[-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
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
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