Message 01821 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: oxenT01363 Message: 36/59 L13 [In index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

Re: SpamAssassin and OHA (was: [ox-en] SpamAssassin (was: OHA/ODA in English))

On Mon, 15 Dec 2003, Martin Hardie wrote:


you might always have rebels but control is pretty effective
I will trya nd find you some references.
But galloways Protocol How Controls exists ...a nd Deleuze's Postscript on 
Control Societies are good. they build on Disciline and Punishment 

Deleuze, Gilles Deleuze, "Postscript on the Societies of Control", from 
OCTOBER 59, Winter 1992, MIT Press, pages 3-7, available at: 
http://amsterdam.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9512/msg00012.html;  
Alex Galloway, Protocol, or, How Control Exists after Decentralization, 
Rethinking Marxism, Volume 13, No. 3 pages 81 -- 88 
I have this at http://openflows.org/~auskadi/protocol.pdf
; and Control and Becoming, An interview with Gilles Deleuze by Antonio Negri,  
	http://www.generation-online.org/p/fpdeleuze3.htm 


Thanks for the references, interesting. But I don't think they're the
kind of control I was thinking of - the control in the piece by Deleuze is
basically by money, and in Galloway, by technological protocol. I was 
thinking of something more internal - closer to what Jamie is describing
in the piece cc just linked to: 
http://gig.openmute.org/modules/wakka/PacketGang
where the control is also part self-mystification. Though I think this
self-mystification doesn't really happen in groups that only exist to 
create software where leadership (in my limited experience anyway) is
more transparent; it's a consequence of trying to extend the model to
a representional, political, function; where there is no mechanism
for representation to happen the self-mystification seems inevitable.

Graham



On Monday 15 December 2003 16:36, Graham Seaman wrote:

On Mon, 15 Dec 2003, Martin Hardie wrote:

On Monday 15 December 2003 15:33, Graham Seaman wrote:

In other words, you would replace censorship with self-censorship and
external discipline with internal discipline...


sounds like Foucault/ Deleuze: from societies of discipline to societies
of control


I never read anything by Deleuze, and the only relevant thing from
Foucault I've read is Discipline and Punish - but going by that, the
impression I have is that they associate this kind of internal control
with capitalism. To me it seems that internal control in 'normal'
capitalism (as opposed to fascist dictatorships, or ex 'really existing
socialism') is not that successful: you can always find rebels, just
because lots of things still are controlled by rules, and not internal.
Where it is really successful is in small scale societies, villages where
life tends to be shared, the antithesis of capitalism, gift economies
even.. The kind of society where gossip rules (and fear of being gossiped
about creates the internal controls). The kind of society where people
might end up commenting 'hmm.. you know her, SHE hasn't written much free
software lately... in danger of being alienated from the group she is'
(oops.. slipped into Yodaese)

Graham

_______________________
http://www.oekonux.org/






_______________________
http://www.oekonux.org/
Thread: oxenT01363 Message: 36/59 L13 [In index]
Message 01821 [Homepage] [Navigation]