Accelerationist vs reactionary? Primitivist vs futurist? These are banal dualities that any halfway sophisticated leftist analysis would instantly dispatch.
-
-
-
Explain to me how.
-
I’d suggest by not conflating tech development with human development and then applying it to history as a tale of moral progress. You might then find space for a politics with more complex registers than either/or, +/-, progress/regress etc.
-
I don’t think I did that in the article. I don’t believe in progress, nor do I believe that tech is synonymous with “progress”—though we cannot easily detach ourselves from it. Not believing in progress is a rightist position.
-
Some interesting analysis here, but reality doesn't fall so neatly into this leftist/rightist binary. Accepting the cyclical nature of life and death does not make one rightist – nor does a lack of belief in infinite growth and consumption. Nor does being a poet!
-
The left is anti-nature. It’s predicated on the idea that the cycle of nature can be transcended, usually through technology (Marx adored the Prometheus myth). This includes transcending death itself (see transhumanism and Soviet views on immortality).
-
To me, statements like "the left is anti-nature" or "not believing in progress is rightist" suggest a degree of dogmatism and historical/theoretical naivety that put an end to worthwhile exchange.
-
1/2 I'm afraid I agree. Your imperiousness overshadows whatever might be interesting in your enquiry: who'd of thought a commitment to poetry was a defining element of rightist thought! Imagine trying to explain that to Pablo Neruda!!
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
It's hard to know where to start here. How can I give weight to the view of someone who thinks anarchism is "an aristocratic movement". Similarly, I'll be sure to stroll down to the local community garden and tell them that they're all on the right.
-
It's at the end that this piece becomes truly chilling. Artificial intelligence and predictive policing being our saviour? Spare me. Please have a read of something like thishttps://thebaffler.com/salvos/big-brothers-blind-spot-mcneil …
-
I didn’t say it was a good thing. I said that’s what a certain type of rightist wants, and that’s what’s happening in China. If the tech advances to detect, say, a sexual interest in children from a person’s face (facial features map to this) then I don’t see what will stop it.
-
Please read the article. In the case of facial recognition, you're fundamentally misunderstanding the efficacy of a very questionable tech. Anyway, feel free to DM if you want a more extended discussion. Twitter isn't the forum for expressing anything in depth
-
I don’t follow anyone, so I can’t DM you. The article, once the insinuations of racism and other attempted journo smears are stripped out, merely says that the tech is better than humans but not 100% reliable, i.e. it’s a question of refinement. Not if, but when.
-
You can DM me, tho.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
You're quickly becoming one of my favorite writers. I've been investigating the reactionary elements in anarchism recently, goaded on by the increasingly present primitivist vs futurist distinction. This article captures what I've been discovering better than I could hope to
-
Thanks. You may enjoy this article where I sketched out some of the links between these movements in more detail:https://medium.com/@TXHart/men-in-black-anarchists-libertarians-and-fascists-d5d577082558 …
End of conversation
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.