The 90's promise of cultural and capital acceleration completely fizzled out, which totally explains Lands position now. He seems to have handled that reality better than the rest of CCRU.
-
-
Replying to @phungazi @morphine96_
It really didn't, it's just coming in waves
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
-
Replying to @phungazi @NyxLandUnlife
Land talks about this a bit in the "Concept of Acceleration" stuff from NCRAP, but acceleration was never supposed to address something-to-come, but to designate a process that is already underway, i.e. the accelerating rate of change of techno-economic development +
2 replies 0 retweets 16 likes -
Also round-a-boutness implies an oblique accelerative trajectory. Linear acceleration was never a possibility and is probably the largest misunderstanding for those with mere cursory understanding of the issue.
3 replies 0 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @Friedrich_Ux @EBBerger and
Is it really not a possibility or is that just to justify creative destruction as the highest form of acceleration?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Sal100001 @EBBerger and
'Creative destruction' is Capital's method, insofar as something like that can be ascertained. Merely Schumpeter's way of making Marx's grand and long-winded style pithy.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Friedrich_Ux @EBBerger and
Creative destruction is a bust boom spiral no? So same question: is this really the highest form of acc?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
'Highest' assumes some sort of hierarchy, so erring on the side of caution (as cunning) no. Creative destruction can certainly be regarded as a boom-bust spiral but is not reducible to it. Delineation between what processes seems to be acc/dec is crucial.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.