Re: <nettime> So what's the use of art, theory, activism? OR the public sphere?

[André Rebentisch via nettime-l <nettime-l@lists.nettime.org>]

In my view where the arts could contribute the most is in creative
disruption of technocratic governance and discourses.
or as I would phrase it by folding of the democratic dough, in a playful
and fun way.

Most digital policies are shaped in Brussels these days  and this is also
where the leverage for action lies.

An allotment with your LOCAL rhizomes could be brought closer to the
circles of power.

The new Chinese AI just contributed this poem about the getting open source
preferences in the EU Public Procurement directive:

* The Code of Progress*

In halls of Brussels, where decisions gleam,
A directive stirs, a bureaucrat's dream.
Public procurement, a labyrinthine art,
Now seeks a change, a modern start.

The ink of treaties, the weight of law,
Yet innovation knocks, with a gentle claw.
Open source whispers, a digital muse,
A call for freedom, for minds to infuse.

"Let code be open," the voices declare,
Transparency rising, a virtue so rare.
No vendor locked, no siloed chain,
But shared solutions, a common gain.

The old ways falter, their grip grows thin,
As open source beckons, a future within.
Collaboration's spark, a beacon so bright,
Guiding the EU through the digital night.

Yet skeptics murmur, "What of the cost?
What of the risks, if standards are lost?"
But visionaries counter, with wisdom profound,
"Freedom breeds strength, in it we are bound."

The directive shifts, its pages rewrite,
A nod to the future, a leap toward light.
For public good, for the people's voice,
The EU embraces the open source choice.

So let the code flow, let the systems align,
A union of progress, a design divine
From Brussels to borders, the message is clear:
The future is open, and it starts here.
Funny and light. Normally no one makes casual poems about such "technical"
regulatory stuff
but that exemplifies what I call "folding of the dough". Just as the
Prussians commissioned a
march for everything, it could be fun to have a song for each EU directive
proposal.

Also the yellow perils ai presented a joke about the EU procurement
directive, a bit adapted:

Why did the open source community get invited to the EU procurement party?
Because it brought enough forks for everyone! 🍴😄

Best
André


Am So., 2. Feb. 2025 um 20:34 Uhr schrieb Stella Aster via nettime-l <
nettime-l@lists.nettime.org>:

> Thank you all for the continuing discussion.
>
> I have struggled to find the time and the ways to thread together and
> respond to all the points I was touched by. But I thought I should send
> something back.
>
> > Working backwards from Stella’s point: It seems to me that THE LOCAL is
> an intrinsic starting point for political activism because the local is a
> critical discursive zone where people, a public, are able to discuss and
> act, most directly, on the issues and conditions that impact their lives.
> The local in this sense is a nascent form of the public sphere.
>
> This. But also it is more fundamental. The local is material first, and
> its discursivity follows from its materiality. My body is in a place, and
> there are other people here too. Because the local is material, local
> organising can be material organising, in the form of mutual aid. The local
> is also a design constraint, which can enable creativity just like any
> other design constraint. When alienation and distance are pervasive and
> weaponised, I propose using the people and places around us, the relations
> we are already tangled in, as our raw materials and themes.
>
> > What you would need is a broadly shared sense of how to change the shape
> of everyday existence. And where does that come from? People do have to
> make it themselves.
>
> > We would say activism probably needs to take more center stage in
> cultural events. Less art ?! Less theory ?!
>
> > Simply put, the public sphere is not static or necessarily one
> dimensional and is capable of enabling a broad range of political and
> economic programs within which 'art' can appear as an essential and
> integral element.
>
> > Resistance is different now. It really is a whole way of living. The
> hardest part of resistance is getting people, or even yourself, to
> understand why it is necessary, and with whom it could be somehow
> successful.
>
> > Thus, I'd suggest that how we are assembling our worlds around "art" and
> "activism" and especially "theory" are probably not serving us the way they
> use to. For whom? To whom?
>
> I think of activism, art, and theory as coloured gels through which we can
> look at all human activity and practice. Sometimes a thing is legible
> through one of these things, sometimes not. I'm interested in doing things
> which do all of the things these things do, even if that 'practice' is not
> immediately legible as any of them.
>
> > All the big issues being discussed here are fundamentally important, and
> I hold on to social theory and ecological science in order to get some
> sense of what the future holds. But the future looks desolate, people are
> afraid, and there is no use at all for art, theory and activism if you
> can't share them in a way that builds trust.
>
> The materials we are working with are people, relationships, and things
> made by people and through relationships. So the things we are working with
> are delicate and valuable to people. This emphasises the importance of
> process ethics of our work. We have to think of how what we plan to do
> could make people feel.
>
> > The under-commons, fugitive forms of trust, solidarity and togetherness,
> point to a way of living inside the ruins. But beyond that? There is only
> so much that rhizomatic structures can hold. Another hard lesson from the
> digital experience.
>
> Deep Green Resistance proposes a taxonomy of action and an ecological
> perspective on how different forms of resistance can enable each other:
> https://deepgreenresistance.net/en/resistance/action-taxonomy/taxonomy-of-action/
> I think what I have found for myself is a current lack of, and interest in,
> the areas labelled "Support Work and Building Alternatives" and "Capacity
> Building and Operations", hence working to nurture my local rhizomes. I
> don't just want to live, I want to thrive, and be part of the
> infrastructure which allows other forms of action and resistance to live
> and thrive, and grow our vines until the ruins are mulch.
> Stella ✨
>
> On 29 January 2025 12:40:24 GMT, allan siegel via nettime-l <
> nettime-l@lists.nettime.org> wrote:
> >Hello all,
> >
> >*Louis* mentions, "I'd suggest that how we are assembling our worlds
> around "art" and "activism" and especially "theory" are probably not
> serving us the way they use to. For whom? To whom?" and *Brian*, "I am now
> an elder, who must turn experience - even the experience of failures - into
> something valuable for present and coming generations. Resistance happens
> in the streets, but not only." *Felix*, says, "The political center
> abandoned the notion of the public sphere in the 1990s." *Andreas*,
> provides another vantage point, "I believe that there is a connection
> between the political organization of postwar democracies and the way in
> which their public spheres were structured (for instance through
> large-scale public and private media monopolies)."and back to *Stella's*
> item that, "Strong local units are able to materially and discursively
> resist the imposition of authority from outside."
> >
> > Working backwards from Stella’s point: It seems to me that THE LOCAL is
> an intrinsic starting point for political activism because the local is a
> critical discursive zone where people, a public, are able to discuss and
> act, most directly, on the issues and conditions that impact their lives.
> The local in this sense is a nascent form of the public sphere.
> >
> > In the classical realm, which Hannah Arendt discussed, the local realm
> is the agora, a model of the public sphere. A multi-functional social space
> that was ‘the space of appearances’ where people came together to discuss
> and also if necessary to act. For Arendt political discourse and action
> seem to be inseparable. If we look globally, and closely, at postwar social
> movements (a long list) this connection between discourse and action
> enabled often inextricable and profound social and political changes
> > With examples that begin to appear from 1945 forward (and we could
> easily look at previous centuries) the public sphere is not only one
> specific social space as in Habermas’ study but rather a variety of social
> spaces according to Nancy Fraser’s important critique of Habermas.
> Accordingly, there are a multiplicity of discursive zones from which ideas
> become transformed in to political acts and social movements.
> >
> >The connections between the so-called 'political center' and the
> 'political organization of postwar democracies' brings us into the present
> neoliberal miasma within which the dimensions of the public sphere range
> from the Occupy, MeToo, and BLM movements to Facebook and TikTok. Simply
> put, the public sphere is not static or necessarily one dimensional and is
> capable of enabling a broad range of political and economic programs within
> which 'art' can appear as an essential and integral element.
> >Louis' questions, "For whom? To whom?" can be approached first by looking
> at From Whom? Meaning, from which positions and/or places, does ‘art,
> theory and activism’  originate? What do our local individual
> ‘units/collectives’  look like and what are their connections (if any) to
> some variation of a "public sphere"? Meaning, am I part of some discursive
> zone? And, BTW, does Nettime count as a public sphere? Does Stella’s
> definition of a local unit include virtual communities like Nettime? And,
> how do forms of 'resistance' that ferment within virtual communities
> translate into activism…? This becomes a critical question if we are not to
> be swallowed within the Neoliberal Miasma or fenced within Trumpist ghettos.
> >Best
> >
> >Allan
> >--
> ># distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
> ># <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
> ># collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
> ># more info: https://www.nettime.org
> ># contact: nettime-l-owner@lists.nettime.org
> --
> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
> # more info: https://www.nettime.org
> # contact: nettime-l-owner@lists.nettime.org
>
-- 
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: https://www.nettime.org
# contact: nettime-l-owner@lists.nettime.org