A. G-C on Tue, 13 Jun 2006 10:41:45 +0200 (CEST)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: <nettime> nettime as idea

Dear David,

At the same time I am touched that you celebrate my return, by an ironical
and pleasant version of the return of singular insane or some accidental
dust, but I am as more amazed as you told of respectable or unrespectable
mean, by how you can link it to Ken whom has nothing to do in this debate
where he could take a part if he would hope ? but obviously not ?:) so
please, may be it is simple to leave the indirect voice of Ken in this
debate. Or his proper voice ad coming.

I do not want contaminate Ken, the same as he would not contaminate me. We
are diverse but solider autonomies. Being both pride. Proselytism is not
exactly our friendship mode, but critical exchange. I trust him as friend in
our differences recognizing of what we have in Partage that is of free
positive ( freedom ) creation and ethically trusting together in a cognitive
disposition. And I am really working a lot to success in a difficult work
from several sides as tribute to his Hacker that only friendship from his
part can support so long waiting for FR emergence next Autumn 2006 ( at last

At the moment you evoke him I want to quote his last interactive work in the
institute future of the book, http://www.futureofthebook.org/ that is simply
great critical work organically playing theory instead of theory of the
truth ( I do not tell why, immediately not being the subject ), where more
is linked a certain blog on religions and gods title "without gods toward an
history of disbelief" by Mitchell Stephens, both works being at my view an
emergent and free vitality from New York that fascinates me cheerfully. Of a
beautiful arrogance from any few in that appears currently missing here and
there in the English-speaking streams of the no thematic lists of which I am
a subscriber. 


I am not impressed by contaminations, old use that I could approach in the
former times as a mean of post modern Marxist Leninist organizations being
bureaucratic power themselves, -with a blind view, a deaf discourse and
making dumb the voice ( even the vote) of the base- where I transited very
fast not being from my part an adept of the hierarchic cup of tea (but from
a South tradition, of the voice and of the critical feeling ) my cup of tee,
in the former times

As I was educated among a psychiatrist clinic by my parents as doctors with
their patients, your glance does not deprive to me of any dignity to my
proper eyes, being exactly the site from which I learnt that "other" was so
strange but so attractive so it is my richness nowadays to be able in
discovery whatever the generation and the sexes, to autonomy and self

>From my part I have entered very late the debate since the beginning (
regarding Montreal ) thanks the very special occasion of reopening the list
to critical diverse point of views. But I see how hardly it can be to whom
is a following subject of otherness such as not being considered able to
debate both together with the little aristocratic and academic but community
having the large list in mastering. I mean of hierarchy and advantages over
passing the question of the language BUT having the language as media

 I prefer the part of Geert, cannot be my particular friend, even sometimes
puritans at my view but never "integrist" and always straight and punctual
in matter of criticism of the web community in real vision of the practice,
thinking from his experiences of common, not from the part of a lobby nor
from the part of a globalizing critical party (may be yes may be not but
this is not the public obvious part of his criticism to tribute others);
more, he is nearest than every one from nettime ? as well as outsider lists
of nettime.org ? as thinker of the diversity of the common; to the part of
self-organization as common diversity, from local self-organization till
federal self-organization being powerful: that is not exactly the power.

That is really which I hope better to criticize EU, at the time the power
abolish the self decision, can be of Art, can be of the social

Can be more of what you call theory of which I think myself that the time of
theory is over passed by the general time of organic essay whatever the
field ( another regime of theory in essay regarding the opposition between
Hegel and Hölderlin about philosophy and poetry that was never solved, just
a divide before ). At the moment the criticism of political economy has lost
the precious symbolic pact of relationship of means in social reports of
production (specially capitalism having cut its own link with the social
pact of production), something new has to appear of we'll run in repetitive
dying as from a traumatic situation to leave getting larger and larger the
wide to the total power (Jarry says: "l'ascension du vide par la périphérie"
that represents every part even that one of power ? taking the power from
every and in every part ).

But having a come back to the purpose, please let us note which changes
since Geert has left the moderation of the list :

Internet ? code sources and Free sources
Of Web2
Post productive society
Of security
Of browser of lists
Of spams
Global organizations and alter global organizations

And so on...

Please why it is not possible to have a discussion on that point. Is it a
supposed consensus to a political line here that forbid to approach this
sort of debate?

And to tribute the best of the list: why not a larger moderation as suggest
it Geert? (Be quite: I do not beg my part in it:)

On 12/06/06 13:47, "Geert Lovink" <geert@xs4all.nl> probably wrote:

#  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: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net