thanks for this
interesting discussion to everyone, I think a crux is to look at
altermodern epistemologies and systems of knowledge – and the
(political) question is how to (finally) acknowledge and federate these
to the planetary political. – this can be spelled out in terms of
'post-humanism' (though one always should be aware of the
SiliconValley/Accellerationist attempt to capture this imaginative
trajectory, I think), it can also be thought of along other lines of
'altermodernity', of 'de-colonialism', 'cognitive justice' etc etc. in
all of this, I think the very notions of 'knowledge' and 'discourse'
need to change; and as to 'voices' (and the implied idea of raionality):
an issue brought to the fore by all the above mentioned discourses (as
well as other recent ones; think: embodiment; new materialism; social
semiotics etc.) is that *language* (in the Western/rationalist sense) as
sole or master modality / measure of knowledge and discourse does no
longer hold it – if it ever has. I think, the whole new resurgence in
aesthetics (or, I would say with Merlea-Ponty and others, aesthesiology)
is all about that. (btw. and randomly talking in Guattarian parlance:
one prbobably will encounter the whole idea of asemiotics and other
paradigms challenging traditional ideas of 'language representation'
here once again). generally, I think visiting any of the current
art-related exhibitions, conferences etc around Anthropocene and
'post-humanism' gives examples in abundance of the search for one thing:
new modes, modalities and medialities of knowledge, experience,
communication, understanding, 'reading', rationality etc. of
course to unsettle the strong anthropo-cenric (colonial,
subsumptive,...) tradition of discourse and politics (and giants like
Habermas and others) it is crucial to spell all of this out in terms of
political processes. starting with acknowledging 'non-european'
(non-industrial) knowledges and forms of discourse (not last
'aboriginal', 'indigenous' and other 'minoritarian' (Guattari) systems
would be a starting point. (note that this is not part of any *serious*
official discourse on the anthropocenic political crisis we are seeing
nowadways every day in the 8´clock news). thus, cherishing Seans
whole theory + politics tracetory, I would be equally inerested in other
voices from the list in regards to such central quesions. David Garcia
in particular worked a lot recently on knowledge and the constitution of
social politics. a lot of others work on 'how to listen to mountains,
bees, and morasses' – e.g. the whole sub-discourse on techno-shamanism
plus some others. people working on new dialogues with indigenous and
other sidelined knowledge communities should also be on this list... ...
I´d sincerely like to hear from them on this question, as it´s a HUGE
*question* for us all... ... some pointers in the meantime that I
can find in my quick drawer on how to listen/talk to mountains, stones
and oceans: • Land as pedagogy: Nishnaabeg intelligence and
rebellious transformation, Leanne Betasamosake Simpson :
https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/des/article/view/22170•
Surfing the Semiosphere: Encounter in Kilpisjärvi, Judith van der Elst :
http://artjournal.collegeart.org/?page_id=11202• articles by Tyson
Yunkaporta (from Muck Rack) - on things like 'Sand Talk: How Indigenous
Thinking Can Save the World', 'Indigenous Science: Water knowledge
systems', 'Lessons from stone - Indigenous thinking and the Law' :
https://muckrack.com/tyson-yunkaporta/articlesbest to all oliver
25.
November 2020 um 10:56 Sean, Brian,
others, thank you for the interesting and engaging
contributions. (Some of it gets a bit cryptic since it refers to
political discourses that are not immediately apparent, at least to this
reader, but that's generally OK for a most-of-the-time lurker.)
Sean Cubitt wrote (Nov 24, 2020 at 3:53 PM):
> Any 21st century politics has to be formed by an alliance
of the
> excluded - human, ecological and - I would add, though it
needs a
> longer argument - technological.
I wonder whether you could expand on this a bit; I understand the
argument (I don't know whether you would call it posthumanist, for lack
of a better word I would), but i cannot get my head around the idea how
the anthropo-logical systems of political representation, of governance,
could be transformed into systems that would encompass nonhuman beings,
incl. technological, as equals.
You are imputing that all of the following: women, ex-slaves,
migrants,
oceans, mountains, [technics], are all "excluded" in a way that can be
overcome. I would maintain that what may have been unthinkable for some
people in some places in some past (that women, ex-slaves, migrants
would have a say in how they are governed), is of a different order, not
only because it relates to the way in which humans treat other humans
(thus an intra-anthropological issue), but because these once excluded
individuals and groups can speak for themselves in a human language.
I agree that all humans must factor the oceans, mountains, trees,
etc.,
into the way they live on the Earth (some do), and I also agree that
capitalism systematically treats these as cheap or free resources. (But
maybe it is not only capitalism, but homo sapiens in general? What has
brought about and sustained the non-nature-exploitative civilisations?)
But I wonder what the "voice" of the oceans, mountains, trees is
going
to be. Will that "voice" be the storms, the droughts, the fires? Or will
it be the voice of human scientists (some of whom search for the
sentience of trees and stones, while others support geo-engineering, and
yet others look for the next site for open pit mining)?
And then there is the question of how the "technological" is brought
into the alliance of the excluded...
Regards,
-a
# 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]
# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
25.
November 2020 um 01:19
War: is already the de facto result of climate change in what used to be
the Fertile Crescent. Trump damn near made it an issue of war on the
Mexican border. If Australia wasn't a federation, its states would be at
war over the selling off of the Murray Darling
river system's water. And the pyrocene is entrenched in Australia.
There used to be a sour joke: There are Irish nationalists, Welsh
Nationalists, Scottish nationalists and... English Greens. Like
anarcho-fascists (Dominic Cummings, late of Downing Street, was just
such a right-wing situationist), green-nationalists are equally
revanchist.
Crutzen and Stoermer closed their 2000 proposal for the term
'Anthropocene' thus:
'An exciting, but also difficult and daunting task lies
ahead of the global research and engineering community to guide mankind
towards global, sustainable, environmental management'
Geoengineering by a class of scientists (shades of HG
Wells' Shape of Things to Come') may be as risky as scientists running
nuclear programs. Tho maybe Wells also had something smart
behind his aeronautical Übermenschen - world government. There's a good
history of the UN that uses the Victorian poet Tenison's lofty vision
of The Parliament of Man for its title - the gender is clearly out; but
so is the speciesism. Rancière argues that
politics occurs when the excluded demand a part in their governance - a
demand that changes government permanently (as women and ex-slaves have
done already). It is unthinkable that oceans and mountains should have a
seat in government, just as it was unthinkable
for women - and still is unthinkable for migrants - to have a say in
how they are governed. The unthinkable has to be thought.
Eco-socialism yes - but only if the 'social' is rethought -
and re-practiced - no longer exclusively as human: The Commons is a
better phrase, common land, general intellect (including
those forms it takes when congealed into machines and infrastructures).
We could start with that absurd contradiction 'intellectual property' -
commons as peer-to-peer ecology/economy may start from undoing at least
property as core concept of western Enlightenment.
That this implies undoing the 'proper' as the principle of
individualism is one way to recognise where anarchism belongs to capital
and when it doesn't
Think local, act global
s
| UoM notice: External email. Be cautious of links,
attachments, or impersonation attempts |
On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 3:53 PM Sean Cubitt < [email protected]>
wrote:
Nationalism builds on the other great crisis of our times, migration.
Post-nationalism means opening borders. Only that way will the wealthy
learn that removing the causes of migration - war, pandemic, climate
change, colonialism - is the only way to survive
(unless of course you're one of the billionaire class)
This is for certain, because the only alternative to opening
borders - and at the same time, engaging in co-development strategies
that allow some people, at least, to remain where they are - is war
plain and simple. Climate change is going to translate
into burnt crops, forced migration and war long before rising seas
drive people out of lower Manhattan. And state collapse induced by
neoliberalism will do the same. The current political economy is a
vicious circle getting worse, 2020 has sure made that clear!
Any 21st century politics has to be formed
by an alliance of the excluded - human, ecological and - I would add,
though it needs a longer argument - technological
The question I have, is how to build an effective alliance of the
excluded, one that does not become a wrecking ball in its own right?
A lot of anarchism is now doing the work of neoliberalism, it's
heavily nihilistic. Autonomism itself was an uneasy fusion,
anarcho-communism, but the communist part was gradually reduced to a
kind of fantasy for intellectuals whose real politics were
anarchist by default - not their own default, but because every attempt
to construct a state-for-the-multitudes was foreclosed. In the absence
of a constructive principle you get alienated people looking to
accelerate the breakdown, on both right and left
btw. The US is rampant with that kind of accelerationist now - in fact,
on the extreme right they describe themselves with that exact word.
I think we need an eco-state. I mean a form of social coordination
that doesn't precipitate collapse, but protects against, reverses the
trends, allows human and ecological healing. Of course you can imagine
an eco-state in an authoritarian vein, because
that's where China is going. Rana Dasgupta surely sees it differently -
I'm looking forward to read that text - but I see China going toward a
state that will internalize earth system imperatives, and actually
respond to the climate crisis by producing self-driving
electric cars, total surveillance and geoengineering. Geoengineering is
good - or at least, it's inevitable - but authoritarianism isn't. How
should the Western countries and their "integrated peripheries" respond?
What can civil-society movements do about
it? The answer is, we don't have a clue. Shame on us. Mexico is
collapsing, and white people in the US think they can bring back the
good old days.
As for the carbon tax that someone mentioned, I hear you, but it's
too little too late. It might have helped twenty years ago, if it hadn't
been just another neoliberal ploy for gaming the system. It can still
do some good, in a more serious form, but
now we're on a timeline that's going to require central coordination in
addition to market coordination. Unless we just want civilizational
breakdown in the megafires of the Pyrocene. Which is really coming into
its own in Colorado, by the way. I'm afraid
it will put a real dent in the tourist industry.
Green New Deal or bust. I'm not kidding when I talk about
eco-socialism. The question is how to get there.
Brian
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 10:58:52 +0100
From: Felix Stalder < [email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: <nettime> Thoughts on coups
Message-ID: < [email protected]"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"> [email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
On 24.11.20 04:14, Brian Holmes wrote:
> Here's my two cents: Keynes aimed to save capitalism from itself.
Double
> down on Keynes, unleash vast new creative energies on the basis of
fiat
> money, and maybe, instead of sapping capital's foundations, we can
push it
> over the top into ecosocialism.
There are probably two distinct political strategies here. And it would
be interesting to work out their relation.
The first is move capitalism towards a different regime of accumulation,
one based less on extractivism and consumerism but rather more on
renewable energy and "eco-system services" for repairing some of the
damage already done (I know, this term is conventionally used in a
different sense). A little bit of this we are already seeing, with the
EU's project to become a first climate neutral continent by 2050, China
commitment by 2060 and new Biden admin making similar gestures. So far,
actual effects, in terms of reducing the output of CO2 and and
ending/slowing down the loss of biological diversity, have not been
achieved. The big question is: is that too little too late, unable to
overcome very real system barriers to substantial change? Or can this be
made into the beginning of a self-accelerating shift in the energy
regime of global civilization?
In the longer run, it's hard to imagine how capitalism can still be
capitalism without treating "nature" as an externality. So the question
then becomes, what are the condition under which a 'greener capitalism'
can be pushed into something else. In a way that is like an update of
the old Marxian idea that capitalism will produce productive forces on
which communism can be realized.
all the best. Felix
--
| ||||||||||||||||||
https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/b7quCvl0E5u7vp9LAIXkohl?domain=felix.openflows.com
|
| Open PGP |
https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/1COxCwVLG5hGoJjVys9yMFM?domain=felix.openflows.com
|
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_0x0BBB5B950C9FF2AC.asc
Type: application/pgp-keys
Size: 3192 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: < http://mx.kein.org/pipermail/nettime-l/attachments/20201124/9ee66756/attachment-0001.key>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 495 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: < http://mx.kein.org/pipermail/nettime-l/attachments/20201124/9ee66756/attachment-0001.pgp>
------------------------------
# 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:
https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/bMvNCr8Dz5s8xPqn2T7Q76k?domain=mx.kein.org
End of nettime-l Digest, Vol 158, Issue 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:
[email protected]
# @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: [email protected]
# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
25.
November 2020 um 00:29
Nationalism builds on the other great crisis of our times, migration.
Post-nationalism means opening borders. Only that way will the wealthy
learn that removing the causes of migration - war, pandemic, climate
change, colonialism - is the only way to survive
(unless of course you're one of the billionaire class)
This is for certain, because the
only alternative to opening borders - and at the same time, engaging in
co-development strategies that allow some people, at least, to remain
where they are - is war plain and simple. Climate change is going to
translate into burnt crops, forced migration and war long before rising
seas drive people out of lower Manhattan. And state collapse induced by
neoliberalism will do the same. The current political economy is a
vicious circle getting worse, 2020 has sure made that clear!
Any 21st century politics has to be formed
by an alliance of the excluded - human, ecological and - I would add,
though it needs a longer argument - technological
The question I have, is how
to build an effective alliance of the excluded, one that does not
become a wrecking ball in its own right?
A
lot of anarchism is now doing the work of neoliberalism, it's heavily
nihilistic. Autonomism itself was an uneasy fusion, anarcho-communism,
but the communist part was gradually reduced to a kind of fantasy for
intellectuals whose real politics were anarchist by default - not their
own default, but because every attempt to construct a
state-for-the-multitudes was foreclosed. In the absence of a
constructive principle you get alienated people looking to accelerate
the breakdown, on both right and left btw. The US is rampant with that
kind of accelerationist now - in fact, on the extreme right they
describe themselves with that exact word.
I
think we need an eco-state. I mean a form of social coordination that
doesn't precipitate collapse, but protects against, reverses the trends,
allows human and ecological healing. Of course you can imagine an
eco-state in an authoritarian vein, because that's where China is going.
Rana Dasgupta surely sees it differently - I'm looking forward to read
that text - but I see China going toward a state that will internalize
earth system imperatives, and actually respond to the climate crisis by
producing self-driving electric cars, total surveillance and
geoengineering. Geoengineering is good - or at least, it's inevitable -
but authoritarianism isn't. How should the Western countries and their
"integrated peripheries" respond? What can civil-society movements do
about it? The answer is, we don't have a clue. Shame on us. Mexico is
collapsing, and white people in the US think they can bring back the
good old days.
As for the carbon tax that
someone mentioned, I hear you, but it's too little too late. It might
have helped twenty years ago, if it hadn't been just another neoliberal
ploy for gaming the system. It can still do some good, in a more serious
form, but now we're on a timeline that's going to require central
coordination in addition to market coordination. Unless we just want
civilizational breakdown in the megafires of the Pyrocene. Which is
really coming into its own in Colorado, by the way. I'm afraid it will
put a real dent in the tourist industry.
Green
New Deal or bust. I'm not kidding when I talk about eco-socialism. The
question is how to get there.
Brian
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 10:58:52 +0100
From: Felix Stalder < [email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: <nettime> Thoughts on coups
Message-ID: < [email protected]"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"> [email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
On 24.11.20 04:14, Brian Holmes wrote:
> Here's my two cents: Keynes aimed to save capitalism from itself.
Double
> down on Keynes, unleash vast new creative energies on the basis of
fiat
> money, and maybe, instead of sapping capital's foundations, we can
push it
> over the top into ecosocialism.
There are probably two distinct political strategies here. And it would
be interesting to work out their relation.
The first is move capitalism towards a different regime of accumulation,
one based less on extractivism and consumerism but rather more on
renewable energy and "eco-system services" for repairing some of the
damage already done (I know, this term is conventionally used in a
different sense). A little bit of this we are already seeing, with the
EU's project to become a first climate neutral continent by 2050, China
commitment by 2060 and new Biden admin making similar gestures. So far,
actual effects, in terms of reducing the output of CO2 and and
ending/slowing down the loss of biological diversity, have not been
achieved. The big question is: is that too little too late, unable to
overcome very real system barriers to substantial change? Or can this be
made into the beginning of a self-accelerating shift in the energy
regime of global civilization?
In the longer run, it's hard to imagine how capitalism can still be
capitalism without treating "nature" as an externality. So the question
then becomes, what are the condition under which a 'greener capitalism'
can be pushed into something else. In a way that is like an update of
the old Marxian idea that capitalism will produce productive forces on
which communism can be realized.
all the best. Felix
--
| ||||||||||||||||||
https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/b7quCvl0E5u7vp9LAIXkohl?domain=felix.openflows.com
|
| Open PGP |
https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/1COxCwVLG5hGoJjVys9yMFM?domain=felix.openflows.com
|
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_0x0BBB5B950C9FF2AC.asc
Type: application/pgp-keys
Size: 3192 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: < http://mx.kein.org/pipermail/nettime-l/attachments/20201124/9ee66756/attachment-0001.key>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 495 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: < http://mx.kein.org/pipermail/nettime-l/attachments/20201124/9ee66756/attachment-0001.pgp>
------------------------------
# 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:
https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/bMvNCr8Dz5s8xPqn2T7Q76k?domain=mx.kein.org
End of nettime-l Digest, Vol 158, Issue 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: [email protected]
# @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: [email protected]
# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
24.
November 2020 um 22:52
Brian hits the nail on the head when he writes "paying out fiat money to smooth the
jagged edges of the business cycle and thereby making proletarian
consumption into the very engine of capitalist growth."
As Felix adds, capital absolutely requires externalised nature - a
cost-free resource which can be mined and dumped into at no cost.
The model also applies now to the proletarian consumer: once merely
formally subsumed under capital, the new form of consumption has been
'really' subsumed: the form of consumption is fully integrated - all
consumption is also productive, generating data for
further exploitation. The mass production of debt is a crucial part of
the process: as is the mental health epidemic that it generates - this
is one way capital dumps its unwanted product, just as it dumps unwanted
heat into the atmosphere.
Waste is not marginal: it is integral to capital - and that includes
wasting excess humans, ie those that are not in the inner circle of
obscene wealth. The destruction of the state by capital under Brexit /
Trumpism is one strategy for ensuring a) the proletarianization
of the real subsumption of consumption under capital and b) the
externalisation/environmentalisation of the bio-mass and - in a way that
must terrify all post-autonomists - the general intellect.
Ex-communist polities (populist cronyism in its Putin/Xi variants) still
seem to prefer state capture; neo-con/neo-libs go for state
destruction: but the distinction is blurry (Georges Monbiot has a
suggestion why:
More depressing is the failure of the Left - while half believed the EU
was a flawed but viable system for controlling the worst excesses of
capital (which is why Murdoch and other gang members wanted it wrecked),
the other half, including Corbyn, saw it as
a capitalist conspiracy. Given that nationalism is such a hallmark of
the rhetoric of neo-populists, one obvious experiment to make is a
post-nationalist left - which instantly implies not rebuilding
globalisation as it existed prior to the GFC but one that
builds on what now constitutes the material infrastructure:
populations, networks and ecologies.
Nationalism builds on the other great crisis of our times, migration.
Post-nationalism means opening borders. Only that way will the wealthy
learn that removing the causes of migration - war, pandemic, climate
change, colonialism - is the only way to survive
(unless of course you're one of the billionaire class)
Any 21st century politics has to be formed
by an alliance of the excluded - human, ecological and - I would add,
though it needs a longer argument - technological
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 10:58:52 +0100
From: Felix Stalder <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: <nettime> Thoughts on coups
Message-ID: [email protected]">< [email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
On 24.11.20 04:14, Brian Holmes wrote:
> Here's my two cents: Keynes aimed to save capitalism from itself.
Double
> down on Keynes, unleash vast new creative energies on the basis of
fiat
> money, and maybe, instead of sapping capital's foundations, we can
push it
> over the top into ecosocialism.
There are probably two distinct political strategies here. And it would
be interesting to work out their relation.
The first is move capitalism towards a different regime of accumulation,
one based less on extractivism and consumerism but rather more on
renewable energy and "eco-system services" for repairing some of the
damage already done (I know, this term is conventionally used in a
different sense). A little bit of this we are already seeing, with the
EU's project to become a first climate neutral continent by 2050, China
commitment by 2060 and new Biden admin making similar gestures. So far,
actual effects, in terms of reducing the output of CO2 and and
ending/slowing down the loss of biological diversity, have not been
achieved. The big question is: is that too little too late, unable to
overcome very real system barriers to substantial change? Or can this be
made into the beginning of a self-accelerating shift in the energy
regime of global civilization?
In the longer run, it's hard to imagine how capitalism can still be
capitalism without treating "nature" as an externality. So the question
then becomes, what are the condition under which a 'greener capitalism'
can be pushed into something else. In a way that is like an update of
the old Marxian idea that capitalism will produce productive forces on
which communism can be realized.
all the best. Felix
--
| ||||||||||||||||||
https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/b7quCvl0E5u7vp9LAIXkohl?domain=felix.openflows.com
|
| Open PGP |
https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/1COxCwVLG5hGoJjVys9yMFM?domain=felix.openflows.com
|
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_0x0BBB5B950C9FF2AC.asc
Type: application/pgp-keys
Size: 3192 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: < http://mx.kein.org/pipermail/nettime-l/attachments/20201124/9ee66756/attachment-0001.key>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 495 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: < http://mx.kein.org/pipermail/nettime-l/attachments/20201124/9ee66756/attachment-0001.pgp>
------------------------------
# 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:
https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/bMvNCr8Dz5s8xPqn2T7Q76k?domain=mx.kein.org
End of nettime-l Digest, Vol 158, Issue 30
******************************************
|