[-empyre-] Them/us in the context of bare life

Them/us in the context of bare life

I don't think there is symmetry between green politics and the complex binary of us/them.

As Carl Schmmit said, the us/them, or friend/foe dichotomy, is the basic ethics of the democratic state in the western world. It is a rhizome of inventive legal terms perpetuating the social structure of inclusion within exclusion.

Does technopanic generate totalitarian moves? Or do totalitarian moves generate technopanic? What are the formulative criteria for what makes a citizen and a non citizen, a solid dichotomy between the chosen ones who can practice and enjoy the good life, as against the ones who are bared beyond? Isn't it preferable to be included in materiality, as well as in virtuality, in the good life? Is it, at all, an option for a non western to join the fruits generated by the democratic western system, other than by taking menial slavish jobs in the democratic western states, in exchange for the remote hopeful belief in a better life?

Why are human beings in the non western world so poor? Why a tiny minority desperately gives up their young lives to become suicide weapons? Is it the ideology of Islamic fanaticism? Or another fanatic religion? Could it be an emergency action?

Shouldn't these painful, disturbing ethical questions be considered in our aesthetic vocation without the gluing panic constructing the unseen justification of emergency laws which perpetuate technopanic?


This archive was generated by a fusion of Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and MHonArc 2.6.8.