On networks and control

I received my first computer in 1978 from my parent.  That means that I have 
been in front of a screen for 32 years as of this writing.

And I've had it.  Or at least I'm having severe problems with this practice.  
You see, I'm a digital native, or at least a technological one, with Star Trek 
before my eyes (the ORIGINAL ONE) before kindergarten, and electronics in my 
hand before puberty.  I have been before a computer screen, or a television 
screen all of my life, but I am not alone.  Let me begin that I feel like a 
unit of livestock in a Web 2.0, or (3.0, or 4.0 by now) carrel, tethered by 
instrumental fear and social panopticism and  workplace Taylorism, as well as 
seductive playbourism to keep me immobile.

The Building of the Borg-machine
Marshall McLuhan wrote on privacy in the electric networks regarding ubiquitous 
interpersonal involvement -

“Electronic media bring us in touch with everyone, everywhere, instantaneously. 
Whereas the book extended the eye, electronic circuitry extends the central 
nervous system.. Constant contact with the world becomes a daily reality. 
All-at-oneness is our state of being. Closed human systems no longer exist. For 
us, the first postliterate generation, privacy is either a luxury or a curse of 
the past. The planet is like a general store where nosy people keep track of 
everyone else’s business – a twelve-party line or a “Dear Abby” column writ 
large. “The new tribalism is one where everyone’s business is everyone else’s 
and where we are all somewhat testy”. []

The key phrase here is “Constant contact with the world becomes a daily 
reality.”  I believe that McLuhan was dealing with more of the Orwell/Huxley 
milieu of constant broadcast to a passive audience as a measure of pacification 
and control, but this is not the case of the fin de millennium culture.  The 
individual is in constant contact with the world, the virtual, and all of its 
inhabitants. Facebook has over 500 Million subscribers[], constituting 1 in 
every 12 people alive.  Add Twitter, academia.edu, Google Wave, LinkedIn, 
Friendster, Ning, Second Life, and you have a milieu what beckons for the 
individual to go online, work at the computer, shop at the computer, play at 
the computer, and fall asleep while the computer plays your favorite music or 
plays your favorite news.  In many ways, this echoes the utopian ideals of 
1960's futuristic ephemeral videos of the “House of the Future”

Control
Paul Virilio, in his essay, “The Third Interval” described the lack of 
differentiation between the technologically accelerated disabled body, and the 
technologically accelerated able body.  His assertion is that the one becomes 
accelerated in its ability to engage in the discourse of the able in virtual 
space while the able becomes paralyzed in its enmeshing in the virtual.  In 
short, under virtual acceleration, the body becomes inert and the virtual 
gesture takes on lines of flight.  The paralysis is the problem.  As in 
Postman's Technopoly, the tool becomes a platform which becomes a societal 
underpinning, then becomes its own mythology.  The shape of society becomes 
such that the indivdual is chaped to fit the machine.  Although this may sound 
like Englebart's ideas of human-computer coevolution in which the development 
of the computer drives the human to adapt and then build the next improvement, 
this is not so.  It is the shaping of the individual by the nation-state in its 
complicity with the corporate oligarchy to create desiring-machines and 
labor-generators in service to the cybernetic systems of control of the 
increasing Fordist/Taylorist regime of First World capital.
In many ways, social media are almost akin to Temple Grandin's approach to 
slaughterhouses in which she has designed devices that calm the cattle by 
giving them a gentle squeeze, or her colleague Wendy Jacobs' squeeze chair.  
This calming effect of the squeeze is the feeling of togetherness the Facebook 
user feels to see their friends or the receipt of a heart of smiley on Skype.  
The reality is that this is not a hug, or a kiss, or anything of the sort – it 
is an empty signifier of breath and flesh. And embodied socialization.  
Secondly, the network is a conduit of information that can be quantified and 
tracked.  The networked individual is placing the keystroke and lexial quantum 
into he net, where the governmental/military/corporate superstructure that runs 
the Internet can track our movements, our consumptions, our desires.

In the age of the Global economic crisis, there is the implication of the loss 
of ability to support oneself for lack of employment or for that matter, 
productivity.  The fear of falling behind in any technological proficiency is 
replaced by the fear of not being available when an opportunity appears.  This 
can be anything from a potential employer or client.  Or, there is also the 
existential terror of the potential family member, friend, or lover in 
distress.  It is almost as the broadcast insurance ads goad us into purchasing 
their product - “What if you weren't there to help them?”  It is widely known 
that advertising is driven by fear and desire, and this is the constant 
ratcheting of the machinic enslavement to the screen.

In the grip of machinic enslavement, the body becomes assimilated into the 
collective mass of labor, fear and desire, much like the hive like organisms 
called The Borg from the television series, “Star Trek: The Next Generation”  
These are fragmentary being who have been literally woven into a collective 
whole of a cybernetic milieu and drained of all individuality. In the 
neo-McLuhanist network, the individuality is intact but the continuous 
interlock to the machine remains. One response is merely to get out of the 
cubicle and get on one's feet.

Tethering
The transparent evil of the electric net is that walking away is no longer 
enough.  Our mobile devices, iPhones, and iPads still engage in the act of 
machinic enslavement in terms of the net-corp apparatus by  merely 
miniaturizing the cubicle and having us hold it before us in our hands.  
Amazon.com still beckons, our friends tweet us and Facebook us (don't you think 
that Facebook can be a verb?); everything is open season.  These are the 
invisible silver cords that ties us to the net.collective, not the human 
network that would be far more beneficial. But the individual is torn between 
the possibility of the contact that can reverse the pull of control through 
resistive communication and the enslavement of being beholden to it if they use 
the net.corp system.

Solution?
In writing this tirade against the screen behind I and so many have been 
enslaved, I am resolved to, I am challenged to provide strategies for 
resistance, a revolt against the network.  Unfortunately, all I can do is offer 
an ambivalence, as this is my work, this is my  milieu, this is my home.  The 
best I have been able to do is to go to places on the earth where there have 
been little contact with the Grid, such as the Western Aleutian Islands.  We 
cannot, as Postman suggests in a future post-Technopolic society, abandon all 
technology to return to a Classical education.  This is akin to us simply 
trying to unhook and go to a pre-technological way of life, or even the 
technologically-enabled protoindustrial net of communes outlined in the 
Invisible Committee’s “The Coming Insurrection”. Unless we are truly prepared 
to abandon the superstructure and ride horseback on the post-Capital 
apocalyptic landscape, we have the tendrils of techne grown into us like a 
planter's wart.  So we are driven to resistance through intentionality and 
perhaps developing an aloofness to the network.  Develop strategies in which 
one only uses it for necessary functions, for information, to organize 
resistance against it, and to facilitate the embodied presence that is 
necessary to human existence.

My problem is, I have been woven into the Matrix, and even when I am removed 
from it, I realize it is still my home and my point of resistance and cannot 
totally remove myself from it.  Therefore, I have to either attack it 
discursively, stand aloof physically, or drop the carrier completely at times.  
I can no longer live with it, nor can I live without it.  I an a reluctant 
symbiote of the electric net.
_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour

Reply via email to