Alex Foti on Sat, 17 Oct 2015 16:53:59 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: <nettime> McKenzie Wark: Birth of Thanaticism |
blown away by this piece. i usually favor the term fossil capitalism, because similarly to mandel-jameson's late capitalism somehow hopes to consign it to a primitive past. in my mind (since 'inside out' a pop metaphor) two people fight for audience in the assembly of the self, the rational progressive who thinks that if we get done with neoliberalism we can recombine social production, market production, government production in a climate-neutral and fairer, empowering way (for instance, for all BP's nefariousness, there's major investment out of fossil and into solar), and the 1999-2011 insurrectionary black hoodie, who hates the state and the corporation in her/his bones and only returns fully human when congregating with similarly riot-prone, post-civilizational anonymous anarchists, steampunkers, genderbenders, guerrilla garderners, u catch the drift. btw are you reading POSTCAPITALISM by mason? like in klein, there's usually a subtle conflation between overthrowing neoliberalism (which we haven't yet managed to do, although the hegemony of elites is no longer there thanks to 2008 and 2011) and outlasting capitalism. Politically, i think today there's a popular majority in advanced capitalism to shelve neoliberal austerity cum financialization and end thanaticist subsidies to Big Carbon. I mean if old glories like sanders and corbyn can be standard-bearers of social populism in the heartlands of market conservatism, then there's hope for socioecoqueer political change all over the place, no matter the superstructures of $/[EU] banking and international monetary arrangements. However, civilizationally, it's not hard to be struck by the bleakness of our predicament as the human species. Just before reading this article by mckenzie wark, by coincidence i read on new scientist this truly review of thackara by Bruce Sterling (which stands as an essay in its own right): ARE WE WORTHY? Before 2008, "next economy" books were a dime a dozen. They've been thin on the ground lately, but John Thackara has just published one of a decidedly different bent. An incessant traveller, thoughtful listener and the former "symposiarch" of the legendary Doors of Perception events of the 1990s, Thackara is a beloved figure in sustainable-design circles. A guru of labs and think tanks worldwide, he is painfully aware of the crises facing the world in 2015. Most new-economics gurus would crassly motivate their readers to get rich quick online. By contrast, in How to Thrive in the Next Economy, Thackara tackles our planet's most basic survival topics -- preserving soil from erosion, supplying clean water and keeping people sheltered, fed, healthy and mobile. There's a light dusting of digital here, but for the most part, the author sternly confronts every major environmental issue that has worsened in his lifetime. As Earth's situation gets more perilous, we don't wise up and reform, we just embrace our myths ever more tightly. So Thackara sees little promise in political solutions. Likewise, private enterprise cannot do much because it is laced into a fatal straitjacket of optimising return on investment, even if that means levelling forests and blackening skies. As Earth's situation gets more perilous, we don't reform, we just embrace our myths more tightly" Thackara's inconvenient mathematics expose our planet's decline, but despite his ill-concealed dread he stoutly refuses to "head for the hills with a truckload of guns and peanut butter". That prospect obviously tempts him, but a guru should not become a doomsayer and abandon the world. Somehow, humans must "thrive", although by Thackara's reckoning, thrive means surviving with about 5 per cent of the energy and resources most Westerners avidly consume. It's hard to talk rich, heavily armed people into sacrificing 95 per cent of everything they have grabbed, but Thackara thinks that it is necessary, physically possible and a praiseworthy moral effort. His book is full of examples of people who already manage such a pared-down life: Lagos kiosk traders, Indian jugaad tinkerers, Central American cooperative farmers, Danish bike sharers and the like. These marginal, sociable groups seem obscure and humble, mostly because they tend to avoid the focused, malignant attention of governments and markets. So, argues Thackara, if these ingenious refuseniks haven't been methodically crushed by our dominant, ill-conceived legal and financial systems, others might indeed thrive, or at least do better by copying their thrifty ways. In my own wanderings, I have also encountered under-the-radar activist groups, such as Brazilian Gambiologia tech-art hackers and Serbian pirate street-marketeers. So I share Thackara's awareness that "material poverty" is a relative thing. If you've got a few thousand calories along with a dry spot to sleep, a backpacker's simplicity is not as bad as bankers would have you believe. In fact, I'm quite a fan of Thackara's bonhomie, ingenuity and can-do designer abilities; if the two of us were marooned on a desert island, I bet we would have a rather jolly time of it. However, as Henry David Thoreau found out beside Walden Pond, the worst problem with noble simplicity isn't the lack of cash, status and shiny appliances. It's the monotony. Even if this "thriving" life is doable, where's the aspiration, the ambition, the raw possibility? They've all been trimmed back by 95 per cent, because bold swagger and transformational technology will no longer do on the wounded surface of our fragile planet. Anyone reading Thackara's book will certainly get a much improved idea about what genuine 21st-century mass poverty will look like. It will be crowded, chatty and socially networked, yet still very poor, and with no ladders upward. It will also be very threatened, because any angry gang of mountain bandits with Toyota trucks and machine guns could easily conquer a peaceable eco-village co-op. As for states and markets, their power and malignity isn't withering away, it's intensifying. The radical niche and attic life Thackara is describing here is being crushed by most powers that be rather than ignored or encouraged, much less allowed to sweep over us in a vast wave of profound transformation. Frankly I wonder whether humans deserve a position in a thriving economy. Given our résumé as a species, who would hire us? Any wise, sceptical alien would notice that plankton, grass, ants and termites all do a much better job at saving Earth than humans. If we raucous anthropoids really want to save a planet, we should probably try to upgrade Mars or Venus, low-rent planets that we weren't born on. If we could sit still in our rooms like coral polyps, we wouldn't be killing the coral reefs. But we are killing them, and troubled spirits like ourselves will never rest content with what we ought or ought not to do. This book is a thoughtful plan for a better and very different world, but it's one that we don't deserve, can't have and won't get. So how is the bios vs thanatos class struggle gonna play out? my question to you, dear net-timers. luv n rev lx On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 3:59 AM, Brian Holmes <[1][email protected]> wrote: Well, 20 years after the Californian Ideology, at least we have three good concpets: -thanaticism -the inhumanities -the antisocial sciences Like a good cyber-communist, I'm just gonna put 'em in my bag and use 'em. thanks, BH <...>
# 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: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [email protected]