Re: <nettime> The Californian Reality (from: New Geography)

[Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldrift@gmail.com>]

On 01/22/2014 03:06 AM, allan siegel wrote:

> exactly what kind of planning/organizing/conceptualizing is necessary
> (or possible) not simply as a defense against the OS of a corporate
> totalitarianism but to envision and "plan" a new trajectory of
> possibilities altogether?
Allan, always so interesting to dialogue with you, and with all the 
others respondents to this thread -
I don't think any alternative will be possible until certain realities 
are squarely faced, not just by fringe figures like ourselves but by 
much broader swathes of society.
The flight of capital from the national welfare and developmental states 
in the 1970s has led to the formation of full-fledged transnational 
capitalist class, which has been described very well by people like 
Leslie Sklair and especially William Robinson (of UC Santa Barbara, 
kudos to him). The so-called "offshore" operations of the TCC ultimately 
transformed the world economy and now, everywhere is offshore, ie, every 
country and region offers prime conditions for capital accumulation. The 
result is the formation of oligarchies. We don't live in democracies, we 
live under oligarchies who control tremendous human resources and 
technological power via finance and other knowledge-intensive means.
The new oligarchies have captured decisive influence over the former 
national states and mobilized their police, secret service and military 
forces in their defence. Their reign, though it appears under quite 
different guises depending on where you are, is extremely sophisticated 
and it's supported by almost everyone who gets a piece of the action 
(the globalizing technocrats and bureacrats, as Sklair puts it). 
Unlimited global trade is what they're all about. They've been able to 
use the 2008 crisis to shift capital toward the newly developing 
regions, and in this way, turbocharge an already accelerated world 
economy. Instead of human-oriented development, we have a 
hyper-competititive rush toward infinite accumulation, currently 
supported by the printing of money on unprecedented scales. 
Narco-violence, local ganglands, fundamentalism and brutal fascism all 
flourish around the edges of this juggernaut, but they're not stopping 
its development. If you want an image of the TCC in all its banality, 
look at the unbelievable numbers of unbelievably wealthy-looking yachts 
in any Carribean or Mediterranean harbor, and probably also in San 
Francisco or Newport Beach. Runaway industrial development with no heed 
for tomorrow buys the TCC the only award they can seem to conceive. The 
endgame of such fun in the sun is the looming prospect of mass 
extinction due to climate change in the Anthropocene.
Societies are articulated by the relation between knowledge and 
practice. Neither moaning about the decline of the unions nor 
withdrawing to some romantic exodus will change anything. To achieve 
substantial change, large numbers of those who occupy articulatory and 
directive functions in society (what Gramsci called "organic 
intellectuals," whether inside or outside the universities) would have 
to identify this situation and make it a priority both to combat it and 
to devise alternatives, complete with the adequate political and 
instrumental means to acheive them. That means giving up the illusion 
that the current rule of law and system of political representation 
constitute adequate means of democratic governance. They don't. So 
pressing for substantial change is tantamount to advocating revolution.
For the past few years I have been developing this viewpoint in every 
context that I occupy. Sadly, I must report that up to now, almost no 
one has been interested. Left-leaning intellectuals are still 
preoccupied by individual liberation, minority and sectoral rights 
claims, the ghosts of working-class struggles, and anarchist longings 
for direct democracy. All of those have been very important, but none of 
the current oppositional discourses can marshall the sophistication, 
depth, durability and power to confront the transnational capitalist 
class. An alternative is not something that one fabricates on the fly, 
in a study or an artwork or or a hacklab or an affinity group or a 
church or a social center, even if all of those can be part of it. To 
make it real would require a large-scale articulation of theory and 
practice, extending into mainstream institutions even while outstripping 
and transforming them. Obviously it's easier said than done, but without 
saying it you can't get anywhere. The silence of the intellectuals is 
the new treason of the clercs.
I think the keyword of systemic change already exists: political 
ecology. There are many people working in that direction. But the 
universities, cultural systems, professional association (including 
unions) and press/media apparatuses are still massively captured by the 
dream of belonging to the transnational capitalist class, or mired in 
some vague nostalgia for the klarion calls of yesterday's struggles. 
Meanwhile our old nettime nemesis, the Californian Ideology, has made 
tremendous forward strides.
Just how far will we let it go?

best, Brian


#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  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: nettime@kein.org