  - architect is respected, but is not to be trusted
  - architecture theory is to be questioned, not presumed true


  YET, it is also true that:

  - architect deceitful, actively tries to discredit work
  - architect connected with university education system
  - architect connected with architectural establishment
  - architect agitated, disrupted, & lied at precise times
  - architect is theorist who travels the theory circuit
  - architect presents self as friend of star architects
  - architect presents their self as a computer hacker
  - architect replaced public agenda w/private agenda
  - architect is opaque, not transparent, in their purpose
  - architect manipulates and plays people off one another
  - architect is inconsistent in public & private interactions
  - architect denied responsibility for new public project
  - architect threatened to sue should this be advanced
  - architect used open-source as a ploy for proprietization
  - architect controls open architectural theory directory
  - architect offered to host sasquatches work for free
  - architect insults open source supporters of new research

   		~*~

  Operative ETHICAL/MORAL/LEGAL POINTs being:

  > academics knows of private hacking of other academies
  > academic seeks to control, or destroy, public work
  > academic could plays dirty tricks, but is untouchable
  > academic is teacher, whose thought is beyond question
  > academic promotes theorists so to promote this gaming
  > academic puts private interests aheead of public good

  		~*~

  if an academic, a teacher, a professional, is said to
  know others who are 'playing' games with others in
  academic systems, without their knowledge, in a type
  of background competition of the 'old ____ network',
  so to speak, and this passes into the realm of being
  illegal, and yet, only a joke, yet real damage is done:

  where is the line drawn in the sand, between what is
  deemed moral, ethical, or even true for that matter,
  if no one is held responsible for their actions or deeds?
  nor if this only happens in privatized space, not public?

  [such as, thinkers who know of others who are hacking
  at other thinkers work. doing the same to universities.
  and trying to control what is said, and how it is said,
  online. yet, it is non-descriptive in that it could be most
  any architect from a certain entrenched ideology. one of
  modernist industrial models of production & consumption.
  it is in its connections to art and theory that these dis-
  parate events take an unusual turn, not only architects,
  but to add this net.architect, to a net.artist, and net.
  theorists, and to see what EDUCATORs are doing today.
  of what they may be trying to keep from happening. this
  architect could be anyone, or no one in particular, but
  a type, a typology created by the educational system
  in an attempt to keep the net.despots in total control...]

  		~*~

  'automated madness vs humanity' said the sasquatch.

  [END of scene one of Opera of Networked.Despotism]

  for background information on this stageset see:
  http://www.electronetwork.org/works/automadness/

Opera of Networked.Despostism, copyright 2002.
public academic use only, intended for peer review.

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net