[-empyre-] Mediated matters and design abjections

[Adam Nocek]

Hi all,

I just wanted to jump in here and encourage you all to continue discussing.
I got the green light from Renate since the new month at -empyre- won't
begin until Sunday.

There are a couple things that strike me here about the discussion over
Datapolitik.

Davide writes that Datapolitik

refers to the transformation of humans from identity-bearing subjects to
data-emitting subjects. There is datapolitik because we acknowledge
ourselves as informational subjects whether we like to admit to it or not.
Indeed, most of our daily activities are data-generative


I can’t help but think of Deleuze’s “Postscript on Control Societies”
here.  In this short text he notes that we no longer live (and this is in
1990) in a society in which there are individuals, but one in which there
are _dividuals_. If I may say so, I think Davide nicely fills out what
Deleuze may have been getting at, though he never really analyzes in his
brief essay. I do wonder, though, why biopolitics and biopower don’t
concern you, Davide. You seem to bring together biopolitics and human
subjectivity – you write: “Hence my lack of pursuing (also) of questions
about biopolitics and subjectivity”—  but I’m not sure that this captures
how biopolitics operates in the 21st century. How are you thinking about
biopolitics in this instance? And aren’t the practices of bioinformatics
and biotechnology (that we talked about last week) clear instances of
(neoliberal) biopolitics at work? They also seem to exemplify the
Datapolitik you describe. How does this work out for you? And might this
help sort out Johannes’ question re: the politics in Data-politik?

I know this is spilling over into October, but I invite Davide, as well as
the –empyre- community, to jump into this discussion!

Thanks,
Adam



On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Johannes Birringer <
Johannes.Birringer at brunel.ac.uk> wrote:

> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------
>
>
> thanks for your very interesting reply, Davide,
> to some of the comments. And your reply, if we had time here, would raise
> further questions, naturally,
> but I am hesitant to ask them as I feel that somehow the monthly debate
> has not involved very many discussants
> on our list. and it worries me not knowing whether anyone is reading the
> conversations or wanting to participate
> or wanting us to stop?
>
>
> >>
> I don’t think (at least for me) that the transmissional model of cause and
> effect of influence (which is also the model of coercion) is sufficient for
> our day and age (maybe it was never enough). Hence my lack of pursuing
> (also) of questions about biopolitics and subjectivity - which aren’t
> uninteresting questions to raise and follow through; they’re issues that I
> don’t feel equipped to deal with well enough - or rather, I should say,
> that the issue of control always already has a moral answer built into it;
> namely, the one who controls is the one (or it) that simultaneously
> exploits....
> But once we’ve established this moral/ethical trajectory – let’s call it
> critical thought’s a priori - what can we say about the structures of
> association in our contemporary condition? ..
>
> The disregarding of interest seems like a unique dynamic of datapolitik
> that distinguishes it ..... >>  [Davide]
>
>
> Your (aesthetic?) belief in the healthy disinterest of "datapolitik" (how
> can disinterested algorithms have or form a politics or have strategies if
> we associate the latter with Politik?) is peculiar
> as you did, earlier, speak of a transmission model, and you called it
> contagion. But surely contagious spreads and swarming affects are
> opportunistic, no? they are Machiavellian?  at least as far as i understand
> the biomedical
> metaphor or epidemiological process and your zombie allegory -- "viral
> algorithms spread, contaminate, and affect influence through contagion --
> how then do the immune systems respond and how to political tactics and
> strategies
> become re-thinkable and rethought in such an algorithmic culture of
> associationn? You argue that data have/imply no politics, but call that a
> data-politik? Are you being ironic?
>
> regards
> Johannes Birringer
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20141002/a9e519cf/attachment.htm>