book links to amazon
adding page during another iteration of diving in again ness..
and ongoing add ons via re re readings
opening – taking up the baton
many who are not part of the struggles have trouble seeing the connections in this list of events.. (tunisia set self on fire dec 2010 to cairo egypt tahrir square to n africa and mid east.. yemen libya syria.. to wisconsin .. to madrid barcelona indignados may 2011.. to greeks to tel aviv to england to zuccotti park sept 2011)
wall st occupiers had them all in view, translating ie: struggle against the tyrant into a struggle against the tyranny of finance – you may think they were just deluded and forgot or ignored the differences in their situations and demands.. we believe, however that they have a clearer vision than those outside the struggle and thy can hold together w/o contradiction their singular conditions and local battles w the common global struggle..
characteristics of movements: occupation – (encampment); org as multitude (no leader – demo decision making); struggle for the common.
on movements common internal org as a multitude.. ie: in tahrir sq occupation would each day presume a diff leader: mohamed elbaradie.. next day google exec wael ghonim.. et al.. what media couldn’t accept was that there was no leader in tahrir square.. same w zuccotti.. many intellectuals/celebrities.. but no one could consider any of them leaders.. they were guests of the multitude.. from cairo and madrid to athens and ny.. the movement instead developed horizontal mechs for org.. creating democratic practices of *decision making so that **all participants could lead together
just not horizontal enough ie: democratic admin ness.. *decision making is unmooring us.. not horizontalizing us.. **rather so all whales could lead.. need detox embed in order to get to legit non leading.. non managing ness
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.
dominant forms of subjectivity.. 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.
debt controls you.. it discipline our consumption, imposing austerity on you and often reducing you to strategies of survival, but beyond that it even dictates your work rhythms and choices.. effect of debt.. like that of work ethic.. is to keep your nose to the grindstone.. whereas work ethic born e/in .. debt begins as external constraint but soon worms its way inside.. debt wields a moral power whose primary weapons are responsibility and guilt.. the indebted is an unhappy consciousness that makes guilt a form of life
society has become a factory… our bodies/minds/capacities for communication/intelligence/creativity. life itself has been put to work.
rent – this is where debt enters the pic.. as a weapon to maintain and control the relationship of production and exploitation..
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 Deleuze explains, “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
the media don’t really make you passive.. in fact they constantly call on you to participate, to choose what you like, to contribute your opinions, to narrate your life..
as whales.. huge diff.. ie: non legit voice/participation/whatever if still whales.. rather.. it’s all about spinach or rock ness.. we need to detox and listen deeper simultaneously.. ie: imagine if we listened to curiosity over decision making over some finite set of choices
the media are constantly responsive to your likes/dislikes and in return you are constantly attentive
whales likes.. dislikes..
How can we separate the repressive powers of media from the potential for liberation?
is it possible to recognize qualitative distinctions among diff types of info and communication? perhaps a look back at role of info and communication in factory in an earlier phase of production can give us some hints
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.
nothing can replace the being together of bodies and the corporeal communication that is the basis of collective political intelligence and action..
complex narratives of your life situation, longing, and desires have been reduced to the typical question of social media: where are you right now.. what are you doing?.. habits and practices of friendship have been diluted
habits and practices.. already a dilution of us
imagine if we could get back/to us.. via listening deeper to itch-in-8b-souls first thing.. every day .. and use that data to connect/coord us.. we might just get to a more antifragile, healthy, thriving world.. the ecosystem we keep longing for ie: the energy of 8b alive people
why do you accept being treated like an inmate? in previous era prison, separated from society, was institution of total surveillance.. but today.. increasingly the general condition of society as a whole.. You accept being in a prison society because outside seems more dangerous.
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.
during same yrs of prison expansion, has also been a militarization of us society.. what is most remarkable is not the growth in the number of soldiers in the us.. but rather their social stature.. military personnel have become (once again) objects of national reverence
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.
all forms of out internment and enlistment in the security regime.. marx credits to the ‘bloody legislation’ in pre capitalist england directed at the propertyless and vagrant classes.. in addition to coercing the formerly rural populations to accept sedentary jobs in urban centers, the legislation also created the discipline by which the future proletarians would accept wage labor as if it were their own wish/destiny.. so too, our participation in security society operates as a kind of training or dressage of our desires/hopes but also and most importantly our fears.. prison functions in part as a warehouse for surplus population but also as a frightening lesson to the ‘free population’.. furthermore.. the current econ and fin crisis adds a whole series of other fears.. and in many cases one of the greatest fears is that of being out of work and thus not being able to survive
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 securitized lives in fear of a combo of punishments and external threats.. fear of the ruling powers and their police is a factor but more important and effective is fear of dangerous others and unknown threats – a generalize social fear.. in some ways those who are in prison have less to fear; rather, even though the threats they face from the carceral machine, the guards, and other inmates, are sever, they are more limited and knowable.. fear in the security regime is an empty signifier in which all kind so terrifying phantoms can appear.. all kinds of injustices can be warranted by the ghostly apparitions of a generalized fear..t
the associative nature of social relations is transformed into a fearful isolation
thru the processes of representation, politics dumps this world of filth on the represented..
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
even if everything were to function as it should and political rep were characterized by transparency and perfection, rep is in itself, by defn, a mech that separates the population from power, the commended from shoe who command
on white male subjects designated as ‘the people’.. it was rather conceived as ‘relative’ democracy, in the sense that rep functioned at once, to connect the people to and separate them from the structure of power..
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.
for rousseau, rep is generated by a (metaphysical) passage from the ‘will of all’ that constitutes society to teh ‘general will’ that is the will of those preselected by all but who respond to none.. as carl schmitt says, to rep means to make present an absence or really a no one.. schmitt’s conclusion is perfectly coherent w rousseau’s presuppositions, which themselves are expressed in the us constitution and the constitutions of the french revolution.. the paradox of rep is complete
since systems of rep were constructed primarily on the national level, the emergence of a global power structure dramatically undermines them.. the emerging global institutions make little pretense to rep the will of populations.. the function of rep that in a mystified way, pretended to put the people in power is surely no longer effective in this global terrain
m of care – mar 5 – on talking of going beyond national
just as the indebted is denied control of its productive social power; just as intelligence affective capacities and powers of linguistic invention of the mediatized are betrayed; and just as the securitized, living in a world reduced to fear/terror, is deprived of every possibility of associative, just, and loving social exchange, so too, dos the represented have no access to effective political action
what does it mean to win back (or really to realize for the firs time) the political power of the citizen-worker..
holy cow.. loaded/wrong question.. no?..
democracy will be realized only when a subject capable of grasping and enacting ti has emerged
ch 2 – rebellion against the crisis
we are on the titanic, they tell us, and if we want to be saved from the ultimate catastrophe, we have to agree to worsen even further the situation of the indebted/mediatized/securitized/rep’d.. isn’t it possible to rise up and give voice to the indignation that seethes **in all of us when faced w this blackmail
Hannah Arendt, for one, well grasped and anticipated, in the era of triumphant capitalism, this generalized reduction of the potential of human action. . her concept of action – living kairos (opp) that traverss and subverts those conditiosn fo work and exploitation.. a kairos of resistance..
again.. deeper than resistance.. what we need is legit energy\ness
when you bend under debt, hypnotically glued to screen, house is a prison, see your passions strained.. 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
there is no alt, certainly we are on decks of the titanic.. making our life into a gray indifference.. But we are here together. There is a kairos of resistance as well as a kairos of community
oi.. kairos (opp) of resistance? seems a very limited opp
the depotentialized subject is a figure that has been separated from what it can do.. as 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
cooperation and productive interdependence are the conditions of the common, and the common is now what constitutes the primary basis of social production. our social bonds, which link us to one another, become a means of production
the new forms of debt become ever more social and anti individual, transitive, and singular rather than closed in a contractual relationship..
music & lyrics: not another negotiation..
but i don’t think you’re meaning it to go that deep.. ie: still democratic admin et al
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? (ie that not going deep enough)
we need to let go of any form of m\a\p
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… of reciprocal ness.. messes with us. would rather work from – can’t not ness..
commodities serve as vehicles of social subordination.. t
don’t think, though that some of these struggles are more advanced and others more backward.. no, the old bolshevik theory of a passage of political consciousness from spontaneity to org no longer has a place here..
..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..t
bill strickland ness – quit playing defense and build/create/be it
break the spell and discover a new way to communicate.. we need to make new truths, which can be created only by singularities in networks communicating and being together..t
imagine if we just focused on listening to the itch in 8b souls.. first thing.. everyday.. and used that data to connect/coord us.. we might just get to a more antifragile, healthy, thriving world.. the ecosystem we keep longing for.. the energy of 8b alive people
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..t
and perhaps what is killing us.. ie: thinking all data today is non legit.. like from whales in sea world
the same is true of practice of ideology.. revealing truth about power does not stop people from striving for thier servitude as if it were their liberation..
,,neither is it enough to open a space for communicative action in the public sphere.
what we need is a means to undo our hierarchical listening
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..
2\ if we create a way to ground the chaos of 8b free people
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.
on 99 and 1 ness.. then to.. expressing these political affects in being together embodies a new truth
not legit new if not about 100% of us
on ie of zuccotti park producing new truths: working groups and commissions on topics from housing rights and mortgage foreclosures to gender relations and violence function as both self learning experiences and means to spread knowledge production.. anyone who has live thru such an encampment recognizes how new knowledges and new political affects are created int eh corporeal and intellectual intensity of the interactions.. (and later).. constant attempt in communities to subvert gender/social hierarchies and to open to all decision making and governing responsibilities give substance/meaning to projects to lead by following and to walk forward questions..
dang.. not new.. not deep enough.. let go.. of any form of m\a\p
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.
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
on breaking voluntary compliance et al
they conducted a kind of secret flight while staying still
part of our fight has to be not only again the ubiquitous tentacles of security system, but also against the very real and concrete walls of the prison and military barracks.. angela davis rightly calls for abolition of the prison
moten abolition law et al
today’s prisons clearly have none of the noble functions of reeducation or social reintegration that 19th cent reformers imagined.. on contrary.. prison is a machine that creates and re creates antisocial subjectivities, perpetuates fear and poison social relations
so too.. supposed to’s of school/work
the struggle against the military and militarization is equally important.. .. the warnings of an illustrious catalog of us presidents that military establishments undermine public freedom and democracy have gone almost entirely unheeded.. for a nation that so venerates its founding fathers and past presidents, the us is remarkably deaf to their pleading on this subject
wft? ie: dirty wars et al
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
impossible to realize fully in our socities as they are currently structured..
new structure.. could turn it overnight
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
going cold turkey would be suicide.. the body must be cured instead over an *extended period to purge itself of the poison
yeah.. *i don’t think so.. at least not now
on tahrir square .. instead of defying the injustice of affirming how they would defend selves in future.. people began to say, simply and remarkably, chant ‘we are not afraid anymore‘..
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..t
you can no longer oppress (Eleanor Longden) one who is no longer afraid
huge.. so how to do that for 8b people.. in sync (has to be all of us or the dance won’t dance)
we think the ability of those encamped in these squares to shake off fear has little to do w heroism or even death.. spinoza: ‘a free man thinks of death least of all.. and his wisdom is a meditation on life, not death’.. so focused on joys of life that death becomes an afterthought..
spinoza foresaw – real security and the destruction of fear can be achieved only through the collective construction of freedom
one novelty of these protests consists in the fact that they immediately make clear that the crisis is not only economic, social an political, but also constitutional.. rep structures and liberal governance regimes are all thrown into question..
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.
but too.. it’s hard to let go w/o legit alt (aka: not part\ial ness)
political and constitutional debate has to be reopened..
that would be spinning our wheels in tragedy of the non common.. we need to let go of debate/defense ness.. we need to just do/be an alt
ie: imagine if we
how can people associate closely together in the common and participate directly in democratic decision making
oi.. another loaded (decision making is unmooring us law) and so wrong question.. let’s just go w first 9 words
how can the multitude become prince of the institution of the common in a way that reinvents and realizes *democracy? this is the **task of a constituent process
we have to let go of *democracy ness (democratic admin et al) which is as illegit as managing the common..
*that would be a task/role of whales
we have to quit saying abolition while perpetuating slavery.. ie: gare enslavement law et al
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… now new figures of political subjectivity can instead discover *forms of participation that overflow corporatist and individualist division, adn that give substance and content to the generic and abstract **forms of political activity
*killer (as in lit deadly) phrase.. because it perpetuates *this.. aka: democratic admin
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?
what we need is a means to undo our hierarchical listening
why can’t we free ourselves from all normative structures/institution? every revolution needs a constituent power.. not to bring the revolution to an end but to continue it, guarantee its achievements and keep it open to further innovations.. a constituent power is necessary to org social production and social life in accordance w our principles of freedom, equality and solidarity. constituent processes *constantly revise political structures/institutions to be more adequate to the social fabric and material foundation of social conflicts, needs, and desires
constituent: ‘1 being a part of a whole: the constituent minerals of the rock. 2 being a voting member of a community or organization and having the power to appoint or elect: the constituent body has a right of veto.’
*totally depend on defn of constituent.. if.. 1\ part of whole.. could work.. if 2\ voting part of org.. deadly
said more philosophically, constituent processes are dispositifs of the production of subjectivity
dispositif: ‘Dispositif or dispositive is a term used by the French intellectual Michel Foucault, generally to refer to the various institutional, physical, and administrative mechanisms and knowledge structures which enhance and maintain the exercise of power within the social body‘
none to date (have gotten to ie: subjectivity.. all biased et al) .. we have no idea what legit free people are like.. only what whales are like.. so must be part 2 of defn
sujectivity: ‘based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions: his views are highly subjective | there is always the danger of making a subjective judgment. . dependent on the mind or on an individual’s perception for its existence.’
but why our friends repeat, must subjectivities be produced?.. 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.. we haven’t let go enough to see
***requires: ? – deadly to think need to require management..
an ie can help clarify one aspect of this proposition
instead they have created a rare opp for reforming and relaunching a new and diff left
but also and more importantly because they now have larger battles to fight, in particular on aimed at the structure of rep and the constitutional order..
another ie of whales ness if still talking of fighting et al
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..t
perhaps let’s try… a means to model how 7 billion people could leapfrog to a nother way to live…
we need to quit saying leap/p-shift.. and then describing non legit leaps/p-shifts
on encampments of 2011 having great constitutional relevance..
why would we want that?
they have made of these principles a new common sense and designated them as the basis of a project of constituent action.. believing that only a constituent process based in the common can provide a real alt, we thus hold these truths to be self evident, that all people are equal, that they have acquired thru political struggle certain inalienable rights, that among these are not only life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness but also free access to the common, equality in the distribution of wealth, and the sustainability of the common
if still a project.. let alone one of constituent action.. still about whales.. not about leaping
to secure these rights.. transparency of govt org
t jefferson advocated that each generation must create its own constitution
on providing new guards for our future security
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.
a declaration of independence creates the real basis for a new constituent process
rather.. a declaration of interdependence
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.. declaring *their independence..
indeed – the answers are everywhere and most of all – already in us – we just need to be about setting people free
we won’t have legit/ongoing energy\ness
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
in every instance, time is withdrawn from the schedule imposed by external pressures and electoral seasons, establishing its own calendar and rhythms of development
circadian rhythm ness.. and our need to let go
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..
most important perhaps is how every constituent action is contagious and infectious
posing the desire for democracy against traditional political structures of rep also raises the need for participation and transparency..
if legit craving/infectious alt.. wouldn’t have a need for participation.. so this ‘desire for democracy against traditional’ ness.. is still that traditional/cancerous democratic admin ness..
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
imagining deeper.. more viral.. et al
the slow temporality of constituent movements – typified by the deliberation of the assemblies – allows for and requires the spread and expression (*as well as the control) of knowledges and expertise.. if there ever existed and ‘autonomy of the political’ a la schmitt.. you certainly won’t find it here
the constituent decisions of the encampments 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..
.. decision making procedures supported by widespread knowledge and expertise, asl mark a significant element of the anthropological (or ontological) diff of the new constituent movements..
the spanish indignados and the occupier of wall street offer powerful ie’s of this complexity
in the way they combine in discourse and action the critique of the curren tforms fo ppoitical life (rep, electoral methods, and so forth..
democratic admin.. killing us .. from all directions (doing it.. fighting it.. trying to change it.. ).. let go
finally, the alt temporality of these constituent processes fosters both the creation and spread of knowledges as well as the education of political affects.. (ie: tahrir, square, wisconsin, .. as ie’s)
affects are expressed at those sites, but more important, they are produced and trained.
.. red flags
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.
oi.. not legit 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… for the *production of social/democratic effects
let’s try this proximity ness.. ie: imagine if we
on the need for slowness of constituent work.. but there are pressing issues that won’t wait.. what good is a beautiful constituent process when people are suffering now.. what if by the time we create a perfect democratic society the earth is already degraded beyond repair
the constituent process must be accompanied 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)
today the constituent process must be *accompanied by a similar series of actions to guarantee the **rights of life and provide the ***necessities for a safe, healthy ****dignified existence..
****dignified: ‘having or showing a composed or serious manner that is worthy of respect‘… let go.. not the ‘existence’ we need/crave
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 w/no willingness to stop practices… govt’s and supranational institutions.. equally unable to address/agree.. seems humanity is completely *powerless to stop itself from destroying the planet and the necessary conditions for tis own life
not *powerless.. just part of the perpetuation of tragedy of the non common.. by not letting go enough.. to see.. legit us
another realm where counterpowers are needed.. human necessities for food, health, and shelter, which can be addressed in part thru access to the common
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..
evicted et al
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.. then on dream of peace
what kinds of counterpowers can guarantee the continued flourishing of humanity.. and world.. absolutely essential in this effort is the work that so many are doing today that use the legal means of national/international systems as a kind of counterpower.. class action *suits against polluting corps.. human **righs demands against war, torture and police abuse..
biopolitics needs weapons of *coercion at its disposal, beyond the means of recourse provided by national/international law.. to construct counterpowers..
democratic counterpower must be able to force the corps and the nation states to open access to teh common, to divide the wealth equitably so all can meet their basic needs, and to stop the destruction and reapir the damage done to social systems and ecosystems, populations and the planet..
not happening till we get back/to enough ness (otherwise focusing on non legit needs so never enough).. which can’t happen till we get back/to all of us ness.. (dance – of enough ness – won’t dance unless it’s all of us)
how can such demo counterpowers be constructed and where will they get their force? how this will come bout is not clear to us
well.. it is if we undo our hierarchical listening
but what is clear are the urgent needs of humanity and the earth, and the incapacities of all the existing powers to fulfill those needs.. what kind of force is adequate.. when police attack.. et al
only unconditional ness..
only our interconnectedness
the constituent power of the common is thus *closely interwoven w the themes of constituent power – adopting new media (cel techs, twitter, fb, and more gen the internet) as vehicles of experimentation w democratic and multitudinary governance.
*so not true..
issues of communication are immediately *intertwined w those of knowledge, today more than ever..
*rather.. convoluted/cancered.. by
on.. a society of cognitive capitalism… knowledge ever more constitutes the *heart of social relations, in terms of both capitalist control and the resistance of living labor
no coincidence that.. a large portion of activists are students, *intellectual workers… what some call the cognitive precariat…
they mediate on their own skin the activity of communication, intellectual labor, and the efforts required to study
wow.. such bs.. thinking sinclair perpetuation law at its best/subtlest
this is one solid basis they all share.. the proliferation of struggles and their performative character are grounded in the new nature of labor power. as the centrality of cognitive labor becomes hegemonic, it permeates and is crystallized in these forms of struggle.
seems .. poisonous commenting here..
then.. the demand for the publicity and transparency of power becomes central
any effort to discipline or prepress the curiosity, vitality, or desire of 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
let’s try something to render ie: productivity/intellect ness.. irrelevant.. ie: cure ios city
every form of expertise must be reorganized
rather.. let go of ..
dang.. could now add this to frustrat\ing books list
not just a matter of blowing the whistle on grates abuses o power (ie: wikileaks) but rather insisting on transparency in the regular functioning of govt
again.. transparency not the point.. no one would care to see (not to mention it wouldn’t’ exist) if we were legit free.. need legit mechs to free us as fundamental focus
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.
but it doesn’t legit provide for..
let go.. of democratic admin ness
deciding which minorities to protect in 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..
and even deeper.. has to be for all of us.. or it won’t ever work.. can’t have any form of people deciding which people matter.. can’t have any form of m\a\p
you see people silently wiggling their fingers w hands up or down to express approval or disapproval (at occupy movements).. twitter is similarly used in assemblies for a dynamic expression of majority sentiments.. even though we think such experimentation and novel techniques aof expression are important, this is not, for us, the essential point.. more important are the modes of org of the movements and specifically, the ways they *include differences..
of my..to first part.. and *none are inclusive enough to 2nd part
let’s try this mode: imagine if we
horizontal democratic assemblies do not expect or seek unanimity but instead are constituted by a plural process that is open to *conflicts and contradictions.. the decision of the majority move forward thru a process of *differential inclusion..
*wasted energies on defense.. let go
**rather.. voluntary compliance.. aka: exclusion/oppression
The majority, then, becomes not a homogeneous unit or even a body of agreement but a concatenation of differences.
minorities are protected therefore, not be being separated but by being *empowered to participate in the process
oi.. *seat at the table ness
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.. linguistic/cognitive ness as killers rather that glue
communicative lab.. begs a means to undo our hierarchical listening
common langue is spread widely according to an autonomous temporality, which is often very slow but also self controlled, self limiting, and self managed.. the horizontal dm processes of the multitude require temporal autonomy.. the communication of slogans and militant desires often begins slowly in small community and neighborhood groups, but then at a certain point spreads virally..
oh my.. progression from common language to militant slogans.. we need to let go .. ie: idiosyncratic jargon et al
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..local communication of affects, needs and ideas in urban neighborhoods.. *rise up to form general assemblies and dm system..
using ‘below’ rattles me a bit.. i prefer deep.. and simple needs to be.. like rev in reverse ness.. like mechanism simple enough.. that training/ed et al become irrelevant..
.. 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 another and to create common projects not be renouncing but by expressing their differences.
not about small groups finding ways to connect for common projects.. project ness not the point (of life/living-alive).. listening to every legit voice/itch is.. can’t do that even in a small group.. maté trump law et al
federalism is thus a motor of composition… instead at the microlevel reside the passions and intelligence of a federalist logic of association…. weapons… deployed against these movements in fact.. are 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.
ie of why need to go deeper than small group
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.
discussing, learning and teaching, studying and communicating, participating in actions .. these are some of the forms of activism that constitute the central axis of *production of subjectivity.. a plural ontology of politics is set in action thru the encounter and composition of **militant subjectivities..
*rather conformity/obedience/oppression – any form of m\a\p
**yep.. see.. only by force.. oi
it is very difficult to trace the genealogy of decision making in the multitude and in the movements.
decision making is unmooring us law – quit trying to trace it
many of the conditions and practices of this process are not visible.
*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.. one conditions for this process is not only a ‘being with’ but a ‘doing with’ others, which spreads and ***teaches people how to make decisions
*r&r as initial decisions.. so.. great ie that decision making is unmooring us.. wasting energies.. perhaps.. we can make resistance/rebellion (at least as much as we have been doing/focused on) irrelevant.. (ie:gupta roadblock law )
**not base.. because not every – perhaps what we have been missing.. ie: rev in reverse.. rev of everyday life ness.. has to be every or it won’t work/dance
***so much poison here.. aka: democratic admin
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
we want to investigate, specifically, how some social goods – water, banks, and ed, can be constitutionalized as common and transformed into institutions of the common in line w the se principles and *rights.. the question in essence is whether institution, goods, and resources can be managed effectively in common thru democratic participation..
*so loaded.. linking water w banks and ed?.. and landing on rights..?
free access to water requires that the complex structure and apparatuses of distribution and filtration are subject to effective demo management, governed by decisions of citizens themselves.. we refer to citizens here, not users or clients, to emphasize that water and is physical management have to be governed thru structures of equal and *demo participation.. in this ie, ,then, the constitutional principle of free access has to be asserted and developed in order for water to **become common
*so much huge oi
**this is so backwards.. water is part of the common\ing whole.. as are people.. all the people.. neither need training/policy aka: management.. to be ‘declared so’.. oi
where there is not enough water to satisfy both urban needs and agri demands for ie.. distribution must be decided democratically by an informed population
how did this not totally unsettle me before.. dang
knowledge is obviously a prereq for democratic participation and management of the common
ginorm red flag
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
we need today to *stimulate the appetite for these knowledges and rediscover the pleasure of political participation
it’s like they are kind of saying holmgren indigenous law.. but w guard rails.. oi
rather.. we just need conditions that get us back/to our natural *appetite ness .. meaning our itch-in-the-soul
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.. this *distinction raises a core constitutional issue
how to learn, how to be, — practice democracy.. what is democracy? asking every day – what is democracy.. that’ll do it.. or will it..? decision making is unmooring us.. as is any form of democratic admin
the question of transforming the public into the common thus raises at least 3 issues initially.. 1\ making law common.. that is creating a juridical process of the common , which is necessary for the community of citizens to control/admin a good.. 2\ create a management system that incorps the principles of the common uses of goods 3\ defines demo participation as political terrain regarding both ownership/management.. to speak of common goods, then, means constructing a constitutional process regarding a set of goods managed thru the direct participation of citizens
Becoming common is a continuous activity..
yes to that but what follows.. in same sentence.. not even separated by a comma:
guided by the reason, will, and desire of the multitude, which itself *must undergo an ed of its knowledge and political affects..
oi.. how did a section on water turn out to be all about training.. ie: *must undergo ed.. et al.. red flag
and it continues:
in order to construct society and generate a constituent process, then .. citizens are not obliged to imagine and subordinate themselves to an imperial general will but can create the common themselves thru a process that weaves together the will of all
wtf? so contradictory.. so loaded.. mixing good/deadly catch phrases.. saying not obliged.. but obliging in the saying of it.. oi
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.
*loaded/wrong focus then **marsh exchange law et al
perhaps let’s.. leapfrog.. over irrelevant s: ie: money/institutional activity/management/regulation… for (blank)’s sake.. let’s try/code money (any form of measuring/accounting) as the planned obsolescence
money serves as means for circulation of commodities, for guaranteeing savings and assuring against accidents and misfortune, providing in old age..
holy cow.. how does that fit w ie: hardt/negri property law et al
right away we can say that it should be banned as an instrument of accumulation
like saying cancer is ok.. just don’t accum it
testart storage law et al
banks are always (even in current neolib regimes) institutions of social planning. in liberal and neolib regimes, this planning is directed toward guaranteeing and enlarging the means of the private circulation and accum of wealth
certainly after the experience of soviet socialism, memories of planning and even notion itself of ‘the plan’ have become infamous and w good reason.. socialist planning deprived citizens of freedom to chose and imposed cruel, coercive, norms on social reproduction.. but one should not that the consequences derived not so much from techniques o planing but rather from the public and political powers that deployed them
no.. it’s the planning itself.. just like your hardt/negri property law
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.
so.. accum/planning ok for the common?.. oi.. rather .. it would/does poison it.. ie: tragedy of the non common .. let go
perhaps.. to wean us..radical econ ness
(right after section on lead up to recent econ *catastrophes).. **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.
*following statement is the catastrophe..
**what we need to imagine – imagine if we
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.
*graeber increase b law.. oi
this is how the constituent principles of freedom and access to the common can penetrate the banking institution, making it a buttress of other democratic institutions..
rather.. how we perpetuate the tragedy of the non common
(after – it is clear that today struggles have to assail the banks/fin to denounce injustices..).. tomorrow, however, the struggles will have to find ways to transform the banks and the instruments of finance, bending them to fulfill the functions necessary to *plan the production, reproduction, and distribution of social wealth thru democratic participation..
*all of this is so loaded/wrong.. let go..
i’m thinking/hoping what your words are really trying to get at.. is a legit other way to live.. (like you’ve said – revolution as instigating utopia every day).. which is what io dance, app/chip ness, tech as it could be would do.. via .. self-talk as data.. et al
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
but only if you let go of all those *guiding principles
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.
nor can they tell you what to study.. which i don’t see anywhere.. people letting go of that to some degree.. any form of m\a\p
self ed, of course, 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).. imagine if we
this statement is such a great ie of sinclair perpetuation law
it means instead that these relationships and institutions have to be oriented toward creating environments conducive to study
greatest gift teacher can give is recognition that each student has power to think and the desire to use that intelligence to study
rousseau’s emile gains a poetic and sentimental ed thru a training of the senses and interaction w first the physical world and later the realm of ideas/books
sounds too eerily like.. the scrambling process..
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
begs ie: cure ios city
the management of knowledge must be guided, then like that of other resources, by the principles of open access, equality, sustainability and participation.. demo dm structures must replace present forms of planning that determine the development of ed
oi oi oi.. too much oi to add
on corps that fund research and ed effectively determining management of knowledge and planning of ed
no matter.. graeber f & b same law et al
more than 1/2 cent later, how can we imagine today a comparable act of ed planning an dan influx of funding..
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.
democratic, participatory structure of dm would have to be established to plan/fund ed, develop opps of study, and open access to knowledge.. that is the kind of ed institution that could be build on the constituent principles
What kind of bargain are we making when we struggle for the common but settle for the rule of public property and state control? once we succeed, are we then stuck w state rule, which brings us no closer to eh demo management of the common
holy cow.. one and the same..
let go of managing ness
the point is that we do not need to reject all strategies that affirm public control, but neither can we be satisfied w them.. we *must find the **means to set in motion a dynamic that ensures a movement toward the common
what we need is a **means to undo our hierarchical listening
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..
many aspects of an ‘institutionality of the common’ emerge here w clarity: ..
(clarity and death)
and the democratic dm processes that guide and coord all these aspects (transparency.. constitution process itself… protection..)
when social movements maintain an external relationship to the govt, however, and defend their autonomy, often thru actions against the govt, the bases of any such populist hegemony are undermined
undermined? ..’erode the base or foundation of.. lessen the effectiveness, power, or ability of, especially gradually or insidiously.’
the external relationship between social movements and progressive govt’s that exists in several latin american countries – in varying degrees and varying forms serves for us as a ‘constitutional example.’
and too .. perhaps.. seeing those as ie’s is keeping us.. not us. ie: we just can’t get out of the box.. of the way things are supposed to be.. even when we think we’re really out of the box.. so.. we’re really just perpetuating tragedy of the non common
huge.. no legit ie’s to date
instead we view this ie as a model for other countries and regions
no legit alt
meghan & o
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
the republican constitutions are in desperate need of profound reform, but can they be transformed to create new spaces and structures of democracy
loaded/wrong question.. democratic admin is killing us
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?
any management does..
on the left.. whose most progressive elements remain tied to the defense/reform of the republican constitutions
legislative powers now have a very weak, almost nonexistent ability to propose social projects, manage budgets and above all control military affairs.. the primary role of legislatures, in fact, has become providing support for or creating obstacles to executive initiatives..
ha.. so could be a good thing since the 3 (agenda/projects.. money/manage.. military affairs) are poison
people’s sense of alienation continues to grow w respect to political parties, which are the backbone of parliamentary rep..
so.. another good thing.. ie: alienation to cancer..
is it possible to create new forms of rep and a new terrain of civil debate in which a constituent process could be built from below?
yes.. done it before.. ie: built sea world from below.. but tha’s’ not what we need/want.. more tragedy of the non common
debates about reforming electoral systems invariably go nowhere..
that’s a funny sentence..
and thus perhaps paradoxically, corruption becomes esp for the left, an almost unavoidable path to election
any democratic admin is corruption
the only position they know how to take aggressively is the defense of the constitution, ..
only offense is defense.. that’s all our ie’s to date..
the problem is not only that the tradition left is incapable today of launching an effective dynamic of constitutional reform. the republican constitution themselves can no longer be reformed or redeemed.. a new constituent process is needed to transform the constitutional order and social terrain
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 later refers again to ‘launching such constituent experiments’.. which are still ie’s of tragedy of the non common
on encampments developing techniques for dm.. ie: shaking hands or following on twitter.. they provide a mech by which all can be included in deliberation and dm..
seat at the table ness
any form of democratic admin
but they do nonetheless present a powerful model for thinking about a possible federalism
powerful ie of tragedy of the non common
one of their (worker’s councils/coops) obvious limitations is precisely that they were restricted to a portion of society
if we extend structures of dm and political participation along lines of production, as old workers’ councils did.. we could potentially achieve a much broader reach.. and bring into political structure a much larger portion of society.
and again.. loaded/wrong focus.. ie: decision making is unmooring us
of course.. not an easy task
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..
the key task of generating a new legislative power remains that of inventing a federalist form to extend political participation in dm across the entire social terrain
finally, any effort to democratize society and include all in dm has to ..
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..
imagine if we just focused on listening to the itch-in-8b-souls.. first thing.. everyday.. and used that data to augment our interconnectedness.. we might just get to a more antifragile, healthy, thriving world.. the ecosystem we keep longing for..
The surest and most powerful way to generate democratic political affects is by practicing democracy.
switched to loc … so 1203
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 .. planning ness
in fall 2008.. at height of fin crisis, the theater of the collab of us govt officials and captains of wall st provided a peek behind curtain and showed how small the circle of decision makers actually is
decision making is unmooring us.. as is all our analysis of who’s doing it et al..
.. 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
as we argued earlier regarding water.. resources are not immediately or spontaneously common.. a project of org and infra is required for us to have open access to a shared resource.. for tater to become common requires pipes, pumps, and management systems, whereas for ideas to become common require ed, publication forums and so forth
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.
constructing *mechs so all can share in, have access to and participate equally in the production of our common wealth.. admin takes on a **completely diff form in this context
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
such that all can participate democratically in decisions.. this raises immediately an objection regarding expertise, which we posted earlier
just as political affects and the appetite for participation will have to be fostered in order to realize demands of constitution legislative power.. so too will knowledge/expertise about our social world have to be cultivated on the broadest scale.. 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.
w respect to the legislative and the executive we have been able to reinterpret their functions as a means to explore the nature and org needs of a constituent process
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)
loaded: rights.. sustain what?.. require interp
constitutional interp too will have to be socialized.. principles and truths on which constitutional process is based, after all, were not handed down from on high but were constructed thru the movements and dynamics of society..
rather.. thru few in black robes et al.. which leads to:
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.
seems so far off.. 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.
not so far.. they do exist now.. we have the means to make it happen w/in a year. globally.
eventually we will have 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.
on not having force to topple ruling powers
wrong focus.. not about toppling
… 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..
our political task is paradoxical: we must prep for the event even though its date of arrival remains unknown..t
ready to roll
cure ios city – ongoingly ready
on friedman’s chicago rained economists.. being ready when it happened..
(on other countries implementing neolib policies – via naomi).. there was ready at hand in each case an econ playbook..t
the movements are preparing ground for an event they cannot foresee or predict.
moreover the political practices that the movements experiment w – assemblies, methods of collective dm, mechs for protection/expression/participation of minorities – serve as guid for future political action.. much more important though, than any of the constitutional principles of political practices, the movements are creating new subjectivities that desire and are capable of democratic relations
good frame.. but loaded/wrong ie: democratic admin/relations
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 movement of org’d refusal allows us to recognize who we have become and to set out on becoming diff..
actually.. (refusal ness) is an energy suck.. sucking potential for really diff
it helps us free ourselves of the morality of debt and the work discipline it imposes on us.. bringing to light the injustice of social ineq’s of debt society
and refusal/response/defense ness actually keep our focus/energies on debt ness.. just a diff form of enslavement
it allows us to turn our attention away from the video screens and break the spell the media hold over us
yeah see.. doesn’t do that
rebellion and revolt, however, set in motion not only a refusal but also a creative process
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.
oi to commoner defn.. even to h&n’s later
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.
there are not party cadres telling people what to think, but instead there exist discussion s that are open to a wide variety of views that sometimes may even contradict each other but nonetheless, often slowly, develop a coherent perspective
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.
in fact, the question of org is a prime topic of debate and experimentation: how to run an assembly, how to resolve political disagreements, how to make a political decision democratically
let’s try an org/infra sans running assemblies.. sans dm.. sans disagreeing/revolving.. et al
for all those who still hold passionately to the principles of freedom, equality, and the common, constituting a democratic society is the order of the day
‘to rep means to make present an absence’.. carl schmitt, verfas sungslehre.. 209
‘a free man thinks of death least of all’ .. baruch spinoza, ethics.. 67..t
on study and self ed.. stefano harney and fred motion ‘on study’ 1590175
naomi klein, the shock doctrine
commoner – massimo de angleis et al.. commoner.org.uk for journal
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..