Interesting and useful conversation.
This article, a book review, may add some further perspectives to it, http://www.triple-c.at/index.php/tripleC/article/view/689/716 .
parminder
On Saturday 13 June 2015 03:15 PM, peter waterman wrote:
Ariel:
It is a pleasure to dialogue with you. But to avoid us going round in circles, rather than in a constructive spiral, I should really leave a defence of - no a positive, eco-sensitive, gender-aware - the emancipatory implications of the internet/the web/cyberspace to those better qualified than I.
So I will take issue with one one para of yours:
'No I think you are not quite grasping the full meanings of ‘commodification' and 'colonisation' as materially and culturally embodied in this manufactured instrument the Internet. That reflects perhaps your marxist schooling, which tradition has leaned towards an assumption that technologies are neutral.Here it seems important to emphasise the difference between a technology and a tool. The latter is a relatively simple object. The former brings - and commits us to - a whole fandangle of social relations.'
My Marxist schooling: A touch, a touch, I do confess. But it was, rather, a Communist schooling, to which your strictures, here and elsewhere, do certainly apply. I have been struggling with both, however, since - let's say - my first experience of living with and under Communism, in Czechoslovakia, 1955-8.
Commodification and colonisation: the first of these is pretty much associated with Marxism. The second was taken over and reworked in Marxist/Leninist theories of imperialism.
Technology: I think we have to recognise this as marked by profound internal contradictions.
It was not the intention of the railway to make it possible for French workers to take a cheap trip to London, to meet up with those of other countries, 1851 (I seem to recall).
No more was it the intention of the German Empire that their sealed train, with Lenin inside, should lead to the Bolshevik Revolution (they only wanted him to screw up the Russian Empire's war effort).
I go with the spirit of Hans Magnus Enzensberger, commenting on the Paris 1968 activists' failure to occupy the TV rather than the Opera, and to depend on wall slogans and hand-lithographed posters. He said, of the highest capitalist communication technology of that era, 'A distaste for handling shit is something sewer workers can hardly afford'.
Well, the latest capitalist technology is, in comparison, dramatically different from the shit of 1968. It has created a new universe, which I call Cyberia, of an extremely contradictory nature. It is, of course, both surrounded by shit, full of shit and productive of shit. You have stressed the ecology-destructive effects of the technology involved. These are known to those concerned with emancipation and the commons. As, also, of course, its capacity for surveillance, control and punishment. The moment of left-ish cyber-utopianism was the 1980s-90s. What I today see is a wide, varied, complex and - yes - contradictory wave of radical-democratic efforts on this novel terrain. I mention a few names: Snowden, Castells, Bauwens, Laura Agustin, Gerbaudi, Sally Burch, Dyer-Witheford, Jodi Dean.
You will be considering yourself lucky that I didn't respond to ALL the paragraphs?
Best,
PeterW
- 2014. From Coldwar Communism to the Global Justice Movement: Itinerary of a Long-Distance Internationalist. http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/from_coldwar_communism _to_the_global_emancipatory_movement/ (Free).
- 2014. Interface Journal Special (Co-Editor), December 2014. 'Social Movement Internationalisms'. (Free).
- 2014. 'The Networked Internationalism of Labour's Others', in Jai Sen (ed), Peter Waterman (co-ed), The Movement of Movements: Struggles for Other Worlds (Part I). (10 Euros).
On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Ariel Salleh <arielsalleh7@gmail.com> wrote:
Peter dear friend, I did reply - to you and Jai and Mikel all together - but it evaporated in the ether - which may well be a sign of things to come.On 11 Jun 2015, at 7:27 am, peter waterman <peterwaterman1936@gmail.com> wrote:
Ariel, hola!
I am wondering whether or not you received a message I sent in response to you, dated c. May 29.It might have got lost in space. I will not repeat it. But I do want to respond to what you say below (re-pasted by me so that it fits my screen).
I know it is a pain on the eye, but I will do this para by para and in CAPS.
AgreedWhile considering security aspects of the 2016 WSF in Canada, remember that the more we embed our activities in capitalist technologies like ICT the more we give up our autonomy and make our politics transparent and vulnerable to unsympathetic powers.
I AM WONDERING WHETHER THERE ARE ANY EMANCIPATORY TECHNOLOGIES AROUND, EITHER PRE- OR POST-CAPITALIST. WE ALL USE TRAINS, MOST OF US USE PLANES, WE WATCH OR PRODUCE MOVIES, VIDEOS, PHOTOS, PRINT. OF THESE THE ONLY ONE THAT IS NOT CAPITALIST MIGHT BE PRINT - WHICH PROVIDED A MAJOR MEANS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF CAPITALISM.
ICT IS THE MOST CONTRADICTORY TECHNOLOGY CAPITALISM HAS PRODUCED. ALL SERIOUS LEFT WRITERS ON IT EITHER RECOGNISE OR EVEN SEARCH OUT ITS PRESENT AND IMMINENT DANGERS. THEY THEN, HOWEVER, GO ON TO CONSIDER ITS AMBIGUOUS OR EMANCIPATORY POTENTIALS (AND CURRENT USES). CHECK THE NICK DYER-WITHEFORD CHAPTER I POSTED THIS VERY DAY - EVEN IF HE DOES NOT HERE SHOW ANY GENDER SENSITIVITY.
No I think you are not quite grasping the full meanings of ‘commodification' and 'colonisation' as materially and culturally embodied in this manufactured instrument the Internet. That reflects perhaps your marxist schooling, which tradition has leaned towards an assumption that technologies are neutral.But the idea of an Internet Social Forum carries much deeper political contradictions than this.Technologies are never culturally neutral but embody value systems within them. Recent List discussions in favour of an Internet Social Forum overlook this by embracing wholesale a form of colonisation by the commodity society, fully opposed to the alter-global social critique that WSF is building on.
COLONISATION AND COMMODIFICATION ARE FULLY RECOGNISED BY EMANCIPATORY ACTIVISTS AND THEORISTS. SO THERE IS HERE NO WHOLESALE EMBRACE BUT A SELECTIVE USE INTENDED TO SUBVERT AND SURPASS COLONISATION AND COMMODIFICATION.
Here it seems important to emphasise the difference between a technology and a tool. The latter is a relatively simple object. The former brings - and commits us to - a whole fandangle of social relations.
A globally just technology would not damage the planetary ecosystem that we all depend on for our very existence. The Internet has massive costs in terms of toxifying water - just as we approach “peak water”. It’s global warming impacts alone should be enough to stop WSF activists in their tracks.SECONDLY, IT IS QUITE UNCLEAR TO ME WHAT TECHNOLOGY WOULD, FOR YOU, BE COMPATIBLE WITH 'ALTER-G' (A TERM I NEVER USE BECAUSE OF ITS DEPENDENCE ON THE G-WORD. I PREFER 'GLOBAL JUSTICE AND SOLIDARITY MOVEMENT').Then there are the medical effects of electromagnetic radiation on human bodies.
WOULD THIS IMPLY A RETURN TO THE CHASQUIHUASI SYSTEM OF COMMUNICATION USED IN THE ANDES BEFORE THE SPANISH INTRODUCED THE HORSE.Important to avoid lapsing into ideological assumptions, like the Social Darwinist notions of “development” or “going backwards”. It is part of the capitalist mythos that history is linear and upwards, whereas in fact ever new forms of idiocy and barbarism arise all around us as we speak.WELL THAT QUITE REMARKABLE SYSTEM (OR RUNNERS AND STAGEING POSTS) ENABLED COMMUNICATION OVER 5,000 KM. BUT IT WAS AN IMPERIAL SYSTEM, USING A PRE-ALPHABETIC MESSAGING UNDERSTOOD ONLY BY THE RULERS.FURTHER IT MUST BE POINTED OUT - AND HAS BEEN IN THIS AND OTHER EXCHANGES - THAT WSF INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL COMMUNICATIONS HAVE BEEN THE MOST UNDEVELOPED ASPECT OF ITS ACTIVITIES.
I am not so sure that this is true, Peter. Peoples have travelled across land and sea and made cultural exchanges for centuries.It is ironic that a Canadian hosted WSF emphasising indigenous knowing and being, as well as economic models based on de-growth, should tie itself to an instrument of global military domination and social homogenisation.NO IT IS NOT IRONIC. INDIGENOUS PEOPLES WOULD HAVE NO INTERNATIONAL, POSSIBLY NO INTERCOMMUNAL NETWORKING IF NOT FOR ICT.
We share these reservations about the de-growth movement. It is a very tentative step towards eco-sufficiency and global justice on the part of folks in the global North.THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH 'DE-GROWTH' (ANOTHER NEGATIVE TERM I DO NOT CARE FOR, THO I AGREE WITH THE GENERAL ARGUMENT IT EXPRESSES). THAT IS THOSE ASPECTS OF PRODUCTION, CONSUMPTION AND DUMPING WELL PORTRAYED IN THE ITEM YOU ATTACHED. ANY HOLISTIC EMANCIPATORY ITC STRATEGY HAS TO PRIORITISE THIS INCREASINGLY BURNING ISSUE. MY GUESS IS THAT SOMEONE IS DOING SO. ANYONE BETTER INFORMED THAN ME ABOUT THIS?
The environmental costs of jet-setting to WSFs should be eased somewhat by the Polycentric WSF model.Yes, we are already using the internet here for our communications, but that should not imply some kind of historical inevitability. For example, I drove a car for 3 decades, then decided to refuse the technology - one small step towards eco-sufficiency.
I ALSO GAVE UP MY CAR, ARIEL. AND I HAVE ARGUED THAT THE STANDARD WSF MODEL IS ANTI-ECOLOGICAL IN REQUIRING AIR TRAVEL OVER LONG DISTANCES. AND WITHOUT RECOGNISING ANY CONTRADICTION HERE. BUT ARE YOU ALSO GOING TO GIVE UP AIR TRAVEL?
As a slightly tongue in cheek suggestion: Australians and Pacific Islanders are both small populations and remote from other continents - so perhaps a principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities" might apply in this case!
Political security and cultural homogenisation aside, reliance on the Internet also has neocolonial impacts, human health costs, and severe environmental effects - as the following article explains.OK, THE ADDITIONAL ARGUMENT HERE IS THAT OF CULTURAL HOMOGENISATION. THIS HAS BEEN WELL UNDERWAY WITH TV OVER MAYBE A 50-YEAR PERIOD. THIS WAS A MAJOR ISSUE AMONGST LEFT MEDIA CRITICS/ACTIVISTS IN LATIN AMERICA. TV, LIKE RADIO, LIKE CINEMA IS PRIMARILY A ONE-TO-MANY MODE, AND IT WAS, INDEED, COMMODITISATION, THAT WIPED OUT THE INTERNATIONAL WORKER (ACTUALLY COMMUNIST) FILM AND RADIO MOVEMENTS.ICT IS BASED ON THE LOGIC OF FEED-BACK AND IS, INCREASINGLY A MANY-TO-MANY MEANS OF COMMUNICATION.Radio is very much a two-way technology, of course - as for TV, I’ve never had one.
This strikes me as illusory - and rests on a quite thin notion of commodification. P2P cannot possibly manufacture the global infrastructure itself but will needs rely on some kind of capitalised industry to do so.THE PEER TO PEER MOVEMENT IS, PRECISELY CONCERNED TO ENSURE THAT IT BECOMES SO, THAT IT IS DE-COMMODITISED, AND THAT P2P IS NOT CAPTURED FOR ITS OWN NEFARIOUS PURPOSES BY CAPITAL, STATE AND PATRIARCHY.
Well actually I think it is, as long as cultural, medical, environmental aspects are continually backgrounded by Left and Right alike.
There is a huge dilemma here for WSF - and one that cannot be answered simply by ensuring "democratic consultation" and “protecting human rights” in the digital sector.
IT IS NOT LIMITED TO THESE TWO AIMS OR VALUES.
A
At the very least, future WSF meetings - polycentric and otherwise - must carefully Workshop these critical questions.AGREED.BEST,
Ariel
P.
- 2014. From Coldwar Communism to the Global Justice Movement: Itinerary of a Long-Distance Internationalist. http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/from_coldwar_communism _to_the_global_emancipatory_movement/ (Free).
- 2014. Interface Journal Special (Co-Editor), December 2014. 'Social Movement Internationalisms'. (Free).
- 2014. 'The Networked Internationalism of Labour's Others', in Jai Sen (ed), Peter Waterman (co-ed), The Movement of Movements: Struggles for Other Worlds (Part I). (10 Euros).
_______________________________________________ ** WSFDiscuss is an open and unmoderated forum for the exchange of information and views on the experience, practise, and theory of the World Social Forum at any level (local, national, regional, and global) and on related social and political movements and issues. Join in !** _______________________________________________ WSFDiscuss mailing list POST to LIST : Send email to WorldSocialForum-Discuss@openspaceforum.net SUBSCRIBE: Send empty email to worldsocialforum-discuss-subscribe@openspaceforum.net UNSUBSCRIBE: Send empty email to worldsocialforum-discuss-unsubscribe@openspaceforum.net LIST ARCHIVES: http://openspaceforum.net/pipermail/worldsocialforum-discuss_openspaceforum.net/ LIST INFORMATION: http://openspaceforum.net/mailman/listinfo/worldsocialforum-discuss_openspaceforum.net
_______________________________________________
** WSFDiscuss is an open and unmoderated forum for the exchange of information and views on the experience, practise, and theory of the World Social Forum at any level (local, national, regional, and global) and on related social and political movements and issues. Join in !**
_______________________________________________
WSFDiscuss mailing list
POST to LIST : Send email to WorldSocialForum-Discuss@openspaceforum.net
SUBSCRIBE: Send empty email to worldsocialforum-discuss-subscribe@openspaceforum.net
UNSUBSCRIBE: Send empty email to worldsocialforum-discuss-unsubscribe@openspaceforum.net
LIST ARCHIVES: http://openspaceforum.net/pipermail/worldsocialforum-discuss_openspaceforum.net/
LIST INFORMATION: http://openspaceforum.net/mailman/listinfo/worldsocialforum-discuss_openspaceforum.net