Corporate Contagion

Becoming Hardcopy Now

(for those properly impatient

grab it here)

series2

Well folks, a spontaneous second databend series has emerged, before the first could take shape, out of image creation for the ""Corporate Contagion" Comes to Hardcopy" uncreated event. In any case, en-joy - and if you live in the area expect to see some fan-tabulous packages around soon!

In (h)omage to the biomech of the past, I introduce you to the "Biodig" of the now:

To repeat the same, but in the recombinatory jest of Jetztzeit (en twa mystical nunc stans), I present you                                                                           "darksunnewdawn"

& a return of the old,

refracted in the new:

For those sensitive to the sight of the hard sciences, I give you a reason to continue your fascination,

                                                                   "Attractor Flux"

In its disambiguated form we have;

"Quantum Flux"

&

                                                                     "Chaos Attractor"

Corporate Contagion Ad 1
                                                                       "Techno-Tiki"

Corporate Contagion Ad 2
                                                                           "Memeish"

Corporate Contagion

A playable theory game. You can download Corporate Contagion here. It is currently only available for PCs but at some point in the not too distant future it will also be available for Macs and mobile devices. If you do not have a PC and want to download it sooner than I act, leave a comment or email me and give me some impetus. For those many who enter the inner workings of the corporate world through this game, feedback would be most graciously appreciated.

"In a nutshell, the theory works great with this illustration:

    The Hegelian dialectical formula: A (thesis) versus B (anti-thesis) equals C (synthesis).

    Example: If (A) my idea of freedom conflicts with (B) your idea of freedom then (C) neither of us can be free until everyone agrees to be a slave. "

           Another triumph of mis-understanding, if only a better knowledge of the function of meconnaissance was had a biting critique could ensure, but a simple sense of the logic will do to bring articulated clarity.

A (thesis) verses B (anti-thesis) equals C (synthesis) is a wrong formulation. Since A is first in the alphabet aswellas in this formulation let's begin with it:

A (thesis).

           The relational term 'verses' is not the most appropriate because it leaves open the possibility of a conflict between two contrary forces, which on its own is correct, but making possible setting against A the term B is wrong. If we take thesis to = A then the term anti-thesis, in-itself, says not-A and although B may be a case of not-A it is not not-A. The denial or negation of the thesis, A, is not a determinate statement. i.e., it is not B. The negation of A is an indeterminate statement, i.e. not-A. To borrow a wonderful analogy by Michael Kosak; if asked, “Where are you going?” and you respond: “I am not going to the theatre,” this is a reference to the theatre in the mode of rejection. Not going to the theatre is not saying that one is going to the protest; it is saying nothing other than not-A. From this we can again reformulate the logic:

A (thesis) is Negated by itself

A (thesis) is negated by not-A(anti-thesis).

           That these two terms in this relation 'equal' something is a strange formulation at best. It may be better to say that the two terms in this relation in-form each other in the sense that they co-determine each other. We can formulate this thus:

A is negated by not-A yielding A/not-A.

          The end of such a line of logic then would be a contradiction if not understood to be not the pairing of the two original terms but their simultaneous negation and assertion. This should thus be read that A is present insofar as not-A is present and vice-versa, not-A is present insofar as A is present. Both being co-dependently present in 'A/not-A' "ambiguity in some form must be present because no final distinction into separable compartments such as A not-A, 'true' and 'false,' or present and absent can be achieved."

       Perhaps a better phrasing of this example that is not distracted by utilitarian purposes would be:

(A) I have an idea of freedom, (not-A) What is that idea of freedom?, (A/not-A) That it is Self-determined.

Critique of the anti-Hegelian dialect blog

       The author of the anti-Hegelian dialect blog (http://the-anti-hegelian-dailect-blog.blogspot.com/) writes that:

'Hegelian Dialect = Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis. In other words, they create a problem, create a solution that is too extreme, then have "us compromise" on a solution that is not as extreme as the first solution, but more extreme that the beginning point. Then they do it all over again, steadily gaining ground and moving their agendas forward.'

        Somebody has read too much introduction texts and has not attempted the bitter labor of chewing even Hegel's "Phenomenology of Spirit."

        Let’s begin at the beginning: 'Hegelian dialect = Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis.' Very few pieces of Hegel's logic, as unfolded in his texts such as the "Phenomenology of Spirit" and "The Encyclopaedia Logic," adhere to this kind of triad from thesis to antithesis to synthesis. A more refined understanding of Hegel's dialectic would articulate it not as thesis-antithesis-synthesis but rather as Assertion/Immediacy-Negation/Mediation-Self-Negation/Self-Mediation because it informs us of what the synthesis is. As it stands in the first formulation synthesis refers to the combining of thesis and antithesis without asserting that the aufhebung, or sublimating step, is a function of the thesis itself. Aside from logical arguments, this formulation of Hegel's logic is just plain crude.

          'They create a problem:' What a way to specify scope! Who or what are they? For this blogger I do not know, but, for Hegel they are Ideas or Concepts in a properly philosophical construal of such terms. This means that what undergoes the logic are Concepts. The blogger is correct to state that 'they (understood as concepts) create a problem', for in Hegel's dialectic Concepts contain a self-moving nature and as such are not moved by the thinker but move on their own, and their movement is 'problematic' insofar as "there is nothing at all anywhere, in which contradiction cannot and should not be exhibited." What the hell the blogger has in mind about 'a solution that is too extreme' or 'then have "us compromise" on a solution" is beyond me, I will leave it up to himself or a commenter to clarify this one. In hopes of negatively defining these statements I will lay out a line of Hegelian logic in hopes that someone may pick up on a correspondence between an actual line of the logic and this above construal:

           (1) Being is > Being is Indeterminate, i.e. it is no-thing

           (2) Being is Nothing > is Indeterminate, i.e. Being is not Nothing

           (3) 'Being is Nothing' is Becoming

In the antecedent of (2), 'Being is Nothing, one may be able to abstract some notion of 'extreme' but more so in the sense that 'steal burns at an extreme degree of heat' rather than 'Sharia law is extreme.'

         My intuition is that the language of 'extreme' and 'compromise' are literary support for the last line; "then they do it all over again, steadily gaining ground and moving their agendas forward." This informs us that the blogger does not have Concepts or Ideas in mind when writing 'they' because Concepts, as construed by Hegel and under the light of none Hegelians, do not have 'agendas'. This last line tells us that the blogger has a political bent against Hegel. Sure, Marxism has had a horrendous history under such figures as Mao and Stalin, but this says nothing of Hegel's logic. Stalin's Diamat is radically different from Hegel's logic insofar as it is extremely teleologically bent and Mao's notion of contradiction although it does share much with Hegel's is distinct. A fortiori, if we were to judge a mode of reasoning by its historical substantiations, Christianity ought to be swiftly stomped out. I for one do not think this is the case, Christianity as a mode of reasoning, despite its murderous history, has much to offer to a person's life.   

http://neurophilosophy.wordpress.com/
http://www.phibetaiota.net/2011/05/advanced-cyberio-knowledge-integration/
http://lesswrong.com/
http://arcade.stanford.edu/blogs/timothy-morton
http://mspoliticalcommentary.blogspot.com/
http://networkologies.wordpress.com/2011/08/08/deleuzo-hegelianism-why-we-need-it-part-i/
http://thehegeldiaries.wordpress.com/
http://un-cannyontology.blogspot.com/
http://dailykos.com/
http://jussiparikka.net/
http://www.ejumpcut.org/gatewaypages/aboutus.html
http://fractalontology.wordpress.com/about/

Reflective Data Visualization Possibility

Would it be possible to visualize a formalization of the Hegelian Dialectic?
There is a viable looking formalization of the Hegelian Dialectice;
http://www.thenewdialectics.org/hegeldiallog.htm
Processing is a viable platform for data visualization.
Can the two meet?

https://www.dropbox.com/home?upload=1#:::

Lynch the Linchpin

               Corporate Contagion¹ is a playable theory computer game. Playable theory is a notion derived from the Italian guerilla semiotics and culture jamming website Mollenindustria.org². They have used it to describe two of their games in particular, Leaky World and The Free Culture Game. How these games live up to the notion of playable theory and how any game can will be discussed later, what is essential to note now is that a playable theory game, in theory, is one in which the conceptual and functional ground of a game is based on some scientific or cultural theory. Under this conception games such as Foldit which embody scientific theory on a structural level could qualify as playable theory as could games such as September 12 which take strong stances on important cultural issues.

Playable Theory

In this section of the essay how Corporate Contagion is a playable theory game will be discussed. The goal of Corporate Contagion can be said to be; “find the linchpin in the corporate haystack” because the game is founded upon a social network theory of the small-world phenomena of American corporate elite. This founding theory is taken from the sociologists Gerald F. Davis, Mina Yoo and Wayne E. Baker, who used network theory notions to analyze the interlocks between top ranking American corporate boards in their article “The Small World of the American Corporate Elite, 1982-2001.”³ Looking at the corporate world they defined “American corporate elite as the directors of several hundred of the largest US corporations at a given time... this included 648 corporations with 8623 directorships.” (15)⁴. What serves to turn a large, sparse, decentralized and locally clustered network into a small-world is the existence of 'linchpins.' ‘Linchpins’ are figures whose personal networks cross local clusters and the existence of a few such characters can make a disparate network into a small-world. It is not uncommon in the corporate world for directors to serve on a number of boards at once and in fact nearly all firms share directors with other large firms(4)⁵. This phenomenon is called ‘board interlocks’. What this essentially means is that corporate board directors are connected by a small number of steps, a phenomena that can also be found in social media sites such as Facebook. What Davis says is distinct about the corporate world that warrants attention is that “board members meet face to face in small groups of 7-12 on a regular basis (8 or more times per year, in general), and they are jointly liable under the law. They may not all be close friends, but they are almost certainly on a first name basis, and would return each other’s phone calls”⁶. It is the phenomena of the small-world of the corporate elite which serves as a functional ground to Corporate Contagion and it is the societal implications of this which serves as the conceptual ground.

It is important to situate Corporate Contagion on one side of a divide in how playable theory games can be conceived. It has been noted that playable theory games can be conceived of in two ways; metaphorical and literal⁷. Along this line of division Leaky World would qualify as metaphorical. It is a playable theory game in so far as it is based on Julian Assange's essay "Conspiracy as Governance." Leaky World qualifies as metaphorical because it is not based off actual information. The ‘leaks’ which occur in the game are imaginative and relative to the game itself, and for this reason the game functions to metaphorically represent the world of leaks. In contrast Corporate Contagion would qualify as literal because the board interlocks which the player explores are actual interlocks (although some may be out of date).

To clarify how Corporate Contagion is a literal playable theory game it would be useful to contrast its game play with Leaky World. As a player of Leaky World one is playing as the global elite attempting to quarantine leaks. The goal of the game then is contrary to the position of the theory on which it is based. This is an important feature to note in the design of a game because it has bearing on how the player perceives the values that are being transmitted. In the case of Leaky World, where the goals of the player are contrary to the goals of the designer and theoretical foundation of the game, the player is compelled to wrestle with the value of ‘leaks’ in such a way that he perceives their inevitability. On the other hand, in a game such as Corporate Contagion or Darfur is Dying where the goals of the player are in accordance with the goals of the designer and theoretical foundation, the player is compelled to perceive the difficulties inherent in the issue at hand. This makes for a pronounced difference in the design of Corporate Contagion and Leaky World. The goal of the latter is to change the managerial practices of the corporate world. How this can be achieved is rooted in the game’s social network theory foundations. According to Davis and company the small-world phenomena is a symptom of networks qua networks and thus resilient to change (24)⁸. ‘Linchpins’ by serving as in-between points in the network have many ties and “to the extent that decision-makers in firms look to peers to inform their choices, our results suggest that there will inevitably be overlap in peer groups: firms will be looking to the same set of alters to reduce their uncertainty” (24)⁹. This means that ‘linchpins’ come to be nodes which various other nodes look to in times of uncertainty. For this reason, if a ‘linchpin’ is infected with a managerial meme, whether in businesses interest or social interest, that meme is in a prime position to spread when conditions are right. Thus, as a player of Corporate Contagion one is seeking to infect a linchpin with a social interest meme. As such, the player is on the side of the creator’s ideology as well as the game play being based in some solid fact. For this reason “Corporate Contagion” stands as a well-grounded playable theory game that serves to illuminate how social change can happen in the corporate world and how that change may be difficult.

Corporate Contagion & Philosophy

This section discuses some of the philosophical underpinnings of Corporate Contagion’s presentation design. Beyond the theoretical foundations of Corporate Contagion resting on social theory I also attempted to add a critical dimension to the game that can be said to be more aesthetically political than scientifically accurate. In 1936 Walter Benjamin wrote an essay titled “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction” in which he argued for a particular conception of the aestheticization of politics in which “fascism sees its salvation in giving these masses not their right, but instead a chance to express themselves” and in which “instead of draining rivers, society directs a human stream into a bed of trenches.”¹⁰ What he was articulating was the fact that oppressive societal structures would be maintained not necessarily through political arguments but through allowing people to express themselves and that this expression, or individual’s tastes, would be, if not the justification at least the pool of energies from which oppression would continue. I do not wish to refute this argument, but merely to detourn it. My position is that the proliferation of tastes in capitalist societies, though a mechanism for oppression, may be turned on itself to expose that oppression in an intuitive, aesthetic way. This position is not far from that of Roland Barthes and his conception of semiology as an art. The kind of art that the semiologist is involved in is an active engaged political art that involves critically intervening with different cultural practices and making us aware of how artificial and contrived they are¹¹. The structure of Corporate Contagion is such that it aims to be representative of the cultural practice of corporate management of society. It is its use of images which attempt to critically intervene in the player’s perception of this cultural practice. In his “Inaugural Lecture at the College De France” he wrote that ‘the sign – at least the sign [the semiologist] sees – is always immediate, subject to the kind of evidence that leaps to the eyes, like a trigger of the imagination” (375)¹². The use of images in Corporate Contagion aim to trigger this imaginary evidence while at the same time tainting that evidence with a critical, political proclivity.

Colorization of the Corporate World

This section will discuss how Corporate Contagion incorporates aesthetic elements to express a particular interpretation of the corporate world. The corporate world has come to exhibit an expansive influence in both our personal lives and in our collective endeavors. The sheer permeation of corporate products in our daily lives from the sodas we drink, to the products we purchase for our infants and even the mobile-devices which carry our personal lives in them evidences this. As does the influence which industries such as ‘Lockheed Martin’ have in politics as far as their profits are dependent upon war and industries such as Newscorp, who we endow with the responsibility to inform us about global affairs. The influence which the corporate world wields is not only in the amount of things upon which we depend on it for but also how it holds sway in nearly all areas of human life. The distinction made here may appear miniscule but is in fact large because it is the distinction between our material practices and the directing force behind those practices. It is one thing that we materially depend upon the corporate world for our daily lives and it is another how this corporate world functions.

Before this distinction can be drawn out further it is necessary to look at the corporate world from an objective stance. A recurrent theme of Davis' and company's article is how the small-world phenomena of the corporate world is a symptom of networks qua networks. With this in mind we can then conceive of the corporate world as ethical in a Hegelian sense, meaning that its existence as a social object is actual. In his “Philosophy of Right” Hegel makes the claim that “if reflection, feeling, or whatever form the subjective consciousness may assume regards the present as vain and looks beyond it in a spirit of superior knowledge, it finds itself in a vain position; and since it has actuality only in the present, it is itself mere vanity” (20)¹³. What this means in regards to out subject is that if we take the position that the small-world phenomena of corporate world is vain, in the sense of being something to despise and without real significance, and it is the case that such a phenomena is a symptom of networks qua networks and networks are inescapable then we are vain in the sense that we are ineffectual. Thus, from this vantage point we can see how the distinction made above is important because it draws our attention to the ethical existence of the corporate world as well as displays that the corporate world has a distinct direction, this direction being dictated by the elite of the corporate world.

That this is an ethical fact is useless to argue further, but whether or not it is moral, is open to question, and it is this question which my aesthetic critical aspect hopes to address. It was my hope with this game to express how various corporate spheres of American society are interconnected, and perhaps further how each sphere is not an island. This is important because our mundane daily activities take place within one of these spheres and hence have an effect on and are affected by the other spheres which often extend globally. To flesh this idea of interconnectivity out I chose to use the game environment as a platform to display images that were supposed to be critically representative of a given sphere of influence.

Games & Culture

Mollenindustria.org notes how video-gaming is moving from the margins of culture to surpass cinema in cultural productive output. This area of human life is of course not excluded from corporate influence either. Their claim is that this rise of video-games comes with the continuation of corporate values of big profit. To this their response is that “the ideology of a game resides in its rules, in its invisible mechanics, and not only in its narrative parts.” It is this idea that the values at play, a notion from Mary Flanagan¹⁴, in a game can be expressed in a number of ways that inspired me to use diverse critical images to represent diverse industries in the corporate world network. By having a mall backdrop for a certain company which is liable to change to a corporate board backdrop, a fighter jet back drop, oil spill backdrop or media backdrop I felt the idea of corporate interconnectivity could be expressed in an aesthetically shocking way. The shock is to be found in traveling from a mall scene to bombs dropping. This did not affect the rules of the game but only the narrative (starting at a mall and ending with a globe). To be certain, changing the rules of a game to express an alternative ideology is a difficult task with perhaps fertile consequences but incorporating values into the narrative of a game is no easily dismissible act. It gives unity to the game by giving it a beginning middle and end. By starting in a mall the player is confronted with a scene that he or she encounters in real life at least a number of times a year. A disparate domain shifts from the corporate board, which is the locus of descions that effect stories in the media, one's employment, investments etc. A fighter jet dropping bombs is representative of the little seen fact that this is what some industries produce, instruments of destruction. An all surrounding media room and the results of some of our energy production practices, oil spills. It is in the search through this corporate haystack that they player may discover on his or her own how deeply interconnected and influential the corporate world is. From this personal discovery, the player then may reflect upon whether he agrees with how we get our energy or deal with foreign relations. This approach of using backdrops to illuminate critical aspects of given companies adds a critical artistic political dimension to the game.

1 http://walterfriederichs-virtualroots.blogspot.com/2011/12/corporate-contagion.html

2 http://www.molleindustria.org/

3 http://webuser.bus.umich.edu/gfdavis/Papers/The%20Small%20World.pdf

4 http://webuser.bus.umich.edu/gfdavis/Papers/The%20Small%20World.pdf

5 http://webuser.bus.umich.edu/gfdavis/Papers/The%20Small%20World.pdf

6 http://orgtheory.wordpress.com/2011/08/19/theyrule-net-interlocking-boards/

7 http://playthisthing.com/leaky-world-playable-theory

8 http://webuser.bus.umich.edu/gfdavis/Papers/The%20Small%20World.pdf

9 http://webuser.bus.umich.edu/gfdavis/Papers/The%20Small%20World.pdf

10 http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/ge/benjamin.htm

11 http://www.megaupload.com/?d=O9AJQNOQ

12 The Continental Philosophy Reader

13 Elements of the Philosophy of Right

14 http://tedxtalks.ted.com/video/TEDxDartmouth-Mary-Flanagan-Cri

Master

By Evan Meaney

http://www.evanmeaney.com/pdfs/evan_meaney_lecture.pdf

http://www.evanmeaney.com/pdfs/evan_meaney_on_glitching.pdf

Corporate Contagion

A playable theory game. If you do happen to give it a run or two, I would appreciate feedback.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=HXCXFG39

Decline of the West

Decline of the West

PASCAL'S ROOM

Funities

noice, itselt,

Recombinant Text 3

Original Image by Gabriel Melcher

They were not man, an author to himself, but only a caricature of that masculinist reproductive dream.
The cherode of glitch, if we are to use the homesteading the noosphere metaphor, is like developing on the plya.
self-developing and externally designed
Our best machines are made of sunshine; they are all light and clean because they are nothing but signals
Ultimately the 'hardest' science is about the realm of greatest boundary confusion, the realm of pure number, pure spirit
There might be a cyborg Alice taking account of these new dimensions
both perspectives at once because each reveals both dominations and possibilities unimaginable from the other vantage point

a growing impatience to get faster and to progress towards perfection
I learn about me; my preconceptions and expectations
about you but also about your successors
digital noise materialized and artists wandered the planes of phosphor burnin
the technological curve; to ride the waves of both euphoria and disappointment
The system consists of layers
of obfuscated protocols that find their origin in ideologies, economies, political hierarchies
and social conventions
a feeling of shock, or being lost and in awe
an intimate, personal experience
of a machine (or program), a system exhibiting its formations, inner workings and flaws
a spark of creative energy that indicates that something new is about to be created
But once the glitch is named, the momentum – the glitch – is gone...and in front of my eyes
suddenly a new form has emerged
an unexpected and
abnormal modus operandi
the original experience of a rupture moved
beyond its momentum and vanished into a realm of new conditions
its previous encounter has become an ephemeral, personal experience
they search for the point when a new form is born from the
blazed ashes of its precursor

Identities seem contradictory, partial, and strategic
It remains to be seen whether all 'epistemologies' as Western political people have known them fail us in the task to build effective affinities

the shocking experience,
perception and understanding of what a glitch is at one point in time cannot be preserved
for a future time
an assemblage of perceptions
and the understanding of multiple actors
The glitches I trigger turn the
technology back into the obfuscated box that it already was
synaesthesia not just as a metaphor for transcoding one medium upon another (with a
new algorithm), but a conceptually driven meeting of the visual and the sonic within the newly
uncovered quadrants of technology.
practices of breaking flows within different technologies
or platforms
a medium in a critical state: a ruined, unwanted, unrecognized,
accidental and horrendous state
flow cannot be understood without
interruption
This ambiguous contingency of the glitch
depends on its constantly mutating materiality
the materiality of glitch art is not (just) the
machine on which the work appears, but a constantly changing construct that depends on
the interactions between the text and its social, aesthetic and economic dynamics
Glitch studies is a misplaced truth; it is a vision that destroys itself by its own choice
of and for oblivion. The best ideas are dangerous because they generate awareness. Glitch
studies is what you can just get away with.

an emerging system of world order analogous in its novelty and scope to that created by industrial capitalism,
better yet... hominization
from all work to all play, a deadly game

Surf the vortex of
technology, the in-between,

Recombinant Text 2

the European Union, consolidating the largest trading area in the world and soon rivaling the dollar for global supremacy
 the accumulation of massive and unsustainable deficits
public debt levels in a number of peripheral economies
threatened the eurozone's viability by the end of its first decade
the lack of political integration needed
wealthiest members called on weaker states to embrace strict austerity{ harshness, strictness, asceticism, rigor}
popular unrest and toppling governments in Greece and Italy

economic integration was integral to European peace and prosperity
joint control over food production
Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Poland, and Romania were potential eurozone candidates.
cutting public spending and raising taxes
The periphery states thrived in the first years of the euro
the "productive capacity" of the periphery was limited by rigid labor markets and a reduction of economic competitiveness.
the EU and the IMF bailed out Greece, Ireland, and Portugal
fears of sovereign debt contagion to the eurozone core intensified 
Greece had manipulated its balance sheets prior to the global financial crisis in order to hide its debt.

Markets lost confidence in Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi's ability to implement long-promised austerity measures
a temporary technocratic government of national unity
spending cuts and lifting the retirement age.  

the EU has begun to adopt measures for centralizing governance mechanisms and coordinating fiscal and economic policy.
the European Stability Mechanism, the European Systemic Risk Board 

Recombinant Text

A string of highly partisan budget battles
has called into question Washington
disillusioning the U.S. public
the bipartisan supercommittee mark 
Congress' job approval (Gallup) dipped to just 13 percent
the players seem unaware how damaging they are
a last-minute deal to avoid a default
stripped the United States of its AAA credit-rating

Official joblessness rate hits 8.6 per cent, lowest in 32 months, though many may be dropping out of job hunt.

It's a bit of a bloodbath really
In fact, there's so little incentive to integrate and become more productive

{destination, closed source, vs point of departure, OS, what each creates}
In 1848 revolutions broke out almost simultaneously in 50 different countries from Wallachia to Brazil
universal education systems, for instance – were created pretty much everywhere
The “ten days that shook the world” in 1917 took place in Russia
what Wallerstein calls the “world revolution of 1968” was more like 1848: it rippled from China to Czechoslovakia to France to Mexico
nonetheless began a broad transformation in our sense of what a revolution might even mean
its spirit pervaded everything
In recent years we have seen a kind of continual series of tiny ’68s
The uprisings against state socialism that began in Tiananmen Square
the collapse of the Soviet Union
the Zapatista world revolution, Seattle, Genoa, Cancun, Quebec, Hong Kong,
principles of decentralized direct democracy and direct action
It only makes sense then that the World Revolution of 2011 should have begun as a rebellion against US client states, in much the same way as the rebellions that brought down Soviet power began in places like Poland and Czechoslovakia
he Mediterranean from North Africa to Southern Europe, across the Atlantic to New York
this time the power elite can’t start a war. They already tried that. They’re basically out of cards to play
 Of course this could be the first moment in yet another round of recuperation and defeat.