FIDEL: ono taky jak levice tak pravice ve svých nesofistikovaných podobách mají alespoň teoreticky univerzální appeal: jednání, tj. výkon moci, každého jednotlivce má být hodnoceno v poměru k nějaké byť i zcela vyluhované transcendentální etice (stejná pravidla pro všechny) - tázání se po levicovosti nebo pravicovosti proto selhává mj. kvůli tomu, že otázka morálky u stranictví není problematizována tak radikálně, jak to dělá Land, Foucault, Deleuze a především Nietzsche, jehož ti tří rozvíjejí; to je např. Deleuzova imanentní etika, nebo-li etika bez morálky (nietzschovsko-spinozovský komplex), v níž se nevybírá/nehodnotí s odkazem nějaké univerzální hodnoty, ale na to, jestli je moc dovedena až ke svému limitu, jestli se např. člověk stává tím, kým je...

a právě toto dovádění do důsledků převedeno na makro-sociologickou úroveň chápu jako hlavní motiv akceleracionismu


"The selection, in short, must be based on the purely immanent criterion of a thing's power or capacities: that is, by the manner in which it actively deploys its power by going to the limit of what it can do, or on the contrary, by the manner in which it is cut off from its capacity to act. An immanent ethical difference (good / bad) is in this way substituted for the transcendent moral opposition (Good / Evil). The "bad" is an exhausted and degenerating mode of existence that judges life from the perspective of its sickness, that devaluates life in the name of "higher" values (the True, the Good, the Beautiful). The "good" is an overflowing, ascending, and exceptional form of existence, a type of being that is able to transform itself depending on the forces it encounters, always increasing its power to live, always opening new possibilities of life."
Smith, Daniel W. 2012, "The Concept of Simulacrum: Deleuze and the Overturning of Platonism"

PALO_FABUS: ctu toho Mackaye a jak to tak ctu, tak jem si vzpomnel, ze uz jsme to v redakci pred casem jednou probirali a narazili prave na tenhle vas preklad; tehdy mi to prislo jako silenej myslenkovej bizar a podobny pocit mam nutno rici i nyni, i kdyz to nepostrada na pritazlivosti;) kazdopadne pravoleva kategorizace se zda skutecne zcela mimo (jeho) kontext...

PALO_FABUS: nečetl, dík. ohledně pravolevého dělení: právě proto jsem se na to ptal, neb mne právě to dělení dost překvapilo, ale Landa neznám, čili (zatím) nemám názor. podobně by se ostatně člověk mohl asi ptát i u Foucalta viz. třeba tento rozhovor:
Can We Criticize Foucault? | Jacobin
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2014/12/foucault-interview/

Starsi De Landuv clanek, vychazejici z analyzy Fernanda Braudela rozvoje kapitalismu: stezejni teze je, ze kapitalismus jako system od svych pocatku bytostne anti-trzni, monopolisticky a od pocatku vynaklada obrovske usili, aby se vyhnul destruktivnim ucinkum trhu. predevsim redukci cen. Braudel nazyva kapitalismus "anti-trhem"...
Tohle me celkem bavi, protoze to podtrhava zidli jak klasickejm marxistickejm teoriim, tak neo-liberalum ci pravicovym libertarianum (tedy otvira moznost pro nemarxistickou levicovou teorii). A to cely na zaklade empiricky analyzy vyvoje zapadni spolecnosti...

Capitalism was, from its beginnings in the Italy of the thirteenth century, always monopolistic and oligopolistic. That is to say, the power of capitalism has always been associated with large enterprises, large that is, relative to the size of the markets where they operate. [6]

Also, it has always been associated with the ability to plan economic strategies and to control market dynamics, and therefore, with a certain degree of centralization and hierarchy. Within the limits of this presentation, I will not be able to review the historical evidence that supports this extremely important hypothesis, but allow me at least to extract some of the consequences that would follow if it turns out to be true.

Markets and Antimarkets in the World Economy
http://www.alamut.com/subj/economics/de_landa/antiMarkets.html

jasny, me to taky miji a vlastne nevim co si o tom myslet, o to vic mne prekvapilo, ze to ma svou pravicovou variantu spojenou se jmenem Nick Land. narazil jsem na to asi ve dvou textech, ale moc jsem se toho prave z nich nedozvedel

FIDEL: obavam se, ze neporadim. akceleracionismus je tak rychlej, ze me celkem miji .)) ale kdyz na neco narazim, dam ti vedet.

neodkazal bys mne na nejaky text tykajici se "pravicoveho akceleracionismu"? znam jen tu levicovou verzi skrzeva manifest Williamse se Srnicekem...

Prave jsem docetl knizku Becoming virtual (ktera docela stoji za precteni, predevsim tedy pro ty, ktery si chteji vyjasnit rozliseni mezi real/possible a actual/virtual u D&G) od francouzskyho deleuzianskyho technooptimisty Pierra Levyho a zjistil, ze ma docela zajimavy blog...

Pierre Levy's Blog | Various thoughts and papers in french and english
http://pierrelevyblog.com

Mimojine tam popisuje, svuj vyzkum na poli novych mediich a rozvoji kolektivni inteligence prostrednictvim tvorby novyho jazyka (IEML=information economy meta language)...

We are currently at the beginning of a fourth big anthropological change, because the symbols can now be transformed by massively distributed automata in the digital realm. My main hypothesis is that we still did not have invented the symbolic systems and cultural institutions fitting the new algorithmic medium. So my research in the past 15 years has been devoted to the invention of a symbolic system able to exploit the computational power, the capacity of memory and the ubiquity of the Internet.
My Research in a Nutshell | Pierre Levy's Blog
http://pierrelevyblog.com/my-research-in-a-nutshell/

IEML
the creation of IEML (Information Economy Meta Language), a tool for the augmentation of collective intelligence by means of the algorithmic medium. IEML, which already has its own grammar, is a metalanguage that includes the semantic dimension, making it computable. This in turn allows a reflexive representation of collective intelligence processes.

A trosku medii: Recenze na novou knizku Jussi Parikky: A Geology of Media.

btw Parikka ma blog, ktery se vyplati sledovat.

Machinology | Machines, noise, and some media archaeology by Jussi Parikka
http://jussiparikka.net/

Uryvek recenze:
Media archaeology undertakes to rewrite media history from the standpoint of the machines themselves, eschewing any linear or teleological account. Instead, media archaeologists embrace the ‘anarchaeology’ first mooted by Siegfried Zielinski (2006), which sees media history as a disorderly jostling between concepts, systems, inventions and crazes, any one of which has its own intrinsic merits and its autonomous history. [...] In this book, Parikka outdoes Zielinski, pushing the boundaries back to the scales of geological time, from the far future of radioactive decay to the deep past when key minerals and energy sources were formed.

http://theoryculturesociety.org/review-of-parikkas-geology-of-media-by-sean-cubitt/

akorat mi tady pristal sbornik Deleuze Studies editovany Gary Genoskem. Zatim jsem to prolitl, ale je tam skvelej clanek Machinic Animism od Angely Melitopoulos a Maurizia Lazzarata (kterej se pro me osobne radi spolu s Genoskem a DeLandou jako jeden z lidi, ktery jsou schopny "odemknout" praci D&G). Aneb jak se s pomoci inspirace animismem archaickejch spolecnosti snazi Guattari prekonat subjekt/objektove rozdeleni, jak pojima subjektivitu a jak updatetuje animismus, aby ustal propojeni s materialismem.

Clanek jsem nasel online tady:

“For every type of machine we will question not only its vital autonomy, which is not an animal, but its singular power of enunciation.” Every machinic assemblage (technical, biological, social, etc.), once contained enunciative facilities, if only at the embryonic stage. They thus possessed a proto-subjectivity. There too, like subjectivity, it is necessary to separate the singular power of the enunciation of the subject from the person and the human. This goes against our philosophical and political tradition that since Aristotle has made language and speech a unique and exclusive characteristic of man, the only animal which possesses language and speech.
http://film.ncu.edu.tw/word/Machinic_Animism.pdf

andrew culp se asi nastval .)

Task: Destroy Worlds (Not Create Conceptions)
The conspiracy against this world will be known through its war machines. A war machine is itself “a pure form of exteriority” that “explains nothing,” but there are plenty of stories to tell about them. They are the heroes of A Thousand Plateaus – Kleist’s skull-crushing war machine; the migratory war machine that the Vandals used to sack Rome; the gun that Black Panther George Jackson grabs on the run,[4] and the queer war machine that excretes a thousand tiny sexes. “Each time there is an operation against the state – insubordination, rioting, guerilla warfare, or revolution as an act – it can be said that a war machine has revived.”
Task: Destroy Worlds (Not Create Conceptions) | Anarchist Without Content
https://anarchistwithoutcontent.wordpress.com/2015/06/17/task-destroy-worlds-no-create-concepts/

Hodi se... I kdyz na to, ze ma byt Chandler visual semiotician, tak vizualni uprava dobry peklo .))

Semiotics for Beginners
Daniel Chandler
Glossary of Key Terms
Semiotics for Beginners: Glossary
http://visual-memory.co.uk/daniel/Documents/S4B/sem-gloss.html#plane_of_expression

Jakkoliv teda me Latour nebavi, a prijde mi jako vykastrovana verze ontologie D&G se strasnym humorem a sislavym hlasem, tak ale vcera zacal jeho kurz na Coursere...

Coursera - Free Online Courses From Top Universities
https://www.coursera.org/course/sh

Mimochodem, koukal jsem, ze na libgen.in se da stahnout Bryantova (autor v ramci oboru hypernavstevovaneho blogu larval subjects) Onto-Cartography. Rozhodne stoji za precteni, asi tak 1000x srozumitelnejsi nez cokoliv, co napsal Deleuze nebo Guattari :) Pritom to z nich dost vychazi, plus z Latoura, Luhmanna, Maturana a Varely. A kdyz si knizku prectete tak se muzete prihlasit pristi tyden k jeho on-line kurzu Anarchy of objects .]
Viz

http://thenewcentre.org/seminars/anarchy-object-onto-cartography/

Onto-Cartography: An Ontology of Machines and Media
http://www.euppublishing.com/book/9780748679966

Na tyhle pasazi z TUHO
The first articulation chooses or deducts, from unstable particle-flows, metastable molecular or quasi-molecular units ('substances') upon which it imposes a statistical order of connections and successions ('forms'). The second articulation establishes functional, compact, stable structures ('forms'), and constructs the molar compounds in which these structures are simultaneously actualized ('substances)'. (ATP 40-41)

je dobre videt, jak d&g berou semioticky koncepty od hjelmsleva a "presadej" ho uplne jinam - do popisu geologickejch jevu...

viz trabant v TUHO

"Something can only be called a sign when it is possible to distinguish in
it a signifiant and a signifie. In place of the Saussurean terms Hjelmslev introduces
the terms expression and content, which he calls the planes of the sign. In a
further interpretation of Saussure the terms form and substance are introduced:
Language, according to Saussure, is a form that initiates distinctions in both the
"amorphous mass" of our thoughts (content) and also in the "plastic matter"
(matiere plastique, Saussure, 1916: ISS) of sounds. Just how Saussure imagined
the formation process of these two formless substances is shown in Figure 2,
from the Cours (Saussure 1916: 156). Saussure wanted to portray language as
one synthetic form located between two substances. Hjelmslev, in contrast,
emphasizes the differing formation of the two planes of expression and content, and defines this entity created out of two different forms as the definitive model
of the sign.
The image used by Hjelmslev to illustrate the relationship between form
and substance is that of a net (form), which is thrown over the unformed matter
(called by Hjelmslev purport-also on the plane of expression-or matiere), so
that a formed substance is created by projecting non-substantial form onto the
formless substance. It is necessary, therefore, to distinguish, on both planes of
the sign, between matter (formless substance), (formed) substance, and (nonsubstantial)
form. This leads, in Hjelmslev's model of the sign, to the following
six major components: expression-purport, expression-substance (ES), expressionform
(EF) , content-form (CF) , content-substance (CS), and content-purport.
These can be represented in the following diagram (with the particular interdependences
indicated by arrows):

Expression-purport-ES→ EF↔CF←CS-Content-purport

A tady dobrej prehled konceptu a-signifying semiotics Félixe Guattariho


A-signifying Semiotics
Gary Genosko

Abstract
This paper offers an interpretation of the theory of a-signifying semiotics
developed by French intellectual-activist Félix Guattari in the 1970s. The
argument is that these types of part-signs are perfectly adapted to the quasiautomated
networks of contemporary infocapitalism, and their characteristics
are studied with regard to the magnetic stripe on a plastic bank or credit
card. Although these part-signs are akin to signals since they do not have a
semantic dimension, they do have a political materiality in the technologies,
that is, the information strands of the machinic phylum, in which they are
found. This technomaterialist semiotics of infocapital places Guattari at the
forefront of innovative semiotic theory.

http://www.pjos.org/index.php/pjos/article/download/8822/7920