|
|
|
Excremental tv: Sacrificial tv, Disciplinary tv, Surveillance-tv, Crash-tv.
We live today in the age of excremental tv. No longer tv under the old sociological sign of accumulation
with its coherent division of tv-aesthetics into strategy (official culture) and tactics (outlaw culture), but tv as already
having come under the Bataillean (excremental) logic of dis-accumulation, self cancellation and self-exterminism. |
Tv therefore, as a waste management system: an indeterminate stockpiling
of dead images and dead sounds that threaten to suffocate us with their inertness, and on behalf of which the mediascape now
functions as a vast aesthetic machinery for managing the discharge of image effluents and for recycling all the waste products,
televisual subjects most of all, produced by excremental tv.
So then, four anal flows in the image-discharge of excremental
tv: Sacrifice, discipline, surveillance, and crash.
| . | |
|
| |
|
|
|
A collage of collected wisdoms
.
Audience: Moving away from the topic,
what do you think of Marxism?
Bob: Marx was right. He was the greatest thinker of all time.
Taken from... http://www.mcluhaninstitute.org/baedeker/bobs_articles/phatic_communion.html
Den Mu: What is the best communist party in NYC?
BOB: The LaRouchies. And I'm serious. LaRouche has always
been a true communist. He's an excellent scholar of Marxism's history, both intellectual and political.
Bob Dobbs
Marx
was encouraged by the formation of the Paris
Commune in March 1871 and the abdication of Louis Napoleon. Marx called it
the "greatest achievement" since the revolutions of 1848, but by May the revolt had collapsed and about 30,000 Communards
were slaughtered by government troops.
This failure depressed Marx and after this date his energy began to diminish.
He continued to work on the second volume of DAs Kapital but progress was slow, especially after Eleanor Marx left home to
become a schoolteacher in Brighton.
Eleanor returned to the family home in 1881 to nurse her parents who were both
very ill. Marx, who had a swollen liver, survived, but Jenny Marx died on 2nd December, 1881. Karl Marx was also devastated
by the death of his eldest daughter in January 1883 from cancer of the bladder. Karl Marx died two months later on the 14th
March, 1883.
There are a number of challenges that any political ontology of distributed organization will have to
consider. The ability of a group to mobilize itself in a political way (and not just a technological or biological way) will
depend on the kinds of responses formed to these challenges.
One fundamental challenge will be developing a "tactical"
combination of connectivity and collectivity. This tension is at the heart of networks and swarms, and is most pronounced
in political examples of multitudes. The tensions between individual experience, political ideology, and practices at both
the individual and group levels, are all about discovering the most workable combination of collectivity and connectivity.
Another challenge will be the development of new forms of understanding how "control" exists within networks, swarms,
and multitudes. A network or swarm is not just an arbitrary pattern, but a directed motion implying a material basis for consensus
or the "common." Against the prematurely optimistic views of networks and swarms as examples of an "absence of control," the
nature of control itself will have to be re-thought within the particular ontology of distributed behavior. This is perhaps
the point at which to think about the differences between control, authority, and coercion, as different types of power dynamics
in these group phenomena.
The challenge of re-thinking control also means that, in order for networks, swarms, and multitudes
to operate in a distributed manner, their mode of control will have to be one that is internal. If there is one thing that
the prevalence of networks, swarms, and multitudes demonstrate, it is that we require new understandings of how to conceive
of a control that is immanent to and internal to any distributed behavior. This is more than thinking about self-determination
for individuals and groups; it is thinking about self-determination as self-organization.
Finally, a political ontology
of networks, swarms, and multitudes will necessitate a reconsideration of many terms that are central to political thought
-- power, right, and democracy. These terms are in turn related to philosophical issues -- individuation, multiplicity, and
materiality. This might be as simple as thinking about instances of distributed dissent (politics) in terms of the concepts
of living systems (biology), or it might be finding ways to set political concepts (such as "the people") into a dialogue
with technoscientific concepts (such as "the pack" or "the network").
Taken from...
http://ctheory.net/text_file.asp?pick=423
---DENMU---
|
Nothing is dead | |
|
|
|
From: "LaRouche in 2004" <info@larouchein2004.com>
To: "'Keith Mussenden'" <denmoinuke@yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: Karl Marx
Date: Wed, 26 May 2004 16:31:05 -0400
TO: Keith Mussenden
Whoa!
Not so simple, not so fast! My association with Marx
occupied three distinct phases in my life. First, in 1943, when a
chance
reading of a copy of Capital I persuaded me that Marx
should be read without fear, as a part of the culture with which
anyone
in our society must deal in a rational way. Second, by late
1948, I found that the post-Roosevelt right-turn had gone so
far in
corrupting the fearful majority of the population, than only a few
socialists were seriously fighting against
this. At the end of that
year, I acquired the pen-name "Lyn Marcus," which continued
until Eisenhower had freed us from
the worst aspects of the
fascistic war-orientation of Truman et al. At that point, the
intellectual bankruptcy of the
organized socialist movement was no
longer tolerable to me. I did not return to association with socialist
organization
until the aftermath of the 1962 missiles-crisis, when,
again, it seemed to me that the pro-socialist currents among young
adults
of that period were the only force which might turn the tide
against a new, post-Eisenhower wave of right-wing warhawking.
Since "Marxism" was nominally in vogue among those strata, I
employed my knowledge of Marx's work in intervening into
that
youth-ferment, up to the beginnng of 1972, when the relevant
right-wing "internal security" elements of the FBI
deployed their
Communist Party and kindred assets to attempt to eliminate me
from the scene by physical force.
You
must take into account, that, during 1948-1953, I was
already developing my discoveries in the science of physical
economy
quite apart from references to Karl Marx, et al. This side
of my life, including my already deep-rooted adoption of the
standpoint
of Leibniz, had much more to do, positively, with my
insights and work as a management consultant than any "debt" to
Marx.
This was always the "intellectual" issue of conflict between
me and the Marxists, from the post-war 1940s through to the
present
day.
I do not recommend that you spend nearly fifty years of
your life, from here on, on attempting to replicate
my experience
with Marx and the Marxists. Master my approach, instead, and the
understanding of Marx's work will be
quickly, more or less as
accessible to you as it became to me.
There is another principle to be emphasized in this
connection,
the same principle of historical specificity which I
emphasize as the only competent standpoint for study and
performance
of Classical modes of drama, poetry, and comments
on history. My experience with Marxists came in precise ways, at
precise
moments of history; those moments no longer exist as part
of current experience, but do exist as part of the impact of
the past
upon the present. The attempt to relive the past, as if de novo, is
the habit of such reductionists as the
pathetic Aristoteleans, who
pride themselves on commenting upon history, rather than causing
it.
Do not trap
yourself in the idea of seeking an aspect of anti-
Euclidean geometry of specific sub-domains such as "satellite
communication."
You either master anti-Euclidean geometry,
which means Riemannian physical geometry as I have defined its
relevance,
or you have mastered nothing from it. The issue is:
How is the universe composed, as a self-developing process? To
answer
that question, and nothing less than that, should be the
objective. Then, apply the mastery of that, in that way, to
whatever
chances to fascinate you.
- - Lyndon
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:
Keith Mussenden [mailto denmoinuke@yahoo.com]
Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 4:23 PM
To: asklarouche@larouchein2004.com
Subject:
Karl Marx
Hello Lyndon,
I am going to see you the 22nd.
I want to study neo-marxist thought; I know
you studied Marx when you were my age.You found a way to find what was good and leave that which had faults.I too believe
socialism is dead, yet I still study communist theory.
I like writers like Arthur Kroker although I try to stay clear
from the post-modern existentialism.I don't know what you think of me; esp. I feel like the emails are written by other people.
I
think it is great that you promote the writings of Vernadsky.I like to think of economy in a global aspect; I am no Gaia environmentalist
though.
If I travel to Germany in August will I be kicked out of the movement?
I don't know any German and I
am known as the lazy youth here in Hackensack.They call me the cybernetician existentialist.
It is because I used to
read Jean Baudrillard;even before I came to the movement, I already knew Noam Chomsky was full of it. (Tapeworms as you would
say).
I hope you don't think I am an agent or something.It is just that I am very curious of this Bob Marshall character.
I
don't know what to do in life it is maybe because I have ran into so much of the counterculture.
What did you think
of the movie The Matrix?
The good about it and the bad about it.
What kind of anti-euclidean mobile geometry
does one study for
satellite communication engineering?
Born 3/26/83 Keith Mussenden | |
|
