[LINK] Revolution in the Over-Developed World
Tom Worthington
tom.worthington at tomw.net.au
Fri Oct 21 09:06:17 AEDT 2011
Professor McKenzie Wark, from the New School NY, talked on avant-garde
movements and implications of Occupy Wall Street at Greetings from the
University of Canberra, on 19 October 2011. He had strong competition,
with an interesting lecture on 1930s European architecture in the next
room. The introduction included a poem on the state of the USA and
status of the indigenous embassy outside Parliament House.
Professor Wark started by pointing out that many thinkers of the 20th
century were not formal academics, but on the periphery of academia. He
then read "Square du Vert-Galant" from his graphic novel "The Beach
Beneath the Street: The Everyday Life and Glorious Times of the
Situationist International". He then outlined the Street Ethnography of
Paris in the 1950s, with the delinquent end of Bohemianism and Unitary
urbanism.
Professor Wark discussed the reclaiming of the common cultural property
through (or in denial of) plagiarism. In a way this is a precursor of
thinking about open access and creative commons. Somehwere in here The
Society of the Spectacle (La Société du spectacle) by Guy Debord was
mentioned.
Professor Wark then asked what it means to create groups. Those of the
1950s avant-garde movement were volatile, with groups forming, expelling
members and reforming (reminds me of the factions of the modern
political parties). He suggested that self organismic groups could be a
useful part of modern pedagogy, teaching students that not all
organizations are designed as a hierarchy.
After some readings from his latest book, Professor Wark came around to
the occupy wall street movement. He argued that the modern commodity
world was boring. There is an urge to break through the boundaries and
simply occupy the public space. The Occupy Watt Street Movement was not
making specific demands, simply "occupying" public open space. He
pointed out that the open space occupied is not Wall Street and does not
disrupt the stock exchange.
Professor Wark related Wall Street to the occupation of Tiananmen Square
in Beijing. He also suggested Twitter was not useful for revolution, as
it can be used to spread false rumors.
Parts of Zuccotti Park have now been zoned by the occoupiers, with one
area for non-denominational worship, and one near the library for
information services. Professor Wark commented that many of the people
at the protest in the park were at a loss to know what to do, as there
was nothing to buy and no one to confront. He suggested that while the
current movement has no clear political aim, the movement could be
channeled to some aim (and that there may be some establishment reaction
to this).
Professor Wark pointed out that most of the trading at "Wall Street"
takes place on-line, with traders at distributed workstations. As a
result the protest at Wall Street perhaps has the wrong symbolism. It
occours to me that there has so far been no move to occupy the on-line
manifestations of Wall Street. That would be more likely to result in a
confrontation with authorities, as there are much clearer laws making it
a crime to interfere with a networked computer system. The ACS is
assisting the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (PM&C) with
Cyber Policy consultation. It is an interesting question as to the
extent to which legitimate protest can be recognized and allowed for.
Simply banning anything which looked like a protest would be very
dangerous.are du Vert-Galant" from his graphic novel "The Beach Beneath
the Street: The Everyday Life and Glorious Times of the Situationist
International". He then outlined the Street Ethnography of Paris in the
1950s, with the delinquent end of Bohemianism and Unitary urbanism.
Professor Wark discussed the reclaiming of the common cultural property
through (or in denial of) plagiarism. In a way this is a precursor of
thinking about open access and creative commons. Somehwere in here The
Society of the Spectacle (La Société du spectacle) by Guy Debord was
mentioned.
Professor Wark then asked what it means to create groups. Those of the
1950s avant-garde movement were volatile, with groups forming, expelling
members and reforming (reminds me of the factions of the modern
political parties). He suggested that self organismic groups could be a
useful part of modern pedagogy, teaching students that not all
organizations are designed as a hierarchy.
After some readings from his latest book, Professor Wark came around to
the occupy wall street movement. He argued that the modern commodity
world was boring. There is an urge to break through the boundaries and
simply occupy the public space. The Occupy Watt Street Movement was not
making specific demands, simply "occupying" public open space. He
pointed out that the open space occupied is not Wall Street and does not
disrupt the stock exchange.
Professor Wark related Wall Street to the occupation of Tiananmen Square
in Beijing. He also suggested Twitter was not useful for revolution, as
it can be used to spread false rumors.
Parts of Zuccotti Park have now been zoned by the occoupiers, with one
area for non-denominational worship, and one near the library for
information services. Professor Wark commented that many of the people
at the protest in the park were at a loss to know what to do, as there
was nothing to buy and no one to confront. He suggested that while the
current movement has no clear political aim, the movement could be
channeled to some aim (and that there may be some establishment reaction
to this).
Professor Wark pointed out that most of the trading at "Wall Street"
takes place on-line, with traders at distributed workstations. As a
result the protest at Wall Street perhaps has the wrong symbolism. It
occours to me that there has so far been no move to occupy the on-line
manifestations of Wall Street. That would be more likely to result in a
confrontation with authorities, as there are much clearer laws making it
a crime to interfere with a networked computer system. The ACS is
assisting the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (PM&C) with
Cyber Policy consultation. It is an interesting question as to the
extent to which legitimate protest can be recognized and allowed for.
Simply banning anything which looked like a protest would be very dangerous.
More at:
http://blog.tomw.net.au/2011/10/revolution-in-over-developed-world.html
--
Tom Worthington FACS CP HLM, TomW Communications Pty Ltd. t: 0419496150
PO Box 13, Belconnen ACT 2617, Australia http://www.tomw.net.au
Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards
Legislation
Adjunct Senior Lecturer, Research School of Computer Science,
Australian National University http://cs.anu.edu.au/courses/COMP7310/
More information about the Link
mailing list