Re: A Dystopian New Initiative Will Charge Inmates by the

[Ryan Griffis]

Ted, you make a crucial distinction that is often overlooked (or just unknown) 
by many who are outraged by the relationship between the private sector and the 
(white supremacist) carceral state. The vast majority (more than 90%) of all 
people locked up in the US are in wholly state-managed facilities. Most of 
those held in corporate-managed facilities are in federal custody, and many of 
those are held in “immigrant detention” facilities (may of which are 
managed by non-profit orgs).

https://www.sentencingproject.org/publications/private-prisons-united-states/

As you point out, US prisons are currently more a form of wealth extraction 
than labor extraction--a form of gross redistribution of both what little 
wealth the poor have and the vast resources of the state (aka tax dollars).
Of course, this is simply an updated political economy founded on forced labor 
camps (aka plantations) and the exponential growth of the racist carceral state 
following emancipation and the successes of white supremacy in fighting any 
potential Reconstruction might have had.
https://www.ucpress.edu/book/9780520250031/emancipation-betrayed

The private sector may collect, but it’s the state that (still) provides 
pretext and enforcement. 
https://www.propublica.org/article/digital-jail-how-electronic-monitoring-drives-defendants-into-debt
https://www.propublica.org/article/why-small-debts-matter-so-much-to-black-lives

Best,
Ryan


> On Dec 5, 2019, at 5:00 AM, nettime-l-requ...@mail.kein.org wrote:
> 
> The bad news: There's a difference, which gets lost in the outrage of 
> this Hyperallergic piece, between prisons and the services they rely on: 
> construction, infrastructure maintenance, healthcare, food, etc. Huge 

<>




#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: coronavirus questions

[Ryan Griffis]

> 
> 3-4% of each of these groups will die, so it will likely be a uniting 
> experience, a dismal failure of the identity politics, and therefore a 
> serious problem for powers that be.
> 
> Unrelated, it's funny how coronavirus has the same effect at biological 
> and social levels: the damage to the body is mostly due to the 
> overreaction of the immune system, and the damage to the economy is due 
> to the overreaction of the society. Somehow the ruling class calculated 
> that it is worthwhile to decimate the economy to delay deaths by few 
> weeks or months (idiotic statements about the virus getting tired 
> notwithstanding.)


If you think that social distancing policy is merely designed to “delay 
deaths by few weeks or months” you have never visited an emergency room. If 
you had, you’d understand that creating temporal distance between the numbers 
of people requiring immediate health care changes (dramatically) the number of 
people who will ultimately die (whether it’s viral infections or gun-shot 
wounds). An overwhelmed system creates a higher mortality rate. I’m no health 
expert, but this seems like public health 101.
Take care everyone.
Ryan

#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: Not One

[Ryan Griffis]

Tue, 6 Oct 2020 11:12:55 -0500, Frederic Neyrat wrote:

> A subject, be it collective or individual, is always divided. The One is an
> imposture.

Thank you Frederic, for stating what I would have hoped was a shared 
understanding of nation-state politics, especially on an international list 
focused on “networked culture.” 

I wrote the following just before receiving Frederic's message, then decided 
not to send it. But, maybe it’s worth adding to Frederic’s rightful call to 
dispense with the collapsing of people into nation-states? Anyway, here it is...

I don’t mean to overstate the point here, but discussions of “democracy in the 
US” (as with discussions of the political economy anywhere in the world) should 
really be more responsible to actual history. Personally, I think such 
responsibility is necessary to have a meaningful international leftist 
perspective on solidarity.
For starters, the settler-colonial status of the US as an ongoing form of 
occupation can’t be simply glossed over.
But specifically to the question of democracy, it might be more useful to 
understand the situation as the *continued prevention* of democracy, rather 
than its collapse, as if it was somehow ever stable or even meaningfully 
democratic in some historical sense.
Just to provide *some* specifics.
It would be ridiculous to consider the rollback of voting rights for formerly 
incarcerated individuals (essentially a poll tax) in my settler home state of 
Florida without recognizing that the very rights being undermined *were just 
recently granted* to begin with.
Exactly 100 years ago there, leading up to the 1920 election, there was 
widespread mass violence perpetrated against black residents to re-solidify an 
anti-democratic, white supremacist regime.
For anyone interested in this specific history who is not familiar, I’d 
recommend Paul Ortiz’s excellent book “Emancipation Betrayed.”

Trump may be a glaring and garish example of white supremacist 
anti-democratic/fascism in the US, but it’s not like the foundation wasn’t 
already set. 
IF we’re able to move the US in a more democratic direction, it will be through 
continued struggle that builds on the history of such struggles that have been 
occurring for well over 100 years (some would say it’s more like 500 years). 
IMHO, these struggles are not best understood as trying to *perfect* the US as 
a democracy, but as part of a movement to achieve (and maintain) liberation for 
all people (which is no simple concept in a settler-colonial state). Our 
foundation as a nation-state built on internationally coordinated, genocidal 
violence (that predates the actual US nation-state, obviously) seems like it 
begs for us to understand the US beyond the exceptional, cohesive case put 
forward by the ruling classes (i.e. settler white supremacists and neoliberal 
oligarchs).

Apologies if this is all pedantic… I’m just frustrated by the tone of 
discussions about “American Democracy” that maintains imaginary clean 
spatio-temporal boundaries that prevents us from talking about actual struggles 
for liberation, both “inside” and “outside” any enforced borders.

Best,
Ryan
#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: Not One

[Ryan Griffis]

Hi Keith and all,
I’m confused as to why you’d interpret my comment as an *appeal to the history 
of settler colonialism and the continued history of slavery* as *a reductio ad 
absurdum*. Just to be clear, this isn’t some kind of academic discussion to me.

I certainly never suggested that voting for Biden/Harris (or any number of 
other electoral decisions against the GOP and fascists) was somehow 
antithetical to long-term struggles for liberation. Nor did I minimize the 
enacted and potential violences of the Trump regime.
(I mean, are any US voters on nettime *not* voting against Trump? Does that 
even need to be asked here?)

My specific reference to the election of 1920 in Florida, for example, is not 
one that easily lends itself to a falsely simplistic binary pitting revolution 
against a compromised bourgeois democracy. Nor is it some distant, irrelevant 
historical story in the current moment. The Proud Boys (and all their white 
nationalist friends) are not historical outliers, after all. You know, the 
“again” in MAGA and all.

If anything, I figured my comments would encourage situating electoral politics 
more completely into struggles for liberation. To do otherwise would be to 
completely disregard that history and those that fought (and died) to simply 
exercise the most basic rights that supposedly define democracy, in 1920 and 
before/after.

To try to restate the main reasons I responded in the first place: for many in 
this country, even the *semblance* of democracy has been a fraught (at best) 
lived experience and recognizing that is part of the struggle for those of us 
who have a normalized experience of bourgeois democracy (that’s why I responded 
to Frederic’s post). I guess what I’m saying is that this is not a new fight 
for many, and I think it’s important to keep that front-and-center. If that 
seems somehow reductive, well, I’m not sure what else to say.

Maybe I’d say to ask those leading the fight in the US right now, with BLM and 
the Poor People’s Campaign (for example), whether they think this is about 
*preserving* democracy or *creating* democracy for their constituencies. I 
think it’s possible to recognize the difference and it matters in understanding 
what you are fighting for and with whom.

Apologies for any crossed-wires, misunderstandings.

best,
Ryan

> On Oct 6, 2020, at 6:00 PM, Keith Sanborn  wrote:
> 
> Dear Nettimers,
> 
> An appeal to the history of settler colonialism and the continued history of 
> slavery is appropriate and accurate but at this moment used as a reductio ad 
> absurdum is just dangerous. I am not a believer in justice through bourgeois 
> democracy but the violence promoted and actualized under the Trump regime 
> must be stopped. Think of Biden/Harris as a tourniquet applied to staunch 
> fatal bleeding. 
> 
> Let me end with this: the day after Trump was elected, my students at the New 
> School, most of them women, were in a state of shock and for good reason: one 
> shared with the class that after Trump’s win had been announced she was 
> walking down the street near the “campus” in New York City and a young guy 
> walked up to her and said, “Now I can grab your pussy whenever I want.” And 
> disease entity called Trump was not even inaugurated yet. The irresponsible 
> minimization of covid which has lead directly to deaths and the work of the 
> “Proud Boys” as agents provocateurs, which again lead to deaths. 
> 
> We are talking about the death of even the semblance of bourgeois democracy. 
> And in its place not revolutionary socialism, or an anarchist utopia, but 
> death-dealing fascism. Given the choice, I will vote for bourgeois democracy 
> any time. 
> 
> Keith Sanborn

#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: Not One

[Ryan Griffis]

Zak McGregor wrote:
> 
> Then the cycle will never end. For people outside the USA, Biden poses 
> probably an even greater risk to their lives than Trump. The US left needs to 
> realise that they a. can't effect meaningful change through the ballot, and 
> b. need to bring the entire system down from within.

I think I’ll stick to listening to those who have historically suffered the 
most under the “system” and who have led/are currently leading the fight 
against it (and have always had the most significant expressions of 
international solidarity), but thanks for your suggestions.
Ryan
#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: why is it so quiet (in the US)

[Ryan Griffis]

> From: Molly Hankwitz 

> The Republican Party on the other hand has been galvanized by Trump's
> presidency and they are something to be afraid of, especially if they catch
> QAnon fever and get their way on the Supreme Court with cases involving
> women's rights. This is where Trump has done their  bidding while being
> hung out as a teaser.
> Lindsay Graham and McConnell are frightening.
> There could be a Republican effort to hasten already harsh actions against
> the detained and other disgusting "policies" of the TA

Totally frightening!

While the press focused more on Pompeo’s casual remark ensuring "a smooth 
transition to a second Trump Administration” during Q&A, the actual content of 
the press conference is pretty frightening.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?477982-1/secretary-pompeo-there-smooth-transition-trump-administration

The block of UN nation signatories to this “religious liberty-as-human rights” 
pact has been reported on before, but it does signal an escalation of 
fundamentalist (inherently white supremacist) ideology in establishment GOP 
politics, and maps onto the right-wing “originalist” ideals of the Federalist 
Society that has shaped the current SCOTUS.

The scale of these claims by the right, in centering fundamentalist ideology 
through foreign policy, seems pretty new for the GOP, and seems like one of the 
ways that the legacy of the Trump Admin will exist in institutional terms. E.g. 
as a move by the Right away from typical neoliberal policies and minoritarian 
rule that relies on legalistic maneuvers, and looks more like what followed 
Reconstruction in the South between 1880-1964. The “new lost cause” that Dan 
and Brian mentioned won’t just be the election “stolen” from Trump, but also a 
re-litigation of the culture wars lost by the “rightful” rulers of the US - 
propertied, Christian, white men.

Justice Alito bemoaning the loss of religious freedom and tolerance for 
"Christian values” exemplified by the acceptance of same-sex marriage is 
mind-spinning as such an obvious example of gaslighting.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/justice-alito-speech-polarizing-issues-prompts-calls-reform/story?id=74194553

Curious what others think.

Bes,
Ryan


#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: Fw: Has the right gone full Alt_?

[Ryan Griffis]

Hi all,

Coincidentally, I just recently heard an interview with Vanity Fair writer, 
Jeff Sharlot, about the very topic of Gnosticism, relative to these concerns. I 
found it fairly convincing… 

https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/otm/segments/ancient-heresy-helps-us-understand-qanon-on-the-media

Take care everyone,
Ryan

> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2020 23:23:08 +
> From: "Kurtz, Steven" 
> To: "nettim...@kein.org" 
> Subject: Re:  Fw: Has the right gone full Alt_?
> Message-ID: <1607296989119.10...@buffalo.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
> 
> Hey Brian, welcome to the wilderness my friend. I have been yelling about 
> this for many years, but basically talking to myself. All the knowledge in 
> the world about surveillance capitalism, postfordism, and neoliberalism 
> doesn?t help much (a little with concepts of alienation and its other treks 
> into psychology) when the question is best answered by the history of 
> religion and comparative religion. My education was certainly deficient in 
> these topics, although I have been trying to remedy this situation. Even 
> while I witnessed the rise of the religious right at closing decades of the 
> last century, I never thought it to be more than a political problem. Now 
> it?s clear that the ?political problem? is much more than that as we witness 
> religious illiberalism taking over nations all over the globe, and 
> unfortunately, the left doesn?t have the categories to understand this at the 
> grass roots level, let alone act against it in any reasonable manner. We do 
> well at understanding this phenomen
> on in terms of power constellations at the top of the hierarchy (our 
> traditional comfort zone), but as to the rest of it the critique seems to 
> consist of ?Why are people acting crazy??
> 
> I am the first to admit I have no systematic analysis of this ?crazy,? but I 
> do have a few scattered thoughts that I am trying to order. First, we have 
> seen this crazy before, and have seen it for centuries. I believe what we are 
> witnessing (particularly in the US) is a Gnostic revival. It?s just not in a 
> form we are used to, or we wouldn?t see it as crazy at all, but just as 
> another religious faith. The devoted are out fighting the demiurge?the 
> experts, the deep state, scientists, and others rulers of the false real in 
> an effort to get beyond the flawed knowledge of authority to that of deep 
> esoteric knowledge derived from personal transcendental experience and shared 
> in fellowship among those who know (those who have been red-pilled).
> 
> Many outlets for this way of being are readily available. It?s best if it?s 
> able to survive virtually as social media platforms will help with expanding 
> the fellowship over vast territories and with its separation from the forces 
> of the demiurge. Gnostic groups do not require a messiah, although it?s fine 
> if there is one. The cult of Trump is evidence of that. But they can also be 
> decentralized groups such as in the yoga and wellness community* where an 
> aristocracy of influencers lead the flock, or a distributed network like 
> Qanon, which is fundamentally leaderless. All of these groups, and we must 
> include the Evangelicals, LDS, and conservative Catholics, are concerned most 
> with the elimination of ignorance even more than the elimination of sin.  In 
> fact, in this century sin has become much more tolerable than ignorance. (I 
> should note that this list of groups is very intersectional and  probably 
> should also include the virtual social justice warriors cancelling people who 
> don?t und
> erstand the difference between sexual orientation and sexual preference. Just 
> not woke?the left?s equivalent of the red pill.) The reason knowledge is so 
> important is that it can function as a virtual glue to build community and a 
> way for many members to say I may not be educated like the members of the 
> demiurge, but I am more intelligent and better informed, but most 
> importantly, the goal is transformation?to be a part of a constellation that 
> gives you the power to transcend the limits of a false given. Take the red 
> pill and emerge anew.  I don?t want to play down the former two reasons for 
> becoming a part of the Gnostic front. They are significant. For Evangelicals 
> and other conservative Christians the breaking of the spiritual consensus in 
> the West in the 60s was traumatic, and the erosion of a national spiritual 
> life has continued ever since. From their perspective, Gnostic revelation 
> could bring back the consensus. The fact that yoga and wellness can commune 
> with evangelicals t
> hrough Qanon or anti-vax seems to be an indication of this possibility from a 
> Gnostic point of view. For the greater Trump cult, being viewed as ignorant 
> rubes by their educational superiors (now more than ever as Trump continues 
> to loot and grift this class) has been a source of aggravation. Gnosticism 
> p

Re: made for TV, made for social media

[Ryan Griffis]

Hi all,
In all the conversations about this insurrection/mob/coup attempt or whatever 
you want to call it (including whether it should be property understood as a 
directionless, disorganized act of white rage, or as an early warning/test of a 
more organized fascist coup), I just think it’s worth keeping in mind that 
those things are not mutually exclusive and the numbers of precedent in US 
history are just, well, all too available.
Sure, an attack on the US Congress itself may be novel, but the use of both 
organized and unorganized/spontaneous violence, is a well established tactic in 
the US. That includes violence with implicit and explicit support from sitting 
politicians.
An example I have posted here before, exactly 100 years ago throughout the 
state of Florida.
https://medium.com/florida-history/ocoee-on-fire-the-1920-election-day-massacre-38adbda9666e

There are, of course, other examples both before and after Ocoee, from Tulsa to 
Chicago to Wilmington, NC.

I’m certainly not denying the usefulness of the insights and analyses offered 
by others that speak to the specifics of the current moment, especially as it 
relates to the intersections of international fascism, conspiracy theories, and 
the expanded media environment, and I sincerely hope that my repetitiveness 
does not come off as some kind of arrogant dismissal or smug statement of “this 
is nothing new.” I certainly am not trying to say anything like that.

It’s just that I can’t look at the images and read the reports and not think of 
Ocoee, FL in 1920. Not only did white supremacists “get away with it” then, 
they successfully re-asserted a regime of terror and violence that would only 
start to be undone with the passage of the Voting Rights Act more than 40 years 
later. I mean, this is in the decades following a f*cking civil war, in the 
territories that lost! Personally, I believe we are still in the process of 
undoing that regime, and that those that stormed Congress this week are the 
spiritual descendants of those that burned Ocoee, Tulsa, and Wilmington. They 
are clearly not “anti-state” actors, they are *defenders* of the state, for 
which they feel they are the rightful inheritors.

Ibram X Kendi was on the PBS Newshour last night saying that the only 
*potential* difference between this history and what we are seeing now rests on 
whether or not there will be anything remotely resembling accountability. 
Viewing the potential of the state to hold these people accountable is, he 
argues, only properly viewed from the perspective of those that 
disproportionately suffer the violence of the state on a regular basis, whose 
mere existence has been treated as an affront to our “democracy," a fact 
reiterated multiple times daily. Where is the power for that accountability 
going to come from and what can it look like?

Take care everyone,
Ryan

Ryan Griffis
http://www.ryangriffis.com
http://temporarytraveloffice.net
http://regionalrelationships.org/
https://artinthesetimes.wordpress.com/
#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: The Left Needs a New Strategy

[Ryan Griffis]

Message: 3
> Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2021 22:56:39 +0100
> From: Dmytri Kleiner 
> 
> The Communist Party of China knows, as do the Communist Parties of 
> India, as does the MST in Brazil, and the movements behind the MAS in 
> Bolovia. NUMSA knows. The left has a strategy, and through struggle and 
> perseverance in the face of defeat, it's winning. It's just hard to tell 
> from behind enemy lines.

I’m sorry, is this a joke, Dmytri?

Was this meant to be an op-ed for Adbusters 15 years ago?

Can you help explain how we should be understanding the MST alongside the CCP, 
as related strategies of a global left? I guess the CCPs role in the decimation 
of the lives of both peasants and indigenous peoples in the Brazilian interior 
for the sake of cheap soybeans is forgivable since the CCP is technically a 
Communist Party? Maybe that’s the cost of “winning” in your analysis? Does the 
fact that those soybeans are going to a nominally communist nation make the 
loss of their lifeways less painful than the same soybeans bound for the EU? Is 
it all for the bigger cause?
Of course, I’m being rhetorical… the MST has commented on this already. 
"When they got rid of the European empires, their oil still went to them and to 
the Americans. But a new empire is arriving to exploit their natural resources: 
China. China is taking everything: coal, trees, mineral resources of all sorts, 
foodstuff, to sustain its economic growth. Maybe the next anti-imperialist 
revolt is going to be against China.” (MST leader João Pedro Stédile way back 
in 2008)

Is that just the MST playing “both sidesism”? Is it possible, maybe, that the 
landless workers in Brazil understand that the CCP and the Chinese state do not 
necessarily (or generally) represent Chinese workers or peasants, just as 
agribusiness in Brazil (whether under Lula or Bolsonaro) is ultimately not in 
the interests of the various peoples of Brazil who live on the lands being 
destroyed, whether they are leftist peasants or indigenous Xavante communities? 
How should the global left respond… should it side with the MST or the CCP here?

Who here is offering to judge, denounce, or decry the accomplishments of 
Chinese workers? I think I missed that. I thought, however, that it was fairly 
accepted wisdom that nation states are not synonymous with its people 
(especially workers). Again, maybe I missed a thread that would have disabused 
me of such ideas.

But rather than maintain this weird privileging of the geopolitical context, 
how about discussing the work that various factions of “the left” everywhere 
have been engaged in, and continue to work through in the present? Does your 
leftist imagination not include the world in which you, yourself, live? 

For example: Mutual aid groups that have been aligned with BLM and BIPOC/queer 
social movements in North America (including for housing justice) for years 
have had a big expansion since the COVID pandemic. Many of them are 
intersectional coalitions that look like the most promising foundation for 
(potentially) supporting something like a general strike that I’ve witnessed in 
my lifetime. When protests in Chicago raged through the summer on various 
fronts, especially those related to the police murders of Brionna Taylor and 
George Floyd, various forms of these groups from across the city mobilized to 
both support the protests and those that were arrested during them. Leftist 
community spaces (including many art spaces) and even some small businesses 
served as gathering spaces for supplies and information. * It always has to be 
said when discussing this work: the groundwork for this has been done by mostly 
queer and femme-identified BIPOC organizers. It’s just that more white folks 
have finally recognized their leadership in an expanded time of crisis.
This work also aligns with and comes out of service-sector union efforts (Fight 
for 15, etc) and housing/economic justice work, arguably *the* most visible 
expression of class struggle in North America.

I’m really not interested in some snarky back-and-forth, but your assumption 
that many here don't know what strategies exist on the left because they “are 
not involved" is just patronizing and unproductive. What’s a more privileged 
position than leveling criticisms about global ideological alignments while 
basically letting yourself off the hook by claiming that "none of us in the 
imperial core will actually join the global left, even when we would want to, 
we are resident here and this limits our ability to be involved”?

Come on, take a walk with Freire and McAlevey and actually grapple with your 
relationship to the oppressions around you. I promise you, like them, you won’t 
find a way out in the embrace of a state.

Take care,
Ryan

#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mail

Re: The Left Needs a New Strategy

[Ryan Griffis]

On Jan 12, 2021, at 2:13 PM, From: Dmytri Kleiner  
wrote:
> 
> What does? Do I need to be pedantic here and explain that they where 
> attempting to use Jo?o Pedro, a leader of MST, against China? They are 
> obviously using a third party logic, Jo?o Pedro is not a leader of 
> China, it is perfectly ok to disagree with him about China, without 
> denying his view on MST! Indeed, the soundest position would be to draw 
> about his view of MST while defering to Chinese workers about China.
> 
> Also, since the person who posted the quote from Jo?o Pedro is also a 
> third party, and not involved with MST, they didn't know that this is 
> not the current view or strategy of Jo?o Pedro or the MST, illustrating 
> that it is difficult to know if your analysis is sound when you are not 
> involved, which is kinda the central point here.

Dmytri, I have no interest in engaging further in whatever it is you’re doing, 
or think you’re doing, here.

But just to clarify something in this thread.
 
I did *not* attempt "to use João Pedro Stedile, a leader of MST, against 
China.” You may want to see it that way, but that doesn’t make it true. I 
didn’t even make any significant judgement of China or the CCP, of which I know 
next to nothing. I don’t need to *use* anyone… It’s a *very* simple fact that 
China (and its corporate proxies) is involved in massive agribusiness in the 
interior of Brazil that runs counter to the objectives of the MST, *on its own 
terms*. Not to be pedantic, but you know, it turns out that the activities of 
the Chinese state (or the US or EU) aren’t contained inside its borders, and 
therefore the state is responsible for more than its relationship with its own 
people. It also has a relationship with others around the world to whom it is 
not accountable. *I can’t believe I felt the need to write this here* I don’t 
need to pass some uninformed judgement on anyone to make that observation, I 
can trust the judgements of those working in that context, which is *in fact* 
where my observations came from.

I could go back and forth with you about my experience with the MST and their 
multi-faceted (and multi-coalition-based) responses to global agribusiness, 
including that originating from China. I could go on to discuss how the work of 
the MST is connected with a global network of agrarian movements that take 
different shapes in different contexts (Via Campesina  which includes orgs like 
the Family Farm Defenders based in nearby (to me) Wisconsin). About how I 
learned of the work of the MST not because I was trying to leverage something 
as a “third party,” but because the work they do has direct relevance to 
land-based movements where I live. It’s something to learn from and alongside. 
But, whatever, based on the fact that you responded earlier with an article 
that was probably a first page search result looking to see who Stedile was, 
you don’t seem to care about such details. The only value that article seemed 
to have for you was as a discursive retort (seemingly because it included the 
word “China” in it while acknowledging shifting geopolitical dynamics). In 
fact, you even *introducing* the MST into the conversation was simply a matter 
of convenience for you, one amongst an interchangeable array of movements that 
you can mobilize as an example.

Maybe try taking your own advice before committing to your responses, you know, 
like not speaking about things for which you have no stakes and of which you 
seem to know little. I’ll leave it to others to reply further if you/they wish 
to continue. Just try leaving out further gross mischaracterizations of my 
comments if you can.

Take care all,
Ryan



#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: In God We Tryst

[Ryan Griffis]

On Jan 25, 2021, at 12:38 PM, nettime-l-requ...@mail.kein.org wrote:
> 
> Perhaps, in terms of fascism, fundamentalist religion is what is being
>> substituted for the state.
>> 
> 
> Contradiction doesn't bother these people. They are anti-state
> nationalists. Traditional fascism gets folded in as part of nationalism.
> For them, being against the state means getting rid of those aspects of
> government that don't fit their world picture. Ideally, a Christian state
> would solve all their problems, but in the meantime, the White nation is
> good enough. If you try to find coherency here, there is none.

I’m not sure that it’s worth getting into this, but maybe it is, I don’t know. 
The idea that the Right has a monopoly on Christianity, much less, organized 
religion and spirituality, is not really grounded in history or reality.

Of course it would be ridiculous to ignore the rhetorical use of Christian 
morality by dominant sectors of the US Right… I mean Pompeo’s press conferences 
alone reveal the extremes of such rhetoric being at the heart of their vision 
of foreign policy. But I think it’s spurious to claim that the US Right depends 
on religious fundamentalism to make its claims of white nationalism (as Brian 
notes), misogyny, and minoritarian rule. I don’t think the “White nation” is 
simply "good enough” for the US Right, it is the goal that (their use of 
religious fundamentalism) serves, IMO. Lots of rightwing conspiracies are as 
grounded in secular apocalyptic fantasies as they are Biblical gnosticism.

But, maybe more important, giving the US Right sole claims to organized 
religion does extreme disservice to the ongoing history of liberatory 
spirituality, from Catholics protesting early colonial violence to 
abolitionists, to the spread of Liberation Theology across the Americas. Yes, 
there are all kinds of problems with the missionary tendencies in some of these 
examples, but there is also the rise of the AME Church to the SCLC to the 
contemporary Moral Monday movement and reimagined Poor People’s Campaign. 

I guess I’m just suggesting that to ignore the role of “the church” and 
organized religion in liberatory and leftist politics in the US Left would be a 
huge mistake. As is suggesting that the left-right divide in the US is 
synonymous with one that is rational vs religious. This recent radio segment 
(from the United States of Anxiety) features a couple of Black theological 
scholars/leaders who make this case better than I can.

https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/anxiety/episodes/how-martin-luther-king-jr-changed-american-christianity
 


Anyway, possibly also of interest, this recent podcast on the rise of 
post-1970s white supremacy in the US features some discussion of the early 
adoption of online message boards to form a broad, decentralized culture, and a 
lot of the talking points then mirror the underlying fantasies of QAnon 
adherents today.

https://www.npr.org/transcripts/940825490 


I hope everyone is doing well,
Ryan#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: Democracy Net Zero

[Ryan Griffis]

Thanks for this David!

Minor point: "Silent Spring" is not a work of fiction in any sense of the
word; the short first chapter "Fable for Tomorrow," is, as its title
suggests, a fable (of a "town that does not actually exist"). That chapter
is obviously a literary device that establishes the stakes up front and in
an accessible and compressed manner, but I wouldn't use it to classify the
rest of the book as even "creative nonfiction." The book is otherwise a
work of reportage, probably *the* model for popular contemporary
climate/science journalists such as Elizabeth Kolbert who rely on a
combination of first-person observations, interviews, and syntheses of
scientific papers and policy documents.
Unfortunately, it's still deeply relevant 50 years later...

Take care all,
Ryan

"To get a comparative sense of where we currently stand its useful to
contrast today?s environmental politics with the political impact of
Rachel Carson?s ?Silent Spring? published in 1962. As is well known this
was an account of an imaginary community afflicted by environmental
calamity. Although a fiction the narrative drew on detailed evidence
from events that had already actually happened in a number of separate
incidents. Carson had simply and brilliantly drawn these threads
together into a worst-case scenario."
#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: Democracy Net Zero

[Ryan Griffis]

Hi all.

This is maybe jumping the tracks of this thread started by David's essay, or 
maybe it’s actually bringing it back online… not sure. But, Patrick’s anecdote 
about verbalizing the urgency of the climate catastrophe is something many of 
us here, I’m sure, relate to.

That urgency is also something that constantly nags at my perception and sense 
of time and perspective. For example, the urgent pleas for “humanity to wake 
up,” and the inverse, cynical response regarding “human nature’s” inability to 
respond to the crisis it has created. These notions are, I think, deeply 
related to the theme of David’s analysis and its concern for democracy.

One aspect of “liberal democracies”, especially settler-colonial ones, seem to 
be blind to is the inherent differences in responsibility that nations states 
have created in their project to flatten and de-differentiate people and their 
understandings of sociality and even life itself. In doing so, entire 
perspectives have been completely shut out of the very discursive mechanisms 
that supposedly create the foundation of democracy. In the US (and much of the 
Americas), the most visible, egregious aspect of this is the explicit disregard 
for treaties governing relations between the US and Tribal Governments.

All of this is to say that, a big part of the climate crisis is, IMHO, a 
willful continuation to ignore (at best) and annihilate (at worst) the *actual* 
humans around the world who have, and continue to, create lifeways that operate 
from extremely different foundations than those driving the crisis. This is not 
romanticizing indigenous worldviews, IMO. A recent NYT article (linked and 
pasted below) on the ongoing “water wars” in the Klamath Basin where 
present-day Oregon and California meet is a great example of this. Thousands of 
years of human existence in this watershed are simply erased in order to talk 
about the inability of “humans” (a flattened mix of conservative and liberal 
settlers and indigenous communities advocating for “water rights") to coexist 
with the landscape. Many of the comments to the article make this even more 
explicit, the writers completely unable to recognize that the crisis is one 
that exists in the temporal reality of settler governance in that watershed 
(roughly 175 years), and what should be the obvious fact that humans were in 
that watershed for thousands of years before US irrigation projects and water 
rights laws. Those people are still there and are even discussed in the 
freaking article!

Carson concludes “Silent Spring” with a chapter titled “The Other Road,” 
offering a challenge to her readers. In it, she writes, “If, having endured 
much, we have at last asserted our 'right to know,' and if, knowing, we have 
concluded that we are being asked to take senseless and frightening risks, then 
we should no longer accept the counsel of those who tell us that we must fill 
our world with poisonous chemicals; we should look about and see what other 
course is open to us.” While I might take issue with the analogy of the forked 
road, her conclusion is one that I take to heart, even if I think the road 
itself maybe needs to be abandoned (whatever that might mean).

I just started reading a book by scholar Dr. Max Liboiron (Métis/Michif) titled 
“Pollution is Colonialism” that I think expands on the scholarship/ideas of 
others like Robin Wall Kimmerer and Anna Tsing, and offers some pretty 
compelling, embodied ways of understanding pollution (specifically plastics in 
Liboiron’s work) through the lens of dominant colonialism's disregard for forms 
of sociality/relations built on consent. Coming to terms with what it means to 
have relations built on consent certainly seems like part of “the other road” 
Carson imagined 50+ years ago.
https://maxliboiron.com/

Take care all,
Ryan

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/01/us/klamath-oregon-water-drought-bundy.html?searchResultPosition=1

By Mike Baker

KLAMATH FALLS, Ore. — Through the marshlands along the Oregon-California 
border, the federal government a century ago carved a whole new landscape, 
draining lakes and channeling rivers to build a farming economy that now 
supplies alfalfa for dairy cows and potatoes for Frito-Lay chips.

The drawdowns needed to cover the croplands and the impacts on local fish 
nearing extinction have long been a point of conflict at the Klamath Project, 
but this year’s historic drought has heightened the stakes, with salmon dying 
en masse and Oregon’s largest lake draining below critical thresholds for 
managing fish survival. Hoping to limit the carnage, federal officials have 
shut the gates that feed the project’s sprawling irrigation system, telling 
farmers the water that has flowed every year since 1907 will not be available.

Some farmers, furious about water rights and fearing financial ruin, are 
already organizing a resistance. “Tell Pharaoh let our water feed the Earth,” 
said a sign erected near the nearly dr

Re: What is the meaning of Trump's Victory

[Ryan Griffis]

Regarding the debate around the racism of the multiple factions of the
right, the comments in this Breitbart article are worth a look. The
article itself, not so interesting.  What is especially interesting to
me here is the assertion by many commenters that *any* assertion of race
is a liberal sentiment. Both overt white supremacists and its critics
(BLM) are labeled tools of the left. The expression of a nationalism
that is *passively* (rather than explicitly) defined as white,
heterosexual, and misogynist is seen here *opposing* explicit
expressions of white supremacy as a racially-defined nationalism (that
also justifies any eugenic, colonial or imperial acts). “Mainstream"
conservatives seem to just want to deny race as a historically produced
reality, while continuing to benefit from it. It seems like both BLM and
neo-nazis prevent them from being able to reproduce the myths of
assimilation and meritocratic freedom, obviously for very different
reasons.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/11/16/business-insider-bannons-2014-vatican-speech-strikes-fear-wall-street/

Ryan

#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Taking sides

[Ryan Griffis]

>
> I take neither side at Charlottesville


Need anyone say more?
As we in the US have been saying for years about the Republican party's
turn to explicit and open authoritarianism, believe people when they tell
you who they are.
In my experience, real pragmatism follows action and results. The people
moving the Left forward in the US are overwhelmingly POC women and queer
organizers. Many of them are trained and educated in political Marxism, as
well as cultural and political organizing through institutions like
Highlander, the Boggs Center, The Allied Media Conference, etc. They have
developed very sophisticated responses to inter-movement/inter-community
forms of conflict resolution that avoid the use of state intervention. They
have done amazing cross-movement organizing that includes labor, indigenous
nations, people who have been incarcerated, etc. They seem perfectly able
to find strength in the recognition of intersectional forms of oppression
and then take them on without saying, "No, but this philosophy is the one
we should stick to!"
People trying to convince me that these folks' life experiences aren't
meaningful to the political struggle I see all around me, while labeling
them with the name of a dead European philosopher, just sound irrelevant at
best.
I'm not really looking to continue this "debate," but wanted to add my
voice to those saying what seems pretty obvious.
Best,
Ryan
#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: Was cultural Marxism the leading force behind the new world order

[Ryan Griffis]

Ayn Rand devotees arguing that “Cultural Marxists” have a skewed view of the 
world… LOL
If The Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) wasn’t part of a very real and 
influential network of Koch-funded think tanks, they would almost be funny.
So would Meuller's book (*of course* he’s a German economist based in Brazil!), 
titled "Beyond the State and Politics. Capitalism for the New Millennium” (hey, 
it’s FREE--as in beer--as a Kindle unlimited book!). In the promotional copy: 
"When the functions of government are privatized, the financial burden of taxes 
and contributions falls from the shoulders of the population.”
I guess the invisible hand of the market is better with a gun.
Ah, that’s why they love the acronym FEE so much!

Octavia Butler imagined this world "without a state” too. Wonder why her vision 
of such a world doesn't sound like theirs?
https://fee.org/about/board-of-trustees

Ryan

Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2018 12:58:45 +0100
> From: ?rsan ?enalp 
> To: Nettime 
> Subject:  Was cultural Marxism the leading force behind the
>   new world order
> Message-ID:
>   
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> Dear list members,
> 
> I really wonder what would you make of this article by Antony Meuller of
> Mises Institute? Is he implying the role really played by, at least, the
> certain liberal post-Marxist Left in building up Neoliberlism, or is it
> just a reaction against the growing power of the left?
> 
> https://fee.org/articles/cultural-marxism-is-the-main-source-of-modern-confusion-and-its-spreading/?utm_content=79412082&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR0PonQZ5UQP4iGvZfSFJE3p8jecBefhyHwupA4ZTa-__n01010J9X305Q8
> 

#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: ?Meta?

[Ryan Griffis]

Favorite line from this weekend’s On the Media, regarding the reading 
comprehension skills of tech bros:

“You can lead a techie mogul to a book, but you can’t make him think."

https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/otm/segments/science-fiction-origins-metaverse-on-the-media

"When Facebook changed its name to Meta, after the Metaverse, many were quick 
to identify the term's origin: Neal Stephenson's 1992 cyberpunk classic Snow 
Crash. But the novel hardly paints an optimistic future—runway inflation, 
collapsed governments, and a maniacal media magnate who uses the Metaverse to, 
get this, destroy people's minds. It begs the question: did Zuckerberg misread 
it?

This week, Brooke speaks with Jill Lepore, Harvard historian and New Yorker 
staff writer, Annalee Newitz, former Editor-in-Chief of Gizmodo and science 
fiction author, and Gene Seymour, longtime cultural critic, to unpack the 
literary world  behind the social media giant's new name. They discuss why the 
tech moguls love science fiction so much, the perils of reading these 
"world-building" novels too literally, and how new forms of the genre today are 
already making the Metaverse look obsolete.”

Take care all,
Ryan
#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: Biocultural Corridors

[Ryan Griffis]

Hey Brian and all,

> The urgent issue is therefore not degrowth but energy transition and
> geoengineering. Despite that I would rather not live in an authoritarian
> eco-state, I am convinced that both the forced transition away from coal
> and petroleum, and the implementation of global-scale geoengineering, will
> be tried within the next two decades.
...
> 
> The project which launched this thread - biocultural corridors - may appear
> to be a simple conservationist program, totally inadequate to what's
> coming. Well, that's largely true. However, I am approaching it as a chance
> to analyze an extremely complex and threatening situation (that's the
> critical part), while building a collective ethical and spiritual posture
> toward that situation (that's the biocultural part). I expect that project,
> and everything else I am involved in, to change rapidly over the course of
> this decade. It's daunting.

Thanks for all of these exchanges, in all their various directions. I’ve been 
following, as I’m sure lots of other folks have.

I’m not sure this is an either/or proposition, but a yes/and one. While I feel 
even weighing in here is an act of undue hubris on my part, maybe we can 
consider “degrowth” not as an alternative to the state-scaled projects Brian is 
describing, but a necessary *response* to them?

As Brian very rightly points out, none of us here can make decisions that opt 
us out of the consequences of state-level actor actions. We’re not gonna vote 
our way out of catastrophic climate chaos (it’s obviously already here), where 
in the US our electoral choices seem to be between neoliberal-technocratic 
governance or white nationalist fascism. And, it’s a toss up which way we’ll 
go! But, we can have some determination of how we organize ourselves in ways 
that leave us more/less prepared for the combination of organized abandonment 
and violent, assertive control by the state.

In this sense, “degrowth” can be approached as a form of “prepping” that is 
collectivist, rather than heroic/individualist. In NGO lingo, this seems to be 
called “resilience.”
Anyone remember these discussions?:
https://www.resilience.org/team/
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/jun/15/transition-towns-way-forward

Maybe one reason I’m arguing (am I?) that “degrowth” is a worthwhile 
term/strategy, is it encourages us to think outside of the de-humanizing scales 
of the state. For example, here’s Mariame Kaba, a beloved prison abolitionist 
organizer:

"We need to skill up on de-escalation, mediation, and resolving conflicts. We 
need to be able to do medic work. The folks that created CPR models were onto 
something. They realized that sometimes there are no doctors around, and we 
need to be able to know how to help somebody who is choking not choke, because 
we’re not going to have time to call 911. Capitalism has deskilled us from 
things that we should know how to do and that we should not be outsourcing. 
It’s going to take a lot to change that. This is why I’ve always struggled 
alongside and respected my anarchist friends. I wonder how we’re going to do 
things without a government, however that government gets reconstituted. How 
are we going to be able to distribute resources en masse or do things in common 
like build roads? I don’t know. We as individuals can do a lot, and we also 
need spaces where we do things collectively toward survival. We have to do 
both, and then some more. I’m open to alternate configurations.”

I believe that prison abolitionists have a lot in common with those working to 
confront climate chaos. Not in terms of what state policies to support (Green 
New Deals, etc), but how we organize our communities regardless of what 
policies we do/don’t end up influencing at the state level. Again, not 
surrendering the state, just preparing for always/already aspects of the state 
that are not about our collective survival. At the end of the day, someone’s 
going to have to wash the proverbial dishes… as long as we plan on surviving, 
we’re going to have to eat.
https://www.thenation.com/article/culture/mariame-kaba-interview-til-we-free-us/

Wow, this is probably way longer than necessary… and apologies for the 
US-centric aspects of my comments here on such a global-scale concern.
Take care everyone,
Ryan


#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: crowd-funding on nettime

[Ryan Griffis]

I'd echo Andreas, Keith and Aliette.
I've supported many projects through those platforms and find out about them in 
plenty of other ways. Avoiding redundant mass-messaging of non-discursive forms 
here would be valuable to me.
The prompt to discuss this is also appreciated. thanks,
ryan

On Aug 27, 2012, at 3:29 PM, nettime-l-requ...@mail.kein.org wrote:

> folks,
> 
> thanks for raising the question. my two euro-cents worth:
 <...>


#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org

Re: P2P Foundation: A Synthetic Overview of the Collaborative Econo...

[Ryan Griffis]

On Oct 1, 2012, at 3:08 AM, nettime-l-requ...@mail.kein.org wrote:

> Technology changes EVERYTHING.  Really.

Everybody sing along:
There's a hole in the bucket...


#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org

Re: No Soap! Radio?

[Ryan Griffis]

On Apr 30, 2013, at 5:00 AM, nettime-l-requ...@mail.kein.org wrote:

> Not HOT (like radio,  although with many similar qualities) and not COOL 
> (like television, against  which it is most directly opposed), the INTERNET 
> brings with it a new set of  behaviors and attitudes.

Hi Mark,

I'm wondering if you can elaborate on something here, as I find what
Iyou're saying to be important, of course. n applying language,
Ilike McLuhan's "environment" to technologies or media, how do you
Idisentangle "our" understanding of them from the "environment"
Iitself?

Isn't the environment (composed OR created by?) the Internet
partially constitutive of our current understanding of it (or lack of
understanding, if you prefer)?

Of course, I'm not suggesting that "we" don't try to understand
a given technology, but why not apply some of the same thinking
that's challenging ecological frameworks to this conception of
technological environments? What are the boundaries of the Internet,
as an environment?

In the end, your calls for "understanding" seem to assume a universal
subject that I think is far from a given. I don't think it's
sufficient to assume that "humans" are composed of a unified mass,
excepting those "exceptional" individuals that can "break from the
mold" and understand things more precisely. There's also an odd
juxtaposition of a kind of simultaneous immanence and call for action
in your posts, that I have a hard time reconciling. Just to be sure,
none of these questions/statements are rhetorical. I am really
interested to hear your, and others', thoughts, if it's at all useful.


Best, ryan


#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org

Future Shock stacks

[Ryan Griffis]

   Tilman,

   This is later, but I know someone who did just what you described in
   the 2000s. Maybe, maybe not what you are looking for?

   http://intheconversation.blogs.com/art/2008/03/interview-with.html

   Ryan

 __

   From: [1]nettime-l-requ...@mail.kein.org
   Sent: 4/8/2015 5:00 AM
   To: [2]nettime-l@mail.kein.org
   Subject: nettime-l Digest, Vol 91, Issue 12

 <...>

   Today's Topics:

  1. cady noland? haim steinbach? alvin toffler? (Tilman Baumg?rtel)

  2. Re: nottime: the end of nettime (d...@geer.org)

   --

   Message: 1
   Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2015 23:48:42 +0200
   From: Tilman Baumg?rtel 
   To: nettim...@kein.org
   Subject:  cady noland? haim steinbach? alvin toffler?
   Message-ID: 
   Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed

   Dear all,

   please help me out.

   I remember seeing a sculpture made out of stacks of differently colored
   editions of Alvin Toffler?s  "Future Shock" in New York around
   1990/1993.

   In my memory, it was at a Whitney Biennial, and it was either by Cady
   Noland or Haim Steinbach, then art word big shots under the moniker of
   "Smart Art" - but apparently my memory does not serve me right, because
   I cannot find any reference on the net with any of these search words.
   That means that either I cannot remember stuff to well, or I used the
   wrong search terms, or there is stuff that Google does not know about.
   In any case, any hint to find this work would be appreciated, as in my
   mind this might be the first! work! of! post-net art! ever!
   Thanks,
   T.
   --
   Prof. Dr. Tilman Baumg?rtel
   m...@tilmanbaumgaertel.net
   Twitter:  Tilman Baumgaertel ?@tilmazio
 <...>


#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org