Archives for destructive character

OWS (4): As Tina Turner propounded: “We don’t need another hero.”—in response to Vincent

Berardi states “[m]oney (i.e. economics) and the State (i.e. politics) are no longer able to govern or discipline the world of production, now that its center is not a de-brained force, a uniform and quantifiable time of manual work. That center is now occupied by mind flows, by the ethereal substance of intelligence, which eludes every measurement and cannot be subjected to any rule without indicating enormous pathologies and causing a truly maddening paralysis of cognition and affectivity.” (87: After the Future)

In Vincent’s lucid summary of economic / technologic ‘exchange currency,’ do we see arteries of the new ether. “At the time when technological infrastructure has permitted trading to speed up beyond the limits of human perception, thus creating what we may call with Virilio a “negative horizon” behind an architecture that is thoroughly oriented on the speed of light, clustering around the entry points of fiber-optic cables, “twittering” has become the negative horizon of language.” The possible outcome of the OWS franchise demands interrogation, as Vincent provides: “[t]he gambling of the market has become the gambling of language, the structural absence of “knowing what to say.”
Continue reading…

OWS (3): The Secret Recipe of the Occupy Franchise—in response to Vincent.

When it comes to language and creative clearing, and more importantly the “idea of order,” Vincent and I have a bit of recent history. It is in the spirit of clearing that I am thinking my response.
 
First, the creative clearing, the “destructive character” in relation to pure force beset by ‘power’ or a type of state. Force usurped by penetrating the language of the vocation seeker, or the protestor looking for a job rightfully blaming the banks, or hearing the call to protest, or both. This power may or may not have a proper name, no less besetting. And my interest falls to the 99% motive (for lack of a better word, how else would the “mediatic” apparatus think it for you?).
 
Harassment, as Vincent points out, is indeed a post earthtone concept when addressing the effectiveness of protest or occupation. In particular the claim on affect related to the false identification of motives. In addition Vincent’s prodding, cynical view of the “occupation franchise,” the movement of occupation pronounces the setting sun across the globe of a dying order. So first we are thinking toward the “possible” against the already noisy, globalizing, occupation movement: OWS in its proper name and tweeting franchise, its secret recipe for those who have ownership, the shareholders. The movement of occupation is nothing new to global order. The occupation phenomenon (to one degree or another) I analyzed thinking about the structural violence in relation to affect. The contest of establishing order, or abolishing order is a matter of applying bioforce. It is force that powers the symbolic blazon—the badge and the gun—in its more extreme kinetic capacity that typified the past protest, stake holders, agency, et cetera.
Continue reading…