[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Never Mind the Cyberbollocks...
---------------------------------------------------------
· · · · · · A E C F O R U M - "M E M E S I S" · · · · ·
· · · · · · · (http://www.aec.at/meme/symp/) · · · · · ·
---------------------------------------------------------
Its pretty hard to swallow so much well-intentioned nostaligia in
one gulp and even harder to get to grips with it. If Richard Barbrook's
favorite target, John Perry Barlow, stands for the flower-toting
California Hippies of yesteryear, Richard places himself squarely
among their rock-throwing European contemporares in the streets
of Paris in May of '68. Nostalgia for the 60's-- nostalgia for the
future which died under the political juggernaught of Reagan and
Thatcher (and Mitterand and Kohl).is something that John Perry
and Richard (and many others of a certain generation, including
myself) share -- even if the futures we envisioned are not exactly
identical.
But the sad fact is that we have inherited the Thatcher/Reagan
version of the future and it is intrinsically entwined with the
(digital) communications technology which is now THE central
theme of all social and political discourse in what used to be called
the industrialised world.
What we have seen in the last 25 years (and especially since
1989) is the end of political and cultural pluralism. One dominant
ideaology prevails -- the ideoology of (post-industrial) capitalism.
This ideology is so pervasive that it has almost achieved
transparence. That is: one hears otherwise intelligent people
claiming that "ideology" is a meaningless word which should be
struck from the vocabulary. This problem arose in the net-debate
with J.P.Barlow who, like most U.S.Americans, cannot grasp the
idea that there are people in the world with doubts about the U.S.
Constitution, with its confusion of Liberty with Property, as a
model for a World Government.
But to get to the point: Evolution is not a one-way street. That is
the un-modernist thing about it. Evolution is not "progressive",
nor does it have any kind of goal. Species or cultures -- or
whatever -- survive, thrive, fail, vanish within the context of
their adaptability. Many species have vanished becaue they were
unable to adapt to their own success and expired in an exhausted
environment. The question of fitness is not "how strong" but
"how flexible". Immensly successful industrial countries like
the DDR collapsed in the end because one-dimensional ideological
rigidity did not allow them to adjust to their own success. There
is no reason to suppose that one-dimensional capitalism will do
much better. And here Richard's sermon on the virtues of the
socialist ideal and the absurdities of capitalist memology are
very pertinent -- be prepared.
-------------
A word about cable-lying and manpower: On average, the street
in front of my house has been dug up for cable (or water- or
gas-mains) laying every couple of years for the past 20 years.
20 years ago a team of 10 to 12 men would show up one morning
and begin to break up the street with air hammers -- and the
work lasted several weeks. Now a multi-purpose tractor arrives
with 2 or 3 men and a little dump truck and they finish in a few
days. This is called increased productivity -- less men = less
man-hours = increased productivity (the machines don't count).
Of course a lot of time is still spent in the manhole under the
street by the engineer who sits splicing the cable and checking
the electronics -- at least untill the satellites replace the
cables -- and the tractors, trucks and workers. The engineer
will probably be around a bit longer.
----------------------------------------------------------
· · · · to subscribe to the Forum just mail to · · · · ·
· · memesis-request@aec.at (message text 'subscribe') · ·
· · · · · · · send messages to memesis@aec.at · · · · · ·
----------------------------------------------------------
