Re: [ox-en] The Ideology of Free Culture and the Grammar of Sabotage
- From: graham <graham theseamans.net>
- Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 12:21:41 +0000
Dmytri Kleiner wrote:
On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 09:54:06 +0100, Stefan Meretz <stefan.meretz hbv.org>
Stefan seriously and carefully explained his position.
No he didn't, he made nonsensical justifications for making
irresponsible, illogical and reprehensible accusations.
His sole justification for claiming Mattea is employing an
"antisemitic structure" was that Matteo uses the term "parasite,"
which supposedly is the same as "comparing people to animals"
which Stefan connects to the character of Nazi ant-antisemitism.
This is more than a stretch.
Repetitive use of the ideas of 'parasite' and 'louse' is something very
characteristic of the rhetorical style of fascists, particularly so in
Italy (I wouldn't know about Germany). What do you do with lice? You
crush them, because they are both trivial and subhuman. It is a term
regularly used by the modern far-right (and by the police) for left
wingers, people with long hair, drug users, the people who wash car
windows at traffic lights, romanian gipsies, or anyone else they think
should be exterminated. In this paper, the parasite permeates everything
to do with the 'digital economy'; anyone you don't like can be
classified with the parasites.
If you say this is an emotional reaction, not a logical one, it is. And
that was my reaction to this paper - it was written with two strands, a
logical one, and what I originally thought was an independent rhetorical
one, concentrating on creating a mood. This mood was fascist, in fact
the whole technique is quite typically fascist; it was presumably
intended to be provocative, and succeeded in being so. And specifically
intended to be provocative to 'digitalist' groups like oekonux, 'the
grey accomplice of a parasitic mega-machine'.
Any honest and sane person would clearly see that there is nothing
anti-semitic about Matteo's article, which makes it clear that
Stefan is neither.
Although anti-semitism is a specific case of the attitude described
above, I saw nothing specifically anti-semitic in the paper. What I did
not realise, until reading Stefan Mn's reply, was quite how far the
logical theme of the paper was permeated by the same attitude as the
rhetorical one. That the contrast between the old-style, supposedly
exploitative but personal capitalists and the new who 'suck surplus not
directly but in a furtive way' is the same contrast drawn by the
red-browns of the past.
I am not at all surprised that Matteo would not want to be part of
community that responds to his article by claiming it to be
anti-semitic, who would?
I guess he has received the reaction he desired. Why, I have no idea.
That you are defending the clearly disgusting behavior of your
colleague the other Stefan is a form of gang violence and just
makes bad worse, you should be rebuking your colleague for
debasing this group with such garbage.
If you think that is gang violence you have a very strange idea of
Contact: projekt oekonux.de