fuse with capital, and that's done.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
Replying to @cyborg_nomade @jelly2nes and
Pretty sure capital + anti-civ is a contradiction.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @mfckr_ @jelly2nes and
no reason to think capital autonomy is not the death of society (and thus civilisation)
2 replies 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @cyborg_nomade @jelly2nes and
I don't believe autonomous capital will ever be a thing though. Or that 'capital' has any meaning outside human intersubjective context.
2 replies 1 retweet 8 likes -
Replying to @mfckr_ @jelly2nes and
I know, libertarianism has this unreformed humanism that's just too hard to shake off.
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @cyborg_nomade @jelly2nes and
It wasn't a normatively humanistic statement.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
-
Replying to @cyborg_nomade @mfckr_ and
my point is: it's humanistic to think capital isn't in a centuries long ascent towards autonomy.
2 replies 1 retweet 7 likes -
Replying to @cyborg_nomade @mfckr_ and
capital is a form of human intersubjectivity. the only ontological autonomy it can have is against competing forms
3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
Capital is machinery ("roundabout production").
-
-
Replying to @Outsideness @cyborg_nomade and
machinery doesn't seem to be any easier to define orthogonally to human intersubjectivity than capital. are humans not-machines?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @schakalsynthetc @cyborg_nomade and
Machinery is by far the more extensive category.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like - 3 more replies
New conversation -
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.