Really like this one and would agree on exploring this passive/active discussion. Also 100% agree with Vic, which I tend towards the least on average, on needing a more refined passive structure, not a call to arms for everyone to be a massive all in radical subject, it's like a form of Marxism working it's way back to Idealism, the Situationists could do with being turned on their head. "it's not just about me and my dream of doing nothing, it's about all of us, together." shortly post hypnosis Peter Gibbons is the radical mass.
WELL PUT AF (not just sayin it. I'll have to familiarize myself w the reference material, but the commentary and comparison u provide is profoundly relevant- every time.)
"It is the concrete conditions of work in society which enforce conformism, not the conscious influences which additionally render the oppressed stupid and deflect them from the truth." Adorno/Horkheimer, Dialectic of Enlightenment (pg 29 of the Jephcott translation).
Linked to your mention, there's the Adorno in his exilium letters, talking about the geometric house planning. That intimate relation between massification and the neo-avant-garde might have sent Adorno to his disagreement with the 68 movements, for he knew the nature of the crisis as inherent to the superstructure of capitalism, the sublimation process, standing Adorno for pretty much the idea of Clement Greenberg.
In that sense, the Duchamp's urinnal must have been for Adorno as the perfect reverse of the situationists with his becoming-alive of the senses cutting off the utilitarian mortified tends... The man did'nt know that was nothing as what we have now... With the shows of talents and the entertainment industry with its movile-tecnics and algorisms.
well, italian futurism is interesting, but Marinetti turned to fascism in his later years and merged his Futurist party with the fascist party and supported Mussolini.
@@shannonm.townsend1232 I agree. But it's telling how many of these psuedo-bourgeois movements pre-war era turned to support fascism in some form or another rather than communism.
On the idea that contemporary MSM offer more viewpoint diversity with respect to riots, the published evidence about riot coverage here in the UK, at least, suggests the opposite: that rioters in the 1980s, for example, were treated more sympathically in the liberal press (Guardian) than in the right-wing media. By the 2011 riots that had all changed and the liberal press were if anything even more rabidly condemnatory.
Your arguments on the riots lose a lot of steam when JP Morgan Chase and Boeing support BLM. Plus, to characterize people defending neighborhoods as Pinkertons, which of course there were, is just as dishonest as saying that everyone looting a target is there in solidarity. There are always opportunists, the goal of any movement should be to either use them to their advantage or create obstacles to their detracting. Then with the media, the take is very undercooked. Of course most media is corporatized, but what does that mean? Get into the numbers if you want your argument to at least seem like it holds water. Or, maybe counter with the fact that as of May 11, 2021, per Harvard, the largest news publisher in the US was wikipedia. What does that mean? Let the ideas bake for a little longer. The spirit is there, but the conclusions are premature.
Really like this one and would agree on exploring this passive/active discussion.
Also 100% agree with Vic, which I tend towards the least on average, on needing a more refined passive structure, not a call to arms for everyone to be a massive all in radical subject, it's like a form of Marxism working it's way back to Idealism, the Situationists could do with being turned on their head.
"it's not just about me and my dream of doing nothing, it's about all of us, together." shortly post hypnosis Peter Gibbons is the radical mass.
"situationists" thank you. Valuable distinction for the modern conversation (and me)
Why can't you guys do a video podcast,. A request from an 🇮🇳 Indian subscriber
Yes, i feel the same.
They did for Jordan Peterson
"Do we have hope for a future media that is different?"
There is hope, but not for us.
12:16 minute mark ........ “yeah, they also are opposed to Wonderbread” ........got my attention, I sell Wonderbread ......lol
Paste 🍞
WELL PUT AF (not just sayin it. I'll have to familiarize myself w the reference material, but the commentary and comparison u provide is profoundly relevant- every time.)
or: OK BOOMER (lol)
"It is the concrete conditions of work in society which enforce conformism, not the conscious influences which additionally render the oppressed stupid and deflect them from the truth." Adorno/Horkheimer, Dialectic of Enlightenment (pg 29 of the Jephcott translation).
Linked to your mention, there's the Adorno in his exilium letters, talking about the geometric house planning. That intimate relation between massification and the neo-avant-garde might have sent Adorno to his disagreement with the 68 movements, for he knew the nature of the crisis as inherent to the superstructure of capitalism, the sublimation process, standing Adorno for pretty much the idea of Clement Greenberg.
In that sense, the Duchamp's urinnal must have been for Adorno as the perfect reverse of the situationists with his becoming-alive of the senses cutting off the utilitarian mortified tends... The man did'nt know that was nothing as what we have now... With the shows of talents and the entertainment industry with its movile-tecnics and algorisms.
The Situationist's enthusiasm and fervour reminded me of the Italian Futurists; Pills, have you read Filipo Tommaso Marinetti?
well, italian futurism is interesting, but Marinetti turned to fascism in his later years and merged his Futurist party with the fascist party and supported Mussolini.
@@bighams69 very true, but I appreciate the audacity of the initial movement
@@shannonm.townsend1232 I agree. But it's telling how many of these psuedo-bourgeois movements pre-war era turned to support fascism in some form or another rather than communism.
On the idea that contemporary MSM offer more viewpoint diversity with respect to riots, the published evidence about riot coverage here in the UK, at least, suggests the opposite: that rioters in the 1980s, for example, were treated more sympathically in the liberal press (Guardian) than in the right-wing media. By the 2011 riots that had all changed and the liberal press were if anything even more rabidly condemnatory.
This was such a misrepresention of the SI. I encourage everyone to read the source material themselves.
25:11 minutes in. It was the 60’s not the 40’s people totally had TVs 📺 in their homes. Color TV if you’re sexy.
Your arguments on the riots lose a lot of steam when JP Morgan Chase and Boeing support BLM. Plus, to characterize people defending neighborhoods as Pinkertons, which of course there were, is just as dishonest as saying that everyone looting a target is there in solidarity. There are always opportunists, the goal of any movement should be to either use them to their advantage or create obstacles to their detracting.
Then with the media, the take is very undercooked. Of course most media is corporatized, but what does that mean? Get into the numbers if you want your argument to at least seem like it holds water. Or, maybe counter with the fact that as of May 11, 2021, per Harvard, the largest news publisher in the US was wikipedia. What does that mean?
Let the ideas bake for a little longer. The spirit is there, but the conclusions are premature.
Why can't you guys do more material analysis?