Re: <nettime> Complexity and nostalgia

[Alice Yang <alice.lan.yang@gmail.com>]

I cannot believe (but can believe) that the discussion has become a typical one of ~Millennials and Gen Z need to grow up already!~ Alexander, your claim that the class oppressed need to study white male academics whose works are only kept in circulation by an echo chamber of elitism such as Hegel and Freud is bewildering.

I’m in favor of the questions Dan posed. We need to redefine class as not separate from race and gender but another component of belief entangled with it. 

The revolution isn’t the redistribution of resources (land, money, women) for reownership but the realization of their condition of ownership by the objects themselves (climate change, decolonization, feminism).

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 3, 2018, at 10:10 AM, Felix Stalder <felix@openflows.com> wrote:
> 
> I cannot believe we are still debating "class vs. identity". If you look
> at the current wave of far-right strong mean, it's seems obvious their
> project is the restoration of race AND class privilege AND patriarchy.
> 
> Behind this, in my view, is a jump in social complexity (globalization,
> Internet, climate crises, multipolar geopolitics etc) over the last 30
> years and the inability to find forms of governance adequate to
> contemporary social realities.
> 
> The neoliberal center has tried to manage this through expansion of
> market forces, in the best Hayekian tradition seeing the market as the
> ultimate information processor [1]. At the periphery (social as well as
> geographic) this never worked particularly well and in 2008, it came
> crashing down in the center as well. That created a giant nostalgia for
> a less complex word which the right eagerly fills.
> 
> In my view, the call to return to a more classic class analysis also has
> the whiff of such a nostalgia.
> 
> We -- lets say cultural producers of any kind -- should not give in to
> this. Our task, in my view, is to develop new languages, and new
> esthetics, to account for, and deal with, the sharply increased
> complexity. That means, that there is no single privileged point-of-view
> or layer of analysis. If there is any strength, it will come out of
> multiplicity, out of ways of translating one set of explicit experiences
> into another one, showing that how and why resonate with each other.
> 
> That's not all that's needed, of course, but might be one of the ways
> where culture can generate agency.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [1] Hayek, Friedrich A. 1945. “The Use of Knowledge in Society,”
> American Economic Review (Sept.), 35 (4): 519–30.
> 
> 
> #  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: nettime@kein.org
> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
#  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: nettime@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: