[NetBehaviour] My name is [Your Name Here] and I am an Accelerationist
rob at robmyers.org
Sun Apr 24 20:48:18 CEST 2016
On April 21, 2016 10:27:26 AM PDT, ruth catlow <ruth.catlow at furtherfield.org> wrote:
>This is less about speed (as distinct from Futurism) than it is about
>rates of change.
>The technologies that we use are bound up with with advanced
>We watch our political and social infrastructures unable to evolve fast
>enough to solve the wicked problems - for environment, democracy,
>justice and a good life- than they create.
>I think we can take two attitudes
>1) Save ourselves! Take what we can carry, run for the hills and build
>the best fortresses we can with people whose values we share.
>2) coordinate and collaborate in the higher interests of all living
>beings - constantly working out who and what these are- and using all
>means at our disposal.
>I like the idea of living in the hills.
>But not under siege, and not in earshot of future generations of
>bemused, brutalised, alienated people.
>The dominant model of global coexistence is that of endless economic
>growth and Neoliberalism (the (increasingly automated) marketization of
>everything). This tends to centralize power and resources and renders
>less effective the usual ways of blocking and resisting; of work-based
>and traditional-identity based solidarity.
>Instead Contemporary Accelerationism suggests (I think) that we use in
>new combinations all the tools, tactics, and knowledges in an attempt
>perform a series of judo moves (using the force rather than resisting
>the force), or to sling-shot our way through the mess we are in.
Yes definitely 2. :-). This is wonderful description of the spirit of contemporary left accelerationism.
>As always, there needs to be a way to accommodate the visions and
>schemes of all sorts- many islands rather than one land mass as Paul
>said. That's why this discussion here and now.
Yes absolutely. My first thought on reading some of the MAP was "this has the potential to be a bit totalitarian....". Srnicek & Williams very thoroughly address how to ensure an open society in their follow-up. Reflecting what you wrote above, they do this in part by reference to neoliberalism, ironising its negative examples of international movement and regional mutaton into positive proposals.
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
More information about the NetBehaviour