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

[horit <horit1@013.net>]

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?





horit