Geert Lovink on Wed, 19 Mar 1997 00:02:07 +0100 (MET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
nettime: Dejan Krsic (Arkzin/Zagreb) on the Bastard fight |
X-ZC-Post: Ilica 96; HR-10000 Zagreb; Croatia X-ZC-Telefon: V+385-1-177866 F+385-1-177867 ## Message of 18.03.97 forwarded ## Originally: ARKZIN_ZG@PZ-ARKZ.ztn.apc.org ## Made by: top-mag@zg.tel.hr Dejan Krsic on ideological fight on Bastard scene Everything should be measured not by some external, so called Universal standards, but by the criteria it establishes on itself, with itself, by itself, with its own critical procedure. So, Igor is criticising Nettime for being 'closed ... there is no discussion (on-line) with the people from Routside'. Yet, that is the very problem of Igor's own work and position. He has made faux pas of signing his personal writing/ideas/viewpoints/posting as those of Intellectual cooperative Bastard. But the real problem is not that he signed its posting with BASTARD, but that he didn't discuss it before with anybody - Buden, Mikulic, me - whom he meets every day in office! So he abandoned the rule of the 'third mind', collective authorship - and logically, slipped, made wrong move, bad text. Keep cyberspace clean? Nein danke! It surely reflects Igors roots in ecology/green movement, but we in Arkzin have already published a text that deals with racist implications of some slogans of ecology/green movement/s (living body of the wood attacked by bugs as body of the nation endangered by immigrants). In his call for the 'cyberspace clean of ideologies' Igor is very close to the position of our dear President Franjo Tudjman and his corporatist concept of unified, undivided by ideologies, body of Croatia. On the other hand, Buden and Hartman almost simultaneously claim that a) 'The idea of the possible end of ideology is an ideological idea par excellence' (which I totally subscribe) and b) 'All dualistic choices are delusive, be it between left and right, or Negroponte and Lovink, or WIRED and NETTIME - the bandwidth simply is higher than that. We do not have to identify ourselves with sides, be it the Californian vs. any other kind of ideology - there are no polls, we are not up to votes.' As if they identify political/ideological position/ideas... only with process of elections and voting (and one of the constant claims of Arkzin, is that official, parliamentary politics is simply not enough, not relevant any more - we need wider political/ideological action of civil, marginal, subculture, NGOs... groups...) Yes, bandwidth is surely wider, but neither the less, just because there are no pools or votes (as some neutral, outside position, place/time that regulates life and politics of society), we have to take the sides, we have to take firm positions, we have to enter political/ideological fights all the time ... Because, doing otherwise, we would follow the idea of 'end of ideologies' and so, be totally under the rule of the 'black hand of ideologies'. Only way to deal with ideology/ies is to firmly say: Yes, this is my ideological position, this is my ideology. And, that's the only way for some rational discussion, dialogue, communication... (which Igor claims he searches for) to start. Once again, isn't Arkzin doing just that! We are not shouting Franjo Tudjman is traitor of our own national Thing (way Croatian liberals are opposing Tudjman), but this is our ideological position, we are against nationalism/clean ethnic states, for the rule of the law, social welfare, freedom of the media, peaceful conflict resolution, etc. ... And outside the Arkzin, without it, there would simply be no place, no conditions for emergence of Bastard! Fact is, the Markovic has recognised some problem/s, but he has presented it in totally wrong way! His mentioning of 'people who lived at least a part of their lives in socialism' should gave his text some 'credibility', but its totally false, cause it presents him as survivor of October revolution, Kronstadt, Gulags, victim of KGB or whatever, while we who have lived by his side (being older even longer) know that he actually lived in badly managed state capitalism under the disguise of workers selfmanagement. But, whats the actual role of Igors claims. Shouting against elitism and powerful few, 'being special' and Leaders, he is actually establishing them as Master/s, he begs them - 'the biggest minds at the field of the social implications of the new media' - for recognition! Yes, its his 'humble opinion', yes its 'minds of people with modest capacity (myself for example)', but he has had that dreadful experience of 'living under totalitarism', he had seen it all, and survived to tell the world, so surely Master has to recognize that! And, Master has to recognise him! And so, he casually leads 'private discussions with Geert Lovink'! Worst of all, Igor has taken the worst possible imagery to presents himself in a way Master could not be unsympathetic about - false image of the Rvictim of communismS! Worst possible, not only because it is false, but because its the cliche, role played every day by the thousands of East Europeans. Igor should know that there is no Stalins shadow behind Marx, but (even more traumatic) Marx shadow behind Stalin, in same way there is no Hitlers shadow behind Nietzche or Wagner, but Nietzche or Wagners shadows behind Hitler. Igor said: 'if I have to choose - and it might happen - between Negropontean or Californian or whatever global state and nettimean or rhizomean or netizenshipean or whatever avant-garde of the working class, I have to choose the first one. Not because I like it, but for the simple fact that Soviet revolution failed with the Kronstadt, not with the Berlin wall. But he does not understand that Soviet revolution did not fail nor with Kronstadt, neither with the Berlin wall (although I'm not sure does he mean the fall of the wall or building it - which, in fact, would be much more interesting choice!), but with the fact, and by the fact, that the so called socialist system was pushed into competition with the capitalist (heavy industry, arms race, space programme...) on the ground and under the rules of the capitalism - fight that was lost before it even started. Of course, even the idea of 'socialism in one country' and closing borders (China, Albania...) is equally trapped into that same logic of global capital as any other fundamentalism. Returning to the Californian ideology vs. nettime, we should understand that if nettime etc. fails it wont be because its position of 'avant-garde of the working class', or some personal character features of some elite in 'country house/s with a gazebo', but because it will accept (tacit) ideological prepositions of global capital, media industry (as formulated and pushed thru Californian ideology arms such as Wired) as the only possible, as fundamental, global, universal... Yes, the bandwidth is simply higher than that. And much more complex. Cause not only that we don't have to choose between Negropontean or Californian or whatever global state and nettimean or rhizomean or netizenshipean or whatever avant-garde of the working class, but we can not choose! We have them both, in the same time. And many other positions on different levels of received media attention. So, today, when media, entertainment industry (CNN, MTV... Internet with its 'domain names system' and roots in military complex) has conquered all, when it is not possible to find some external, outside position from which critique is possible, it is necessary to radically accept our own involvement, that is, politically define our own position - or opposition! To say that one has to choose Negropontean or Californian or whatever global state is cynicism pure and simple. Cause, if you choose it you don't 'have to', you simply want to! And everybody is responsible for his or her choice of the sides in ideological fight, and can not blame any Leaders, elite.... In such situation my ideological position is surely grounded in Marxist analysis - capitalism is the system which all that is solid melts into the air. In thinking about the cybersphere lets take the example of techno music - which, because of its lack of textual message, is usually considered to be without any political message whatsoever (Igor would like to say 'clean', 'post-ideological') is not less pointed towards capitalist market (as if there is any other) than dominant pop scene - and so from the traditional rockist point of view where the 'sell out' is the word for traitory! - not any less profane, but the type of market is radically changing. Faster movement, exchange of informations, shifting of positions of creator, consumer, sender and receiver of messages... all that has deep political significance. In the same time techno scene could not be possible without new technologies - from electronic instruments, digital equipment to computers & software - really products of multinational corporations, often even by-products of military/defence systems - that enable that process of decentralisation. In that dialectic products of the system that is conquering us globally, enables us the subversion on the local level - or, 'the wound is healed only by the spear that smote you'. Or as Madonna said: 'Only the one who hurts you can comfort you, only the one that inflicts the pain, can take it away...' -- * distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission * <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism, * collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets * more info: majordomo@is.in-berlin.de and "info nettime" in the msg body * URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/ contact: nettime-owner@is.in-berlin.de