Re: [SPAM] Re: [-empyre-] Matrixial Encounters

["Aliette Guibert" <guibertc@criticalsecret.com>]

Dear Henry, Dear Eduardo, Dear all, Dear Kate,

Quickly, a fast answer before to talk more as right now I MUST sleep:))

Thanks Henry. Really thanks. I mean of money below and financial system at
the top walking with macro-resources and geopolitical strategies converting
them in macroeconomic superstructure. This does not regard the equivalence
of the value while a simulation of the equivalence of the value goes running
on earth for people as a bait to get them silent and no revendicative. While
the rule is played somewhere else. So we have not a dual but a double
structure playing in the same time.

Eduardo the book is still translated... For a part you are true. But it is
not a book to tell detail by detail (or how any detail is perverse:) looking
at the strategy of global simulation.... My position it is of the simulation
in the text which produces any diverse sensibilities. I mean Ken has a real
talent for a part, for another part he has a real culture in matter of
dialectical materialism and Marxism Leninism without which he could not
write such a book, naturally. But it is exactly the material of the
autofiction which keeps the book out of a scientific intention as an obvious
choice of existential reality. Subversive, insolent, and probably
provocation in exceeding materialism to the limit where the post-modern
hero - not the proletarian - comes back as transgender.

Of the references, Ken is a DJ, he samples he mixes but he does not remixes,
at this place he invents a logical installation to ask of the lost
avant-gardes ; the question of this book it is not of the economy of class,
it is no more the post critic political economy or bio economy, it is of the
transgression of the avant-gardes by this cultural and technical
communicative power in real time. Where he appears socially relevant it is
of the predictable statement of transgress layers as heterogeneous dominant
''classes'': ''managers'' and ''hackers'' not being "the masses".

But you cannot search a scientific strategy regarding the past theory where
it is a symbolic strategy of the predictable mutation without revolution.

For another part, it could be an irony integrating books as Negri and
Hardt's ones (Hardt forwarding Ken's book) who turned over the heads with
universal theories (of which principle I could not agree with, as defending
for my part autonomy diversity and peculiarity in a cognitive organization
of common administration and decision) even Spinoza would be upstream
quoted:)

More universal we are more wrong we make. And more sleepy one is more one is
indistinct or peremptory:))

So what? of course I go to my bed

Cheers and thanks anyway we are tired and give a lot of energy here. But it
is fine.
A.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Eduardo Navas" <eduardo@navasse.net>
To: "soft_skinned_space" <empyre@gamera.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 1:19 PM
Subject: Re: [SPAM] Re: [-empyre-] Matrixial Encounters


> Hello,
>
> I was about to respond to this message, when I got a second message from
> Henry Warwick.  I will respond to that one in a few hours. After I
sleep...
>
> For now I want to respond to Aliette's most recent commentaries.
>
> ---
>
> Bonjour Aliette,
>
> Je comprend le Français, mais la ecritur'est très dificile. Votre
frustation
> avec l'anglais est evident à moi. Il y a comprehensible.  Je te admire
parce
> que vous ecriver Anglais bien; c'est la vérité.  Je ne pouvais pas faire
la
> au Francais.  Votre pasion est evident dans la discussion.  Maintenant,
les
> suivant responses sont au Anglais.  Je vais responder a votre material
> francais au Anglais, aussi.  Pardon moi.  C'est necessaire pour la
> list-serve.  Je procede.
>
>
>
> On 4/12/05 8:17 PM, "Aliette Guibert" <guibertc@criticalsecret.com> wrote:
>
> > Sorry, a transgression in real : one friend not an asteroid (maybe) of
mine
> > but alternative charismatic representative has begun a hungry strike to
> > accompany Marco Pannella (the founder of the Radical transnational
party)
> > who asks Italian amnesty for all the political prisoners as well as for
> > several ones guilty of the small offences of common law. So I had to
help
> > him as well as possible (posting on the European lists etc.) even I am
not
> > an activist. For the lead years and by including the activists of Genoa
(who
> > are still imprisoned), it makes an account about 7000 persons concerned
by
> > the amnesty. In France, since the war of Algeria, we had a tradition of
> > amnesty at every new presidential election, but this tradition was a
little
> > blown out since the second mandate of Mitterrand:) More any events of
this
> > sort strangly happened for the last week-end. That is exactly the very
> > current of the local European country I live into.
>
> I could cite cultural insiderism, but will not.  Many people on this list,
I
> can safely assume have had real circumstances where transgression is real.
> What I am referring to being problematic, however, is a specific work (a
> book) that calls for cultural reconsideration.
>
> >
> > For the most unavailability I have a lot of late works to do all the day
> > long since a pair of days and part of the nights, while the anglophone
> > debate is not easy to me. For my part, the English-speaking answers are
even
> > more difficult than the readings; and there will be certainly nobody
here to
> > contradict me - having judged me in acts:) They are the real reasons for
> > which I did not dash into an exegesis of Ken's book. Here you are very
sharp
> > in your arguments and your references (although I am not completely all
> > right on your seeing of situationnists quite reduced to The Society of
the
> > spectacle, even if it is a work of importance. Maybe because I am of the
> > generation who have crusader Debord and the "fanatics" in papers, in
spaces
> > in debate, and on walls ; I hold the recollection of all original IS
> > publications since these former years - but you have probably read it
for
> > the best, as for my part just regarding the acts ?
>
> I really understand that having time to respond is an issue.  However, if
> you reread my post, you will notice that I did not mention the
situationists
> at all.  I only mentioned Debord because he is the person that inspires
> Wark's book.
>
>
>
>
> >> I am not going to describe the book in detail here, but I will say that
as
> >> many on the list know, it proposes hackers as a new type of class
> > resisting
> >> yet another class: the vector class (a global form of the bourgeois
adept
> > to
> >> information).
> >
> > Not really "bourgeois" but 'resocracts ('netcrats) - as a solution
suggested
> > by the French translator, I have choosen for "resocrats" which tells of
the
> > stream - : the managing category more the oligarchy at the power. They
> > manage the information; they govern and control streams; more they are
the
> > administrators and the managers but they do not hold the production
> > resources. So they do not form a class but a sphere of influence which
> > steers and controls; a layer distributed among several categories of the
> > administration of the business or the power.
> >
> > As in a game with a rule of two partners, the third part of this vision
is
> > of people excluded (but it appears to be a notorious choice from the
part of
> > the author, I think).
>
> The book is divided into chapters.  One of the is called "Class."  Wark is
> very clear in defining each of the classes he sees rising.  He states on
the
> Vector class:
>
> "Information, like land or capital, becomes a form of property monopolized
> by a class, a class of vectoralists, so named because they control the
> vectors along which information is abstracted, just as capitalists control
> the material means with which goods are produces, and pastoralists land
with
> which food is produced." (029)
>
> I site this at length to show how the vector class is connected to well
> established Marxist definitions of class.  So they are a class that are
> supplanting or joining those in power (or have those in power actually
> converted?), in fact, with basic deduction it is easy to see where the
> vector class largely arose from... The Bourgeoisie.
>
>
>
>
> >
> >> The book has been proposed as a reproposition of Marxism and
> >> has been praised by many.
> >
> > It is not a theory - BUT an essay - it is a GAME suggested to be played
in
> > real as a social reality and dialectically contracting its social
transgress
> > ion as possible.
> >
> >> I, however, admit to be a bit skeptical because
> >> the book fails to deal with a major problem with class--its hierarchy.
> >
> > I have just answered that it is not the vision of class, so there is not
> > hierarchy or yes : one have the power but not holding the resources ;
the
> > other one holds the resources (technology - objective material and human
> > structural and cognitive resources of medias) but do not hold the power
:
> > just a service. The power : the adequat work to manage the streams and
for
> > another part the politic power and for others the administrative power
of
> > the decision) and all the others as excluded, out of representative in
the
> > game in matter of consciousness and of real civic power. In fact it is a
> > reintegration of The dialectics of the master and the slave by Hegel to
the
> > current actuality of the divided society.
>
>
> Yet the "game" has such a rule within its framework.  It is part of what
> gets people who might play eliminated.  This may apply to the issue of
> political economy that is raised by Henry Warwick  in the post I hope to
> respond to later, actually.
>
> >
> >> book essentializes hackers as being a type of universal class,
following
> >> Marx's position on the proletariat.
> >
> > Not really. Prolétariat are mass egual to the social mass. In Ken's
vision
> > Hackers are diverse but they are not mass. They are high slaves. They
are
> > Samouraïs. The largest part of the people is out of the game. At last
the
> > hacker is not a class as he crosses several classes but it is the same
with
> > the Vectors (whose name by Ken is the vectorial class of course).
> >
> > In reality Hackers are extremely
> >> diverse individuals (whose class ranges form country to country) who
may
> > not
> >> actually be interested in politics; some of them have very practical
> > reasons
> >> behind their doodling, some like it because they are really curious,
and
> >> others... Well, other simply like the power.  But others are interested
in
> >> research following the paradigms of scientific investigations, and
others
> >> simply want to make money in the long run, via the gift economy or any
> > other
> >> means of legitimization.
> >
> > Exactly what does not plead for a social class grouped around the same
> > factor of expoloitation and of progress...
>
> We can disagree on this.  I could again quote the book, but in the end it
is
> a matter of opinion and how one relates to Marxist ideology (yep, it too
is
> an ideology--before you jump read Althusser).  I stand in disagreement.
>
>
> >
> >> So to claim the term "hacker" as a name for a type
> >> of "cultural producer" is already running into murky waters.  The book
is
> >> short-cited in this sense.  It starts with abstractions and is never
> > really
> >> able to contest the very limitations that Marxism ran into post 1968
for
> >> that matter in a practical way.  There is no hint as to how such
notions
> > can
> >> move beyond the  manifesto--something that Debord (who Wark claims
> > inspired
> >> the book) is able to do very eloquently by showing how his culture was
> >> enslaved by spectacular time.
> >
> > We are widely beyond the society of the spectacle in Ken's book; we are
yet
> > in the society of 1984 wher the hacker is an impure dandy - secretly or
> > obviously rebellious for anytime and in diverse modes.
>
>
> When I cited the Society of the Spectacle, I mentioned that Debord made
the
> book clearly a call to serious issues at play during his time.  It has an
> urgency that is still felt today when read.  With Wark's book I see this
not
> really being a strong point.
>
> >
> >> So where to look?  I would say Benjamin.  He knew better than to
> > speculate,
> >> even though he heavily relied on Marx for his critical position, he
> >> certainly knew better than to predict.  He stuck to analyzing to then
> >> develop real pockets of resistance.  The result as we all know is an
essay
> >> that is so overcited that we may want to hate it, yet it is still vert
> >> relevant today even today.  But resistance is not enough.  There needs
to
> > be
> >> actual strategies for the long term for real change.
> >
> > The strategy of the hacker is not the dictatorship of the prolétariat to
get
> > at the power BUT to exist in the actual not specially in the spectacle.
> >
> > He is a symbol of resource, objective, and project contracted in real
time
> > of his production egual as social acts and way of life...
>
> I am not reviving the proletariat struggle here.  I am actually quiet
> skeptical of it for becoming a type of universal colonial icon that was
> imposed as a disguised European model of resistance particulary in Latin
> America--and this is my cultural insiderism by the way...
>
> I brought up Benjamin because he appeared to be cautious and alet during
his
> own period.  In reality, we need a combination of writers to beg, borrow
and
> steal from, including the usual suspects like Foucault to post-colonial
and
> transnational writers, like Spivak and Stuart Hall or Coco Fusco; yet,
> really young cats are outthere now, and we need to get to know them.  The
> game is changing, and we certainly cannot be citing the same dead people.
> (I am certainly guilty of this too, by the way)
>
> >
> > pardonnez-moi de poursuivre en français pour éviter les contresens :
> > ------------------------------------------
> >
> > « A hacker manifesto » de Ken Wark :
> >
> > D'après moi : La question est que ce texte de Ken pourrait être pris
pour un
> > dinosaure; quelque chose de l'effet retard post-communiste, de
révisionniste
> > même du manifeste du parti communiste, le réveil d'un ouf antédiluvien
> > communiste de parti, ou de retour des ses avant-gardes : en fait cela
relève
> > d'un effet critique : il faut créer la distance pour viser la catharsis.
La
> > distance critique s'exerce aussi par rapport à l'utopie. Contrairement à
> > TAZ, A hacker manifesto n'est pas une utopie, c'est un monde qui
s'effectue
> > et s'innove en temps réel de son histoire, à partir d'un mythe.
>
>
> History of real times emerging from a myth.  This  would certainly demand
a
> deep revision of Hegel's principles of history.  Something I don't see
> happening in the book.  To do this, would need a more detailed
reevaluation
> of, both, Marx and Hegel and their interpretations of history. I read the
> book as an extension of well established dialectics.
>
> >
> > Quel est le mythe ? Dans « A hacker manifesto », de Ken, c'est le
marxisme
> > léninisme lui-même, qui est constitué comme un mythe. Ce qu'il dépasse
> > chronologiquement c'est le communisme scientifique comme vérité
historique
> > et sociale. La transformation symbolique de la société qu'il décrit,
comme
> > dans la poésie épique ou le théâtre tragique, c'est le dépassement de la
> > vérité du projet moderne cautionnée par l'utopie qu'il prétend
accomplir,
> > par l'existence comme événement contemporain contenant son futur
prédictible
> > (ce n'est pas exécutif, c'est aléatoire) - en quoi, c'est un texte
cohérent,
> > organique.
>
> This the book does do.  I actually do think is written very well. And as a
> piece of literature, I accept it.  If we take your proposition of critical
> fiction, then the above fits quite well.
>
> >
> > c'est un manifeste de la transgression historique par la création
littéraire
> > romanesque elle-même (la transgression de l'histoire sociale par
l'invention
> > de mondes arbitraires logiques et réels). Un activisme de la simulation
de l
> > 'environnement et de la praxis au niveau du manifeste qui succèderait au
> > manifeste du parti communiste, en le plagiant par insolence (avec un
bout du
> > « Capital »).
> >
> > C'est une fiction critique, une recherche qui se donne la forme de
l'essai.
>
> That it critical fiction, I am not sure.  It clearly grounds itself on
very
> specific theories that have affected the world in incredible ways.  The
book
> is clearly proposed as a (I quote the inside sleeve):
> "systematic restatement of Marxist thought for the age of cyberspace and
> globalization."  I don't see critical fiction anywhere, to be honest.
> Perhaps it is your interpretation and I respect that.  But this is not how
> the book has been promoted.
>
>
> > Pour moi c'est une oeuvre littéraire importante, transgressive de toutes
ses
> > références y compris poétiquement appliquée au domaine social, et
inspirante
> > politiquement. C'est une oeuvre qui innove une littérature organique
> > héroïque émergente qui demandera un peu de temps pour être lue sans
> > malentendu.
> >
> > Et c'est bien ma raison passionnée - et ma fierté - de vouloir le
publier en
> > francophonie.
> >
>
> This will be the last section I respond to.  Passion can take us a long
way,
> way past transgression, I dare propose.
>
> I did read your section on hacking, but in the end, responding to every
> section of your comments may not lead us to a more fruitful discussion.
> Certainly we can drop the book from the general discussion, unless others
> want to elaborate more on it.
>
> I will only add that it is obvious that I read the book and this means
that
> I put some time considering its ideas.  I actually plan to teach it when
> appropriate.  In the end, it brings to the table a bold honest
reevaluation
> of Marxism, something that nobody has done for a long time.  For that I
> commend it and have consumed it (I bought the book) and I actually do
> recommend it to others.  That I disagree with it does not mean that I
don't
> think it is valuable.  It is.  I wish you the best with the translation
> (which hopefully will be a transgression of language).
>
> A plus tard-- trop de énergie à toi.
>
> Eduardo
>
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>
>