book links to amazon
adding page during another iteration of diving in again ness..
characteristics of movmements: occupation – (encampment); org as multitude (no leader – demo decision making); struggle for the common.
burning/looting responds to power of commodities & rule of property… vehicles of racial subordination….. as much as struggles for the common contest the rule of private property, they equally oppose the rule of public property and the control of the state.
public.. common… property…
four primary subjective figures – the indebted/mediatized/securitized/represented…. one of most radical… the rejection of representation..
The task is not to codify new social relations in a fixed order, but instead to create a constituent process that organizes those relations and makes them lasting while also fostering future innovations and remaining open to the desires of the multitude.
ch1 – subjective figures of the crisis
The hegemony of finance and the banks has produced the indebted. Control over information and communication networks has created the mediatized. The security regime and the generalized state of exception have constructed a figure prey to fear and yearning for protection—the securitized. And the corruption of democracy has forged a strange, depoliticized figure, the represented.
society has become a factory… our bodies/minds/capacities for communication/intelligence/creativity. life itself has been put to work.
Exploitation today is based primarily not on (equal or unequal) exchange but on debt, that is, on the fact that the 99 percent of the population is subject—owes work, owes money, owes obedience—to the 1 percent
in order to survive the indebted must sell his or her entire time of life.
“The problem is no longer getting people to express themselves,” Gilles Deleuzeexplains, “but providing little gaps of solitude and silence in which they might eventually find something to say Repressive forces don’t stop people from expressing themselves, but rather, force them to express themselves. What a relief to have nothing to say, the right to say nothing, because only then is there a chance of framing the rare, and ever rarer, the thing that might be worth saying.
Instead of information and communication, Deleuze says, what we often need is the silence necessary for there to be thought
see video below where Michael is saying he doesn’t really buy into the silence part.. only that liberation no longer has to do w/access to info/communication
Mediatization is a major factor in the increasingly blurred divisions between work and life
so the need/search/craving for eudaimonia ness
How can we separate the repressive powers of media from the potential for liberation?
Just as human productivity is masked in the figure of the indebted, in the figure of the mediatized resides mystified and depotentialized human intelligence. Or, better, the mediatized is full of dead information, suffocating our powers to create living information.
He argues that since the peasants are dispersed across the countryside and cannot effectively communicate with one another, they are not capable of collective political action and, as he famously says, cannot represent themselves
prior to now ness
The most important communication the proletarians have, and that the peasants lack, is enacted in the physical, corporeal being together in the factory.
who’s together in a space/room
The class and the bases of political action are formed not primarily through the circulation of information or even ideas but rather through the construction of political affects, which requires a physical proximity. The encampments and occupations of 2011 have rediscovered this truth of communication.
You accept being in a prison society because outside seems more dangerous.
playing it safe ness
It is a scandal—or, rather, it should be a scandal and one wonders why it isn’t—that the US prison population, after reaching a postwar low in the early 1970s, has since grown more than 500 percent.
the growth in prison pop’s and the rising militarization, both of which are led by u.s. society, are only the most concrete, condensed manifestations of a diffuse security regime in which we are all interned and enlisted.
You have to be good worker, loyal to your employer, and not go out on strike, or you’ll find yourself out of work and unable to pay your debts. Fear is the primary motivation for the securitized to accept not only its double role, watcher and watched, in the surveillance regime but also the fact that so many others are even further deprived of their freedom.
The represented recognizes the collapse of the structures of representation but sees no alternative and is thrust back into fear
It was also due to a blinding of the hope of transformation or, really, a suicide of entrepreneurial capacities, liquefied by the hegemony of financial capital and the exclusive value of rent as a mechanism for social cohesion.
jane costello – mechanism in place – or at least jumpstart mechanism that opens us up to perpetuation of self-organizing
Jean-Jacques Rousseau theorized the social contract (and thus the foundation of modern democracy) in these terms: a political system must be invented that can guarantee democracy in a situation in which private property generates inequality and thus puts freedom in danger, a system that can construct a state, defend private property, and define public property as something that, belonging to everyone, belongs to no one. Representation would thus be at the service of all but, being of all, would be of no one.
perpetuate\ing not us ness
ch 2 – rebellion against the crisis
Hannah Arendt, for one, well grasped and anticipated, in the era of triumphant capitalism, this generalized reduction of the potential of human action.
You are alone, depotentialized. But as soon as you look around, you see that the crisis has also resulted in a being together.
pluralistic ignorance – a waking up from
But we are here together. There is a kairos of resistance as well as a kairos of community
Deleuze says in his reading of Nietzsche: “Une force séparée de ce qu’elle peut.” We must discover a force that reconnects action to being together.
The refusal of debt aims to destroy the power of money and the bonds it creates and simultaneously to construct new bonds and new forms of debt. We become increasingly indebted to one another, linked not by financial bonds but by social bonds
that these social bonds and social debts cannot be measured, or better, that they cannot be measured in traditional, quantitative terms.
or at all.. no?
being truly human means refusing to measure – david graeber ‘s debt
they are not bound by morality and guilt. instead of moral obligation, the function through an ethics of the common, based on the reciprocal recognition of the social debts we owe to one another and to society..
i don’t know.. i think any trace of owe ness… messes with us. would rather work from – can’t not ness..
commodities serve as vehicles of social subordination..
..let’s have no moralizing about how the rebellions of the poor should be better organized, more constructive, and less violent.
They do not seek to restore an order and they do not ask for justice or reparations for the offended, but they want instead to construct another possible world.
bill strickland ness – quit playing defense and build/create/be it
If only the people of the United States knew what their government is doing and the crimes it has committed, one might think, they would rise up and change it. But, in fact, even if they were to read all the books by Noam Chomsky and all the material released by WikiLeaks, they could still vote the same politicians back in power and, ultimately, reproduce the same society. Information alone is not enough.
,,neither is it enough to open a space for communicative action in the public sphere.
Before you can actively communicate in networks, you must become a singularity. The old cultural projects against alienation wanted you to return to yourself. They battled the ways in which capitalist society and ideology have separated us from ourselves, broken us in two, and thus sought a form of wholeness and authenticity, most often in individual terms. When you become a singularity, instead, you will never be a whole self. Singularities are defined by being multiple internally and finding themselves externally only in relation to others. The communication and expression of singularities in networks, then, is not individual but choral, and it is always operative, linked to a doing, making ourselves while being together
ni – the dance..
as singularities we gain a free mobility in networks
shalom.. poverty as absence of shalom – tech facilitating cyber utopian ism (kevin’s paper)
Demonstrations and political actions are born today not from a central committee that gives the word but rather from the coming together of and the discussion among numerous small groups. After the demonstration, similarly, messages spread virally through the neighborhoods and a variety of metropolitan circuits.
The clearest contemporary example of the communicative capacity of an encampment is perhaps the decades-long experiment of the Zapatista self-rule in Chiapas, Mexico
Most often, flight involves not coming out into the open but rather becoming invisible…
..you have to escape by refusing to be seen.
jason fried – benefit of being in the shadows
the need for something else for all to do..
the nature of power explained by Foucault and, before him, Niccolò Machiavelli: power is not a thing but a relation. No matter how mighty and arrogant seems that power standing above you, know that it depends on you, feeds on your fear, and survives only because of your willingness to participate in the relationship. Look for an escape door. One is always there. Desertion and disobedience are reliable weapons against voluntary servitude
Like prisons, militaries degrade subjectivities and poison social relations. Not only are returning soldiers damaged by war and hierarchy, but they spread their diseased subjectivities among the families they return to and everyone with whom they interact
dirty wars et al – none of us if one of us
The prison and the military are poisons, but perversely, the sick body must keep ingesting them to survive, making itself constantly worse. Prison creates a society that needs prisons, and the military creates a society that needs militarism
bad starfish ness
their response echoed the affirmations from Egypt, “No tenemos miedo.” We can’t fully explain how these militants achieved such a state of fearlessness, which must have been due in large part to their being together in the square, but we can easily recognize its political power and importance. Power cannot survive when its subjects free themselves from fear.
you can no longer oppress (Eleanor Longden) one who is no longer afraid
spinoza – real security and the destruction of fear can be achieved only through the collective construction of freedom
the audacious conceptual leap made by the theory and practice of parliamentary representation (from the ‘will of all’ to the ‘general will’) has finally proven to be fatal….. it’s increasingly hard for anyone to believe in the resurrection and redemption of the constitution.
when financial debts have been transformed into social bonds, when singularities interact in productive networks, and when the desire for security is freed from fear, then, form the inversion of these three figures, subjectives capable of democratic action will begin to emerge.
and this.. is ed.. rev of every day life. us emerging. everyday. as the day. (from 2014 interview – mid interview.. asked about ed)
the movement from the bourgeois citizen to the represented was universalizing in it juridical form and yet gradually emptied of any content.
the mechanisms of the production of rules can be constructed only in singular form according to common modalities. from now on constituent powers must function and be continually renewed from below.
so much that we don’t even talk of below ness anymore.. no?
why can’t we just be ourselves? because even if there were some original or primordial human nature to be expressed, there is *no reason to believe it would foster free, **equal, and democratic social and political relations. political organization always *** requires the production of subjectives. we must create a multitude capable of democratic political action and the self-management of the common.
*no reason: perhaps.. and perhaps this is the one thing we haven’t yet tried. haven’t yet given a true shot. ie: why not yet ness
The indignados think of this as a destituent rather than a constituent process, a kind of exodus from the existing political structures, but it is necessary to prepare the basis for a new constituent power
ch 3 – constituting the common
No John Maynard Keynes or Franklin D. Roosevelt has emerged on the scene, and their old recipes, which had some validity for the industrial production of their time, cannot be adapted to our postindustrial era. The ruling neoliberal, market-based policy frameworks have nothing to propose. What we need instead is a qualitative leap, a paradigm shift
perhaps let’s try… a means to model how 7 billion people could leapfrog to a nother way to live…
Today’s struggles thus present, first of all, destituent rather than constituent characteristics. They must destroy the despotic effects left in us and our societies through the exhaustion of the old constitutions.
The common sense that dwells in the hearts and heads of the subjects who conduct the struggles and imagine a new society has a prescriptive value and the power to generate, animate, and regulate new forms of life
indeed – the answers are everywhere and most of all – already in us – we just need to be about setting people free
on questioning (seemingly) short term effects of movements…. of course not. inalienable principles of freedom and equality were affirmed in that spring that may take more time to be realized fully.
What is interesting and new in these struggles is not so much their slowness or swiftness, but rather the political autonomy by which they manage their time
This notion of an autonomous temporality helps us clarify what we mean when we claim that these movements present an alternative. An alternative is not an action, a proposition, or a discourse that is simply opposed to the program of power, but rather it is a new dispositif that is based in a radically asymmetrical standpoint. This standpoint is elsewhere even when it shares the same space. its autonomy makes coherent the rhythms of its temporality..
temporalities are swift or slow according to the viral intensity of the communication of ideas and desire, which institute in each case a singular synthesis.
and perhaps intensified/deepened via mobile. ie: pluralistic ignorance ness et al
the constituent decisions of the encampmenets are formed through a complex construction and negotiation of knowledges and will, which takes time….. the often slow and complex decision-making procedures…
unless… we do/see/be that different now.. augmenting interdependence ness..
affects are expressed at those sites, but more important, they are produced and trained.
for anyone who has not spent time in the encampments, it is difficult if not impossible to understand how much these constituent experiences are animated and permeated by flows of affects and indeed great joy. physical proximity, of course, facilitates the common education of the affects, but also essential are the intense experiences of cooperation, creation of mutual security in a situation of extreme vulnerability, and the collective deliberation and decision-making processes. the encampments are a great factory…
of course.. but also can happen not in proximity..
the constituent process must be accompanies by a series of counterpowers that take immediate action in areas of social and environmental need and danger.. double relation.. 13th cent.. magna carta (rights w/respect to sovereign) accompanied by charter of the forest (rights to access the common)
shamefully, discussion of those in power shift from strategies of prevention to those of adaptation to a changed climate… as if concern for the well-being of the earth were an optional concern only for flush times… corp’s no willingness to stop practices… govt’s and supranational institutions.. equally unable to address/agree
housing..in subordinated countries.. addressed by movements to occupy unused land/structures. and to regularize people’s right to stay there.
rebel architecture ness
rash of foreclosures…anti-eviction campaigns..
environments/social crises exacerbated… by innumerable wars… a stage in which war is never-ending..
global security regime under which we live does not establish a state of peace but rather makes permanent a war society, with suspensions of rights, elevated surveillance, and the enlistment of all in the war effort.
who will put an end to the wars…u.s. has been willing.. no one believes at this point in the old ruse of a war to end all wars. wars only make more and more wars.
on.. a society of cognitive capitalism… no coincidence that.. a large portion of activists are students, intellectual workers… what some call the cognitive precariat…
any effort to discipline or prepress the curiosity, vitality, or desire fo knowledge of cognitive workers reduces their productivity. these qualities are essential to contemporary economic production, but they also open new contradictions regarding the exercise of power and the legitimacy of representation… in fact..curiosity, vitality, and desire for knowledge demand that the opacity and secrecy of power be destroyed
or made irrelevant.. cure is curiosity ness – (cure)(city)
the protection of minorities does not require abrogating majority ruled.. instead, .. singularities in decision making processes provides mechanisms for the inclusion and expression of differences.
deciding which minorities to protect wi which instances, of course, requires and ethical and political choice. not all minorities in all instances deserve to be shielded from the majority’s decisions. indeed, most minorities in most cases should be outvoted. otherwise, majority rule would be meaningless.
ff – saying 1% doesn’t need protection from 99% – because their money would protect them..
? crazy. sounds like a back fire waiting to happen..
The majority, then, becomes not a homogeneous unit or even a body of agreement but a concatenation of differences.
tolerance must instead give everyone the power to participate as different..
it is true.. these struggles confront same enemy, characterized by the powers of debt, the media, the security regime, and the corrupt systems of political representation. however, the primary point is that their practices, strategies, and objectives, although different, are able to connect and combine with each other to form a plural, shared project. the singularity of each struggle fosters rather than hinders the creation of a common terrain.
i don’t know. i mean yeah. but i think we’re missing the potential of today ness. the potential of sync\ing.. i mean.. there’s a glue/placebo/means/mechanism… beyond what we’re doing now..
..these movements were born in something like a communicative laboratory, and indeed the glue that holds them together seems initially to be linguistic, cooperative, and network based (like many forms of cognitive labor).
need deeper/simpler/more open glue
some of israeli indignados camped on tel aviv boulevards.. renewing spirit of the kibbutz (settlement/farm) tradition.. based in such community relationships. drawing on their antifascist traditions, the spanish indignados demo’d, in tents of their encampments… how a constituent discourse can – from below and from the simple..
using ‘below’ rattles me a bit.. and simple.. like rev in reverse ness..
.. local communication of affects, needs, and ideas in urban neighborhoods – rise up to form general assemblies and a decision-making system….
neighbor\hood (govt) ness
small groups and communities find ways to connect with one antoher and to create common projects not be renouncing but by expressing their differences.
app/chip ness.. simple enough.. to facilitate chaos/dance of us ness
federalism is thus a motor of composition… instead at the microlevel reside the passions and intelligence of a federalist logic of association…. weapons… aimed to break apart the connections of these federalist logics… ie: in n america, spain, and elsewhere in europe, police provocations to push nonviolent protesters to violence have repeatedly been used to create rifts.
politics is thus acquiring a plural ontology in these movements.
plural antology … ni ness
.. create a model of constituent democracy… we have thus seen so far a plurality of movements… against global capital, dictatorship of finance, biopowers that destroy the earth, and for shared open access to and self-management of the common.
the *next step would be to live these new relationships and participate in their construction.
*next – or perhaps.. first.. rev in reverse..
to do this we have *only to enter into the movements’ **production of subjectivity.
it is very difficult to trace the genealogy of decision making in the multitude and in the movements.
many of the conditions and practices of this process are not visible.
which is fine.. but if needed… tech can do that for us.. help us see each other better.
resistance and rebellion are, in fact, some of the initial decision taken by the movements. central here are the decisions that anticipate and promote the construction of a common terrain for the activist – the work of agitation, the demonstration, the encampment and so forth – that is at the base of *every collective imagination that supports a movement
*every – ? perhaps not every.. perhaps what we have been missing.. ie: rev in reverse.. rev of everyday life ness..
perhaps.. we can make resistance/rebellion (as least as much as we have been doing/focused on) irrelevant.. (ie:gupta roadblock law )
This decision must be both singular and common
multitudes will inevitably reconvene
in speaking of – where have the occupiers gone… mockingjay ness.. quiet revolution ness .. starfish ness..– in fact.. via ni – multitudes are always convening.. at each other’s beckon call (beck and call) – eternal back up ness
on social good: water, banks, education..
(under water) ..one should not exaggerate the complexity of the knowledges required to engage in political decisions regarding our society. People have been trained in apathy and ignorance, encouraged to suppress their appetite for democratic participation and to regard social systems as so complex that only experts can understand them
it should be clear that making water common does not mean making it public in the sense of assigning its regulation and management to local and state institutions. Common decisions are made through democratic participation not by elected representatives and experts
how to learn, how to be, — practice democracy.. what is democracy? asking every day – what is democracy.. that’ll do it.
Becoming common is a continuous activity..
(under banks).. we are not interested here in the question of whether in some future society money could be eliminated, but instead we want to focus on some of the institutional activity required democratically to manage the means of production and regulate the means of exchange.
p 73 – the rejection of the bank as an instrument of either private accumulation or public planning opens up avenues for conceiving new models oriented toward the accumulation of and planning for the common.
perhaps.. to wean us..radical econ ness
we need to imagine how these functions of gathering together competencies and integrating knowledges can be put to use in a democratic planning of social production and reproduction. production must be understood not as isolated to limited, separated domains, such as the factory, but as spread across the *entire society.
in the city. as the day. system open enough..
in the interests of the common, then, the bank would not disappear but instead its functions to register, foster, and support the whole range of productive social relationships would have to be increased and enlarged.
we need to try to apply the three principles that guided us in the ie’s of water and banks: make resources common, develop schemes of self-management, and subject all decisions to procedures of democratic participation.
all three.. for perhaps everything you could think of.. here: a nother way
In this sense education is at its most basic always self-education. No one can study for you, and the power to think is always already within you.
self ed, of corse, doesn’t mean getting rid of teachers or tearing down the schools..
or maybe it does.. in the vision we have today of it.. but it’s not a tearing down.. rather a setting free (let’s do this first: free art-ists).. of the teachers (do whatever they want.. modeling curiosity as the day) of the buildings (repurpose.. ie: city as floorplan ness or whatever)
The kind of self-education we are discussing is similarly affective as well as social and scientific, but the primary difference is that it is not individual. We can only study in relation to and in interaction with others, whether they are physically present or not. Education in this sense is always an exercise in and demonstration of the equality of singularities in the common
if education were to become an institution of the common, the interests of society as a whole, not those of business, would have to be the guide
whimsy as guide. as the day.
What kind of bargain are we making when we struggle for the common but settle for the rule of public property and state control?
most interesting here is the fact that the multiplicity of encounters, and sometimes conflicts maintains nonetheless a deep political coherence of the governmental process.
or maybe we are just stuck in that mindset.. and so perpetuate/ing.. holding onto processes/habits/happenings/whatevers.. that could indeed be irrelevant to our souls’ desires.. ie: i think when all of us.. every one of us.. has something else to do.. much will change.. many assumptions will die..
the external relationship between social movements and progressive govt’s that exists in several lain american countries – in varying degrees and varying forms serves for us as a ‘constitutional example.’
it is difficult to think of a path toward both democratic participation and a new constituent process of the common that does not pass through this experience of an open dynamic of constituent power in action.
and just do/be it. rev in reverse.. et al
does the principle of the rule of private property and capitalist markets, which is deeply embedded in the constitutional structure, pose an unavoidable obstacle to any opening to the self-management of the common?
as a first approach,.. let us preserve for explanatory purposes the three traditional constitutional functions – legislative, executive, and judiciary – and investigate how they might be transformed by the new constituent principles.
? – preserve for explanatory purposes.. perhaps. but also.. perhaps perpetuate/ing.. not us ness
.. and bring into political structure a much larger portion of society.
no reason today to not have that be all of us. and so..we can’t not. it won’t ever work/sustain/thrive… w/o all of us.
a way to begin to interpret the lessons of “the squares” and their experiments with assemblies in order to apply them on a social level.
the square – moving from square to society..
before any democracy is possible, there must be a new production of political affects that cultivates people’s *appetite for participation and desire for self-government.
already there.. no? no need to cultivate.. just to uncover.. unleash.. set free..
The surest and most powerful way to generate democratic political affects is by practicing democracy.
The neoliberal and neoconservative revolutions of the last decades of the twentieth century propagated the myth of a weak state, claiming to reduce state powers and pull the state out of the social field—getting government off our backs. State expenditures for social welfare were indeed reduced, but, in fact, total state budgets only grew due to increased funding to military, legal, and business interests. The neoliberal state, despite claims to the contrary, wields strong planning powers, which it enacts through close collaboration with corporate and financial interests. *No one should be fooled anymore by the democratic aura that neoliberals still hope to evoke when they claim that the market decides
*no one fooled – pluralistic ignorance ness
all this on b .. planing ness
.. we can sympathize w/those that want no more planning..
Throughout the twentieth century, development was conceived primarily as growth according to an industrial model, with the assumption that human well-being is dependent on continually producing more goods and consuming more resources
just as the common must be organized in order to free up access, it must be managed in order to be sustained for the future. the well-being of the earth’s atmosphere, as well as the realm of ideas and indeed all forms of the common, requires planning.
? maybe this is our downfall.. not being able to give that up. to trust.. us.. enough. facilitate inevitable/desired chaos yes.. but by listening to us.. w/o agenda.
productive cooperation in the biopolitical realm tends to be created in social networks among producers without the need for bureaucratic oversight and guidance. This does not mean that no administration is necessary but rather that it has to be immanent, woven into the social fabric itself
the politicians and financial moguls who today make decisions are not geniuses delivered to us from heaven. there is no reason that through education we cannot all become at least as expert as they are regarding our natural, social, and economic worlds in order to make informed, intelligent decisions.
? whoa. perhaps this so called.. education.. is getting in our way..? answers/insight.. already in each one of us. already.
thinking of inspectors of inspectors ness..
the inalienable rights.. require interpretation to be applied and enacted. *the question is whether we need a small group of experts in black robes to interpret them for us.
* or is the question..whether we need them. (esp if only come in a form that needs interpretation)
Here again, as we said earlier, a widespread educational project is necessary to develop the intelligence, create the political affects, and furnish the necessary tools of expertise to enable the entire multitude to participate in such interpretation and decision making.
so.. practice democracy.. no…? not a matter of some educational project – but rather – setting people free – a people experiment ness – trusting us. (something we haven’t yet tried.)
we can imagine constituting a just, equal, and sustainable society in which all have access to and share the common, but the conditions to make it real don’t yet exist.
well they do. right? we have the means to make it happen w/in a year. globally. so.. i’m guessing you’re assuming part of conditions is the will.. to just do it.
eventually we will hae to take them (rich) – but let’s go slowly. it’s not so simple.
or it is.. if we include .. all of us. ie: not planning to take.. anyone. imagining a nother way each one of us craves. that’s what makes it simple. by being deep enough.
… the monster has many heads..
again – Siddhartha’s thinking w/cancer – and starfish ness. it’s us. all of us. that will make it work.
not to despair.. throughout history unexpected/unforeseeable events arrive that completely reshuffle the decks of political powers and possibility.
i think we have no idea.. what it means to reshuffle..
the movements are preparing ground for an event they cannot foresee or predict.
which is fractal\ing .. how we should live. everyday. no?
the movements are writing a manual for how to create and live in a new society.
? thinking that manual is already in each heart. we just need time/space to … detox… so we can hear/be it.
A *deeper debt is created as a social bond in which there is no creditor. New truths are produced through the interaction of singularities being together. A real security is forged by those no longer bound by **fear. And those who refuse to be represented discover the power of democratic political participation. Those four subjective attributes, each characterized by a new power that revolts and rebellions have achieved, together define the commoner
**no fear in love.
the common has nothing to do with sameness. Instead, in struggle, different social groups interact as singularities and are enlightened, inspired, and transformed by their exchange with each other. They speak to each other on the lower *frequencies, which people outside of the struggle often cannot hear or understand.
don’t think that the lack of leaders and of a party ideological line means anarchy if by anarchy you mean chaos, bedlam, and pandemonium. what a tragic lack of political imagination to think that leaders and centralized structures are the only way to organize effective political projects.
embracing uncertainty. embracing us.. as the day.
2012 – in zagreb – talking on 4 subjective figures in ch 1 in declaration.. (2nd time note taking. first time note taking on Michael’s page)..
7 min – cycle of struggle of 2011 – compared to cycle of alterglobalization movements 1999-2001:
1\ multitude form – experimenting w/horizontal/democratic org and decision making.. refusing leadership/centralized dictation
2\ nomatic (99-2001) to sendentary (2011)
3\ primary concept in alterglobalization – justice… 2011 – democracy
13 min – 4 paradigmatic subjectivities:
1\ indebted – if you want to do anything.. you have to go into debt.. 95% who graduate in us owe loans.. debt as a generalized position.. brings about social hierarchy.. as indebted you are subordinated… the exploited always exists in a relationship of exchange… debt always unequal… thought of consumers rather than producers and reveals the hierarchy.. 99&1% passed so quickly.. because obvious to everyone…. debt – david graeber.. debt is permanent and also a moral power….in german – debt and guilt overlap.. a work ethic.. in so much as you are indebted you have to work..
2\ mediatized – 21 min – the more the media seeps in.. the more superficial… talk so twitter.. – but perhaps he hasn’t used it .. to see it’s deep potential… liberation today.. not about access.. or expression.. deleuze: no longer getting people to express… sometimes need right to say nothing… i don’t think that’s exactly right – about silence.. but i do think first part is right… people struggling for servitude.. as liberation.. ie: marx on peasants can’t represent selves.. can’t act as class/politically.. can’t communicate.. because spread on countryside.. the force of being together in the factory is kind of communication formed by a presence. one thing rediscovered in encampments.. the kind of communication that functions from being together…
3\ securitized – not only what’s new.. surveilled.. ness… now just also taken outside of institutions.. not only object.. but subject. increasing incarceration and increasing militarization… ie: honoring soldiers on rise. all this based on fear..
4\ represented – summary of first three.. corruption of first three. forms of representation are collapsing/fading. i see representation as an obstacle to democracy.. links and separates people..
38 min – these subjectivities mystify (in order from above) productivity, intelligence, power, capacity for political action
40 min – struggles are acting on these and in some ways inverting them.. and creating figures of power..
1\ debt – moment of refusal – ie: we won’t pay your debt – refusal to pay debt.. but also of subjectivity of debt… richard dienst – bonds of debt – not that we have too much debt but too little debt.. lack of social bonds.
2\ communication – refusal to not be absorbed into media – struggle not because of lack of info. real communication requires an encampment..
3\ security – flight as refusal – refusing to be seen. and fights against real prisons/military. key to all of this .. the notion of putting an end to fear.. day after beatings.. slogan was.. we no longer fear..
46 min – state of not having fear… must result from that being together..
4\ represented – demands for democracy comes in.. refusal of representation. encampments as practicing democracy
51 min – how to move from a square to a society..
social bonds of real debt (to each other); collective intelligence – real communication; being together w/o fear
historical analogy for me… i’m asking for a constitual moment.. ie: the u.s. process between 1870s and 1880s…declaration of independence.. seems we’re in the moment of the declaration.. current cycle of struggles.. to create new truths/rights.. truths that are created in struggle..
54 min – what’s next necessary – a constituent process.. that consolidate these truths.. moving from declaration to a constitution.. a new common sense..
we’ve been great at occupying a square.. not to transform that into a new society… the constitution of a real democracy..
56 min – q&a
1:03 – talking on social media again.. and saying.. the being together is what brought the depth.. not the online interaction…
not sure.. i think it’s both.. neither starts it.. it’s both at the same time.. is what’s letting us get closer..
1:06 – tech that interests me most .. ones that help in large group decision making…. some techs that are helpful.. not so technical.. ie: human mic. i’d be most focused on political possibilities for democratic decision making
1:08 – q: beyond constitution.. i believe we have to put it in practice.. so in your imagination how does that go.. a: i would pose diff between constituent process and constitution… working on ways of institutionalizing.. (meaning repeated practices.. social relationships you can return to.. sustained) … a lot of self criticism… during last 10 yrs.. is precisely about this ephemeral quality… ie: spectacular events then disappear.. so… thinking about how to extend.. ways of making durable the kinds of principles that the movements have developed.. institutions of the common: finding ways of making lasting relationships outside public/private property relations.. these things don’t have to be fixed in a constitution but rather lasting processes…..
1:11 (same question) – the public – the force of nation states – at moment.. undeniable element of the exchange.. can be ally.. but in no sense.. the goal. engagement of nation states.. rather than thinking it’s the terrain. ie: movements in bolivia – re appropriation of common.. healthy struggle.. aggressive collaboration with the state
1:16 – these series of refusals have to be accompanied by the creation of alternative bonds..
1:17 – q: if we are lacking social sensitivity maybe we are moving in the wrong direction a: the individualizing of these 4 characters.. the magical feeling of the movements allowed for a new sociality.. rather than individuality
1:24 – it does seem primary – the being together in a space.. is the transformative
1:26 – 2001 to 2003 for me.. pressure of war – invasion of iraq – made it necessary to have a unified agenda. the power/joyful quality that had previously been part of alterglobalization movement was completely reduced when under a central agenda/leader.. ie: we had to stop everything else and protest the war.. the draining of energy/enthusiasm was oriented that way..
1:28 – marx.. the mole that springs up every so often.. but when reappears.. it’s making progress… reappearance at a new stage
2014 – on the Poors, the Multitude, and the Commons — A Conversation with Andrew Reszitnyk – much on declaration..
7 min – lives mapped out… book – 24/7.. life on internet.. distracted attention.. destroy the diff between wakefulness and sleep.. rather than factory whistle.. it’s the sound when get a new email..
9 min – andrew: perhaps what you’re most famous for… on something major changed in the nature of power – empire michael: 11 min – counter argument.. decline of us ability as unilateral power.. point of inflection around vietnam war. our (my & toni’s) idea is that there will be no nation state as center.. global order shifted.. that’s what we’re trying to call empire. notion of a mixed constitution. the disease of thinking w/historical examples.. ie: roman empire as mixed constitution (rule of 1 – emperor, rule of few – oligarchy, rule of many).. ie: 3 dimensional chess – have to play between the boards.. simultaneously…
15 min – empire is really a network form.. no single center. ie: pentagon can’t dictate.. hollywood can’t dictate. network of nodes of power that have to collaborate to maintain.. to keep rich rich..
17 min – poverty – need to rethink concept of working class.. not to throw it out.. we don’t want to think the notion of proletariat.. as not only those w/stable employment. ie: working class today not just auto worker.. but also those partially/precariously/un employed. once you expand that notion.. looking at the poor as a category gives a vision for reassessing what the subjectivity of labor is..
either refuse/invert perspective of us as victims of capital. yes we’re victims of capital but also powerful subjects.
20 min – not only victims.. not only talk about oppression/domination.. but to pose in terms of exploitation.. you can’t be exploited w/o a focus on your power.. ie: necessary to the system.
21 min – new status of debt – all the things the welfare states used to present are now being filled by paying for them through debt. ie: go into debt to go to uni.. to get housing.. healthcare et al.. debt is becoming an increasingly dominant mode of control.. since 2008 – a predominant mode of social discipline and control..
23 min – hesitation.. seems a mistake if one assumes that indebtedness has replaced exploitation.. precariousness goes hand in hand with indebtedness..
27 min – on inversion of debt – ie: climate indebtedness to developing countries
28 min – i’m not much into solidarity – i think it’s a bad concept.. often.. to have sympathy for those less fortunate.. i think often it’s really you that should change.rather than solidarity w/lessers.. maybe instead learn from them
37 min – the common: private property has monopoly over access and decision making.. same distinguishes common from public property.. which does have limits on access and monopoly over decision making.. ie of the state..
so common.. not property and has access to decision making..
39 min – whole notion of tragedy of commons… comes w/absence of 2nd (1st open access 2 mechanism for decision making)
also jo freeman’s structureless ness.. wasn’t that it couldn’t happen – or only happen via transparency of hierarchy.. but that there was no mechanism for decision making beyond 15 or 20 ish
only distinguish from public and commons.. in public own/controlled by state41 min – i want to distinguish common from state and market… so as long as by public you don’t mean owned by state….42 min – again – important to have mechanism for collective decision makingso now lapping over (3 dimensional chessing over) to other talk on 24/7 ness.. (that one of work blur to 24/7) now blur is convo/decision making/voting/et al… to 24/7 – rev of everyday life ness..44 min – role of ed in the common..ed – against making ed into private property – ambiguity between public (state control) and the common45 min – i’m also sensitive to the fact that the public uni sucks.. hating the kinds of controls that come with ed hierarchy .. so movements have been trying to imagine something along the lines of the common in ed46 min – this notion of study (gave two guys names) – an autonomous ed.. outside of either private/public institutions.. or taking places w/in interstices.. free spaces w/in it47 min – interested in another way besides… public – meaning state owned.. and private (struggles today about anti-privatization) …48 min – on need for ed process – so people are capable (andrew) of participating in commons/democracy..where i would say production of subjectivity you would say ed or pedagogy..i haven’t thought the mechanisms for methods for subjectivity (i say instead of ed/pedagogy) in pedagogy context.. partly because don’t involve teacher/student relationship49 min – i do agree.. on being qualified/capable for self rule… how to get there..
50 min – (andrew) at center… of trilogy you talk about a new revolutionary subject – multitude51 min – marks as a challenge: 1\ multiplicity can act politically – assumption was that only a unity can act politically.. multiplicity is not internally unified.. internally different.. because of its multiplicity can act politically… respond through the production of subjectivities that are capable of cooperating across differences…to toni and i – multitude is not a crowd.. not a group of people.. not a mass..instead a multiple formation that’s able to act in common politically..
53 min – multitude to name what’s happening.. but more than that using it to name what we want.. something that’s possible in the futureto a bit of a tension between the really existing and the possible future..54 min – indifferent/passive multiplicities.. neither one of those.. it’s multiplicities that can act together.. politically.. able to make decisions..
55 min – (andrew) – how inclusive is the multitude. (michael) that would be much better than what toni and i were able to think..
multitude means: the becoming common of politics… equal/open access and democratic decision making…
encampments where trying to get at that.. it didn’t mean anyone could speak randomly.. there were certain qualifications of who spoke first.. an attempt at collective self-management.. an experiment in multitude organizing..
again.. that’s how it is now.. imagine if speaking randomly is what we’re really after… listening to that rhythm.. (also i guess included in that is that we would render most speakings/meetings/decisions we spend our time in today as irrelevant..
what if we’re missing what matters most.. because we haven’t yet trusted the rhythm of us – so we have yet to see us.
i’m thinking .. this dance we’re capable of.. wouldn’t have to determine …’certain qualification of who spoke’ ness..
57 min – in order to understand what happened in tahrir square.. you have to understand the multitude.. but i wouldn’t be satisfied with that.. it’s a project.. and we’re seeing its emergence..
59 min – on sovereignty – all toni and i are objecting to .. is when those elements are made the core.. also focus on legal methods of oppression – yes protest guantanamo.. but also daily oppression..
another academic trend that i’m trying to figure out what irritates me about it.. around concept of sovereignty.. what i object to.. the slippage from does to should have a theological foundation..
i want to get theology (and sovereignty) out of politics…
1:02 – it seems to me that democracy runs counter to sovereignty..
1:03 – on people as unity.. in order to be a sovereign.. i think a multiplicity can never be a sovereign..
1:05 – on counter powers.. toni and i recognizing.. democratic/autonomic deliberation not always rapid.. have their own time schedule.. yet many problems we face .. beyond human species.. and local scale.. require a different temporality.. an urgency..
it does seem rational to say there has to be a mixture.. of diff responses..
for urgency’s sake. for humanity sake. for sustainability sake. ness.
1:07 – immaterial common – unlimited/reproducible.. earth common – limited.. a sense of the slowness of democracy among anti capitalist groups… ie: zapitistas on own calendar; environmental groups.. a need to act – urgency..
1:08 – so a need to think these two timings.. ness … at once…
1:09 – both keep saying – democracy has to take time…
but/and.. we can leapfrog to it… which would take care of urgency…
1:10 – last 10 yrs fav slogan: we want everything for everyone.. but for environmentalists.. then all f*&cked. copenhagen: there is no planet b.. but for capitalists.. don’t like saying no alternative..
1:13 – on hope/optimism.. i would say stave off resignation… because it leads to inaction. there are incredibly powerful forces against us.
the thing i would want to avoid in myself most.. is to pose a possibility w/o just cause.. a cheerleading of the movements.. i’ve had encounters.. people ask why i’m so optimistic.. with a hint of insult.. are you so naive to believe.. so a burden on – not hope – but confidence.. to not only articulate/analyze the tremendously powerful forces of oppression/control but also to reveal the real powers/potentials that are at our disposal.. that seems to me the burden of this perspective… recognized as confidence..
(andrew): things that have happened in history. .. things that are unexpected.. surprising..
(michael): and wonderful..