Facebook kollektivieren

von SVEN LÜTTICKEN

Ich schreibe dies am 26. März, dem Tag, an dem die „Vorverhandlung“ der Klage, die Jonas Staal und Jan Fermon gegen Facebook führen wollen, im HAU in Berlin stattfinden sollte. Inzwischen ist Collectivize Facebook natürlich längst Teil eines riesigen Archivs von abgesagten oder verschobenen Veranstaltungen, zumindest in der ursprünglich geplanten Form: die Website http://collectivize.org funktioniert, und um 19 Uhr wird eine vorab aufgezeichnete Einführung auf dem Livestream des HAU gesendet. Angesichts der zentralen Bedeutung von Versammlungen mit physisch anwesenden Personen (von Volkstribunalen bis zu Lesegruppen, von Eröffnungen bis zu Aufführungen, von Vorträgen bis zu Trainingseinheiten) bis hin zur zeitgenössischen ästhetischen und aktivistischen Praxis im allgemeinen ist es schwer, nicht übereinzustimmen mit Kader Attias Tirade auf Facebook (natürlich!) über neoliberale Mächte, die nicht mehr „die Polizei“ brauchen, weil „wir als perfekte Marionetten ihrer Fehler zu Hause bleiben werden“.

Die Vorverhandlung Collectivize Facebook ist ihrerseits auf Facebook angekündigt worden (natürlich!) und exekutierte so die Dialektik der Komplizenschaft zwischen Social-Media-Plattformen und kritischen Kulturveranstaltungen. Diese Art der Verstrickung unterstreicht nur den Punkt des Projekts – dass Facebook zu grundlegend für unser Leben ist, um in der Hand privater Investoren zu bleiben. In der Zwischenzeit, da Covid-19 immer mehr Menschen in physische Isolation versetzt, treibt dies sie (uns) noch mehr in die Arme korporativer, proprietärer Software, von Facebook bis Skype und ZOOM (auch wenn Medienautonomisten wie Geert Lovink uns ermahnen, Jitsi zu benutzen). Wie koproduzieren die verschiedenen Plattformen, was wir sind, sehen und tun, während wir für sie Überschüsse des Verhaltens produzieren?

Die Kollektivierung von Facebook wird erst jetzt zu einem dringlicheren Projekt, da seine Realisierung in der Fleisch-Zone blockiert wird, und Staal setzt, um es voranzutreiben, stattdessen Corona-kompatible Medien ein. Für eine Publikation, an deren Redaktion ich gerade sitze (der BAK-Reader Deserting from the Culture Wars), hat Dan McQuillan ein Manifest für eine Sozialisierung und Neuzusammensetzung der KI durch Volksräte geschrieben. Es wäre ein schwerer Fehler, das Projekt von Staal und Fermon oder McQuillans Vorschlag nun als Schnee von gestern zu betrachten, als malerische Relikte der Vor-Corona-Kultur. Wenn überhaupt, dann wurde ihre Bedeutung durch eine neue Welle der Akkumulation noch verschärft, weil die algorithmische Produktion von Subjektivität und Soziabilität sowie die biopolitische Regierung des Lebens durch patentierte Gesundheitsfürsorge an der Spitze des Katastrophen-Kapitalismus der Corona-Ära steht.

Kompromittiert und verstrickt wie wir sind, versuchen wir weiterzumachen und Heteronomie in Schattierungen von Autonomie umzumünzen. Kader Attia sprach von „perfekten Marionetten“. Es mag ermutigend sein, sich daran zu erinnern, dass Marionetten und Puppen von Freud bis Kokoschka, von Mike Kelley bis Chucky, schon lange ihr Potenzial für unheimliche Spielereien (und das spielerisch Unheimliche) offenbart haben.

 

 

 

26.03.2020 — Rosa Mercedes / 02
Schnittstelle

Lauren Berlant, the brilliant theorist of „cruel optimism“ and related issues, died of a rare form of cancer on June 28. The following, devastatingly optimistic quote is from a 2016 essay on the commons as „infrastructures for troubling times,“ part of a book that they worked on with the typically double-edged title On the Inconvenience of Other People: „What remains for our pedagogy of unlearning is to build affective infrastructures that admit the work of desire as the work of an aspirational ambivalence. What remains is the potential we have to common infrastructures that absorb the blows of our aggressive need for the world to accommodate us and our resistance to adaptation and that, at the same time, hold out the prospect of a world worth attaching to that’s something other than an old hope’s bitter echo. A failed episode is not evidence that the project was in error. By definition, the common forms of life are always going through a phase, as infrastructures will.“

 

Some basics from the Strike MoMA site: „Campaigns, actions, and letters chip away at the regime’s facade from the outside. Inside, every time workers organize, defy the boss, care for a coworker, disrespect secrecy, or enact other forms of subversion, cracks are created in the core. Cracking and chipping, chipping and cracking. As the walls that artificially separate the museum from the world collapse, we reorient away from the institution and come together to make plans. Let us strike in all the ways possible to exit from the terms of the museum so we can set our own.“

 

via Hyperallergic on the environmental impact of blockchain referring to recent NFT (non-fungible token) art sales: „This is not the first time the art world has come under scrutiny for being on the wrong side of the climate conversation. Artists and activists have protested everything from the carbon footprint of physical art fairs to the fossil fuel money funding major museums. But some say the energy consumption of cryptocurrencies is particularly egregious, and research shows it’s relatively easily quantifiable. A study by Cambridge University, for instance, estimates that bitcoin uses more electricity per year than the entire nation of Argentina. (Ethereum mining consumes a quarter to half of what Bitcoin mining does, but one transaction uses more power than an average US household in a day, according to the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.)“

 

Nicholas Mirzoeff on “Artificial vision, white space and racial surveillance capitalism”: “Based as it is on ‘epidermalization’ (the assertion of absolute difference based on relative differences in skin color), AI’s racial surveillance deploys an all-too-familiar racialized way of seeing operating at plan-etary scale. It is the plantation future we are now living in. All such operations take place in and via the new imagined white space of technology known as the cloud. In reality, a very material arrangement of servers and cables, the cloud is both an engine of high-return low-employment capitalism and one of the prime drivers of carbon emissions.”

 

Sara Ahmed on the performativity of disgust (from The Cultural Politics of Emotion, 2004): “To name something as disgusting is to transfer the stickiness of the word ‘disgust’ to an object, which henceforth becomes generated as the very thing that is spoken. The relationship between the stickiness of the sign and the stickiness of the object is crucial to the performativity of disgust as well as the apparent resistance of disgust reactions to ‘newness’ in terms of the generation of different kinds of objects. The object that is generated as a disgusting (bad) object through the speech act comes to stick. It becomes sticky and acquires a fetish quality, which then engenders its own effects.”

15.06.2021

auf Hyperallergic über die Umweltbelastung durch Kryptowährungen aus Anlass jüngster Auktionen von NFT (non-fungible token)-Kunst: „This is not the first time the art world has come under scrutiny for being on the wrong side of the climate conversation. Artists and activists have protested everything from the carbon footprint of physical art fairs to the fossil fuel money funding major museums. But some say the energy consumption of cryptocurrencies is particularly egregious, and research shows it’s relatively easily quantifiable. A study by Cambridge University, for instance, estimates that bitcoin uses more electricity per year than the entire nation of Argentina. (Ethereum mining consumes a quarter to half of what Bitcoin mining does, but one transaction uses more power than an average US household in a day, according to the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.)“

 

Nicholas Mirzoeff on “Artificial vision, white space and racial surveillance capitalism”: “Based as it is on ‘epidermalization’ (the assertion of absolute difference based on relative differences in skin color), AI’s racial surveillance deploys an all-too-familiar racialized way of seeing operating at plan-etary scale. It is the plantation future we are now living in. All such operations take place in and via the new imagined white space of technology known as the cloud. In reality, a very material arrangement of servers and cables, the cloud is both an engine of high-return low-employment capitalism and one of the prime drivers of carbon emissions.”

 

Sara Ahmed on the performativity of disgust (from The Cultural Politics of Emotion, 2004): “To name something as disgusting is to transfer the stickiness of the word ‘disgust’ to an object, which henceforth becomes generated as the very thing that is spoken. The relationship between the stickiness of the sign and the stickiness of the object is crucial to the performativity of disgust as well as the apparent resistance of disgust reactions to ‘newness’ in terms of the generation of different kinds of objects. The object that is generated as a disgusting (bad) object through the speech act comes to stick. It becomes sticky and acquires a fetish quality, which then engenders its own effects.”

07.11.2020

David Graeber (1961-2020) on What Would It Take (from his The Democracy Project. A History, a Crisis, a Movement, 2013, p. 193): „We have little idea what sort of organizations, or for that matter, technologies, would emerge if free people were unfettered to use their imagination to actually solve collective problems rather than to make them worse. But the primary question is: how do we even get there? What would it take to allow our political and economic systems to become a mode of collective problem solving rather than, as they are now, a mode of collective war?“

07.09.2020
mehrweniger Kurznews