m of care – sept 30
on david graeber‘s david on tenure not tenure and fragments of an anarchist anthropology.. and anarch\ism and graeber anarchism law
We are discussing this text, and specifically “Why are there so few anarchists in the academy?” tonight at Museum of Care reading group. https://t.co/nupsxMxLLZ @nikadubrovsky
Original Tweet: https://twitter.com/sonmi451it/status/1443558360524234754
1/ @davidgraeber was a comrade, a friend and a mentor for so many people, and was dear to so many, that promoting and discussing his ideas and writings might seem like something you just do out of love and friendship. It is not. It is, instead, a very political endeavour.
2/ it is the same kind of political endeavour that David himself pursued consciously when he strove to become an high level academic and a public figure. Just as it was a political endeavour, on the side of USA Academy, that of getting rid of him davidgraeber.org/articles/it-wa…
links to david on tenure not tenure
3/ David explained quite well what #AcademicPolitics is, and the reasons why #Anarchists should get into Academy, the text above and in Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology theanarchistlibrary.org/library/david
links to fragments of an anarchist anthropology
notes/quotes from meeting:
only 9 here.. discussing https://docs.google.com/document/d/1w7A63FDwy4FZvzwtd-7E1Zp9wmCyuVmEtiZaSJMte3c/edit.. on doing a karaoke reading group
vassily: david writes a lot.. so difficult to find short stuff that makes a lot of sense..
(robin taylor) choice between afferisms.. hard to fit an argument in 500 words.. but on practical point.. in 90 min could fit in readers at 7 min
nika: i think we don’t know how it would work.. so we can experiment.. if v will take the role of dj for debt book on 10th anniv.. w pre designed quotes..
simona: i suggest to rap up this part of mtg.. and go onto text..
simona: post about debt via david.. on why we shouldn’t ask the big questions.. starts saying.. only astrophys et al can cope w the maths and complex stuff.. at end of day.. all these astro issues.. were just games.. ponzi schemes.. shifting the depth on creating money and shifting the debt on other people/groups.. so david claims our right to ask the big questions.. and this is my biggest thing w him.. so this text about tenure/not tenure and anarchism in academy.. because academic politics has become prohibition to ask big question.. only people who still are allowed to discuss big questions 1\ marxists who did it by interpreting great thinker.. i left academy because i was only allowed to make history of academy.. not to ask the real questions.. and this is rant in david’s work.. we start academy because we have questions about nature of humans, about debt, et al.. and by the time.. we get tenure we’ve forgotten the questions.. and meaning.. et al.. he said bloch was one of few who didn’t forget the questions.. so like a structural violence.. not making it possible .. belittling.. worse thing you can do is ignore/ridicule.. make it not important.. this is the thing we have to fight.. even for david. the thing we have to be aware of..
had people read tenure not tenure
simona: back to discussion.. i can make a note on isms.. very funny.. in my intro i forgot about the idealist future of marxism that’s not in anarchism
steve: i think was david is saying here is that there’s something about marxism that aligns itself w the academy.. because western academy since inception.. associated w great man tradition of thinkers.. lends self to developments made by specific individuals.. to lend to ways of taking power.. where according to david.. anarchism rejects those distinctions.. esp non consensual hierarchical.. so it seems by this logic.. those don’t want to be a part of this wouldn’t find the rewards of academy .. so that’s why fewer there.. also.. anarchists tend to not show level of deference.. that people in this model.. pay dues.. get reward.. academy does a good job of running out those who are deferential.. 2006 interview w charlie rose.. charlie kept pushing him.. on why running out.. so david just said.. i don’t think i was diff enough.. for me at yale.. the more burdened/oppressed we felt.. the nobler we were.. only way got appreciation.. flagellation .. pushes people out who care about others.. david had an eye for writing for others rather than specialists.. academy doesn’t want provocative questions just want as much publications as possible.. w as many readers.. academic freedom shouldn’t be about that
mark: david also said.. seen as having too much fun in activism..
nika: to the practical question.. was reading karaoke format ok? 2 or 5 min?
vassily: i’d say between 2-5.. but i like long songs.. my idea is to let people intro text they chose if they want.. but if want to have 10 readers in night.. maybe we can make debate after each quite short
robin: we had 10-12 people w 7 min each..for 90 min .. it’s workable.. but dj has to really keep an eye on the clock.. also .. how much clustering can take place.. ie: people prepping together.. ok for ½ the time..
vassily: if we can keep it under 7 min.. even in karaoke.. none are 20 min..
nika: i find this format fascinating
nika: my understanding of the text.. if intro anarchists into academy it would collapse..
robin: true.. hard to discuss real questions in the academy.. problem.. is in academy looking for facts.. and activists brings danger to that
marielle: if ask type of question.. not creating debate.. you’re showing how ill adaptive systems are.. so in this case.. you’re putting everyone in difficult position in academia.. you’re not being the authority they’re used to.. anarchists.. not playing on same ground.. questioning the rules
robin: you could be anarchist in a science that is evidence based..
vassily: if do debt.. can have people look at ready made list: https://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/6811142-debt-the-first-5-000-years
robin: spinoza very much had that problem.. if being limited of what he could say
simona: spinoza never uses double speaking.. you can always understand what he is saying
graeber revolution law – graeber model law
**graeber unpredictability/surprise law
**graeber violence/quantification law
*graeber/wengrow back & forth law
*graeber/wengrow never stupid law