Author Archives: DP

In Praise of Wirecutters

We are grateful to an esteemed DP correspondent for guiding our attention towards a recent lecture delivered by London Review of Book’s US editor Adam Shatz, author of The Rebel’s Clinic: The Revolutionary Lives of Frantz Fanon. A brief excerpt below:

 

 

 

˜˜˜

The entire lecture is worthy of close consideration, and is available here.

 

˜˜˜˜˜


Of Lies & State Terror

Following the most recent Minnesota murder committed in the name of “law enforcement,” we relay the following few paragraphs from Timothy Snyder, truth-speaker and author of On Tyranny:

The lies begin as clichés, memes that are pounded into our heads by the government and by those in the media who repeat them, mindlessly or with malice.

One of these cliches is “law enforcement,” which is uttered over and over like a incantation. “Law enforcement” is not a noun. It is not a thing in the world. It is an action.

And action is something that we have a right to see and judge for ourselves. People enforcing the law do not wear masks. And people wearing masks who trespass, assault, batter, and kill are not enforcing the law.

They are violating it.

It is indeed the job of some local, state, and federal authorities to enforce the law. It is a disservice to them when federal employees carry out public executions. It is a greater disservice to them when such actions are defined as “law enforcement.”

The lies continue as provocative inversions, as what in On Tyranny I called “dangerous words”: these are, precisely, “terrorist” and “extremist.” These two words are known to us from history as those used by tyrants. And these are the words used by the Trump people to defame those killed by their polices.

This is their “messaging,” their banality of evil, as Hannah Arendt called it.

Or the evil of banality, as Václav Havel said. Words turned into reality with the complicity of those who hear them.

Those who actively lie are directly complicit in the deaths that just happen and in any deaths to come. But those in media who choose to treat propaganda as the story, to begin from lies rather than from events, are also complicit. The border is the crack, the lie is the wedge, and the wedge is made up of people — of us.

Words matter, uttered first or repeated. They create an atmosphere, they normalize — or they do not. We can choose to see, to call things by their proper names, to call out people who lie. We have to.

The moral horror of those killings is enough. But there is a political logic as well. And the two are connected. Those who resist the lawlessness and the lies are doing right. And they are giving a second chance to the endangered American republic.

˜˜˜˜˜

OUTING THE LIE: EXHIBIT A

˜˜˜˜˜

OUTING THE LIE: EXHIBIT B

˜˜˜˜˜

OUTING THE LIE: EXHIBIT C 

UNARMED VICTIM ON KNEE SHOT IN BACK BY MASKED “LAW ENFORCEMENT”

˜˜˜˜˜

VIGIL FOR ALEX PRETTI

 

˜˜˜˜˜


Es ist ein Ros entsprungen

 

 

 

 


A Day of Thanksgiving

On this day of Thanksgiving, we relay a few sage paragraphs from the ever vigilant, luminous & indefatigable Heather Cox Richardson:

˜˜˜˜˜


Our Mirror World

Now comes Nicholas Carr, eminent cartographer of the data mine in all its hallucinatory caverns. An excerpt from a recent post on his endlessly illuminating substack:

Let us turn those last two words into a declaration of independence: 

DEFY DATAFICATION!


Ecological Connective Tissue

Now comes the voice of the philosophically inclined mycologist Merlin Sheldrake, via a few excerpts from a mini-colloquium organized by the rich mycelial network known as Orion magazine:

SYMBIOTIC WITH-NESS

 

˜˜˜˜˜˜˜


Against the Cult of Death

Now comes an Open Letter, signed by hundreds of Nobel laureates, philosophers, scientists & artists, including the entire editorial staff here at DP:

˜˜˜˜˜˜


Deep In Our Tissues

Now comes the resounding voice of Barry Lopez, with a passage from within the conversational riffles of his  Syntax of the River: The Pattern Which Connects.

 

Our trouble seems to be that, you know, our primate heritage, which is apparent in watching the behavior of chimpanzees and bonobos, is that we’re keenly interested in ourselves and opposed to others. That’s deep in our tissues. And with the kind of world we’ve built, that’s not going to work. So, those human beings who have the very strongest residue of the kind of patrolling behavior and violence that troops of chimpanzees have, those people would like the world to be, I think, arranged in a way that suits their habits and their desires. But a lot of people die that way. And we have created a chemical environment that is killing people left and right, quickly or slowly, through cancer, for example.

It just doesn’t make sense anymore to have these ideas about “me” and “mine” and the terrible burden that has been created by so-called advanced nations about the primacy of ownership, the ownership of food. Or, you know, the terrifying thing in the United States, this idea that nothing is exempt from the application of a kind of economics that’s meant for profit. I mean, how can you make the care of another, the professional care of another person’s body, be informed by a profit motive? Even a fifth-grade kid can see there is something that doesn’t really add up here.

So, for me as a writer, I live here and I’m informed by this [river]. And the way it informs me helps me understand a lot of the things my species does that are suicidal. It’s not up to me to say that they are suicidal, but I would feel like a traitor to my teachers here if I never said a thing, never mentioned it.

 

˜˜˜˜˜˜˜

 


Dead Silent

We are grateful to a DP correspondent for alerting us to the below video study in abject ethical & moral vacuity.

 

 

Once this wave of lethal madness recedes, the judgement of history will be severe regarding all those who silently grinned and smirked while inflicting senseless cruelty upon the weak, the vulnerable and the poor.

˜˜˜˜˜˜


Sad By Design

Over the years, we have received countless enquiries as to why we are not “on” Facebook; and why do we not “weigh in” on X.

Now comes the voice of esteemed media theorist Geert Lovink with a few excerpts from an interview (worth perusing in its entirety) centering on his 2019 book, Sad By Design.

Read on:

In my book, Sad by Design, I contrast technologically induced sadness not just with the historical ‘illness’ melancholy but also with boredom, depression, loneliness and similar sombre mental states that are dominant today. We read a lot about ‘male’ anger, from trolling and shitstorms to cyber-warfare but less so about the regressive side. Emotional rides are no longer experienced in solitude; the virtual others are always there as well.

It is a truism that we are lonely together (a subtle but crucial variation of Sherry Turkle’s alone together). We cannot put the phone away — there is no relief. In my essay, I have tried to minimize the comparison between the current wave of technologically-induced sadness and the rich historical descriptions of melancholy. […] 

The predictable continuity thesis is not just elitist, it is escapist. It walks away from the dirty present, much in the same way romantics did in the industrial 19th century.

Techno temperaments generated by computer code and interface design (also known as nudging) causes overload and exhaustion and produces a gloomy state that flickers, without ever becoming dominant on the surface. Sadness today is an indifferent micro-feeling, a flat and mild state of affairs. This should be contrasted with the much heavier illnesses such as depression, stress and burn-out.

One or two centuries ago these would be labelled melancholia. Some artists make this an explicit topic of their work such as Lil Peep and Billie Eilish.

Sadness is no longer hidden and is becoming part of pop culture. Youngsters feel the anxiety, the stress, and become sad about empty promises and diminishing opportunities. They are experts at reading daily life through the sadness lens. This does not mean we should medicalize them. We are not sick.

How do we comfort the disturbed? Not by taking their phone away. What can we do that’s liberating and prevents moralism? […]

Right now, social media are either the domain of marketing or an object for (moralistic) concern of teachers, parents, politicians). Critical internet research is still a joke in terms of funding, schools, research programs. […]

Social reality (SR) is so much larger than hyped-up technologies such as virtual and artificial reality. SR is also am ironical hint to sociology, the discipline that so far has failed to contribute to a better understanding of the ‘social in social media’ as I called it in 2012 in e-flux, an essay I updated in Social Media Abyss.

I no longer believe there is some raw and truthful reality outside of the social worlds that tech companies have created.

Dichotomies such as online-offline and real-virtual are no longer meaningful. I like the idea of a social reality that people carry with them. Once they grab their phone and start swiping and scrolling through the updates on their ‘social’ apps they are in it again. You go on ‘social’, as the Italians say. Have you seen it on ‘social’, as the Italians say.

We need to re-invent the social, which is now technical and digital. I would not say it ‘affects’ us as such an understanding somehow suggests that we are outside, victims, subjects. The user perspective teaches us that we’re fully involved—by design—and constantly interact, contribute, upload, klick, respond, like, swipe, whatever. The extractive data machine lives of that.

[…]

Self-design can be a somewhat naïve term. The daily reality, in particular for young people, is a brutal one, in which the construction and maintenance of the self-image is a matter of life and death. We should not underestimate the internalized values of the neo-liberal precarious reality in which people are forced to compete with each other and life never quite succeeds.

There are always mishaps, fall-outs, missed opportunities, break-ups, strange downtimes in our mood, an endless period of boredom in which nothing seems to work. The self-image constantly breaks down, we get angry or depressed, can’t finish a deadline. This is all recorded and captured, processed and turned into data points that are added to our profile. Self-image is no longer a cute selfie, it has become much more complex and contradictory. […]

Silicon Valley has all but killed the speculative imaginary—and they are acutely aware of that. This was their aim. Not merely own it but shut it down by pulling it into the background. A growing movement is reclaiming the net but it’s an uphill battle.

It sounds weird but ‘another internet is possible’ has almost become a subversive slogan. If we want to overcome homo extractionist, we need to organize and fight, in visible manners, build and use those alternatives we desire so much! […]

Right now, there is hardly anyone working on the speculative re-design of the social. This space has been poisoned by the systems of likes, followers, updates, newsfeeds, ‘friends’ you name it. Let’s get rid of this jargon. However, we want to reinvent the social we need to acknowledge that we can no longer distinguish between the social and tech.

Forget offline romanticism. Secondly, we need to get rid of the Silicon Valley online presence inside our conversations, our lives. Let’s minimize the presence of third parties and focus in a pragmatic way on what needs to be done and what tools support this strategy.

No more invisible moderators, filters, censors. The algo ain’t no friend of mine. Alt.social will have to confront itself with various challenges: monetization and democratic decision making. Both aspects have been quietly removed from Silicon Valley’s agenda and their related start-up venture circles. For art and activism redistribution of the ‘wealth of the networks’ and collective decision making are essential. We need to dismantle the ‘free’ and invent new ways to work together and deal with difference and disputes.

We can no longer delegate the management of the world to these IT firms. Silicon Valley is part of the problem and we no longer expect them to resolve the growing tensions in the world.

 

True, all that, in 2019 — more deeply so in 2025!

˜˜˜˜˜