[iDC] More on Peak Biopower
Martin Lucas
mlucas at igc.org
Fri Jul 10 17:04:22 UTC 2009
Peak Biopower
In a recent post I postulated a potential counter-force to the
incorporation of humanity into the global market, into the states
that support it, a force of consciousness. My thinking was based on
the idea that in the same way that the global ecology is
understandable as a closed system, where resources are being depleted
(hence the petroleum analogy) so we could understand that there are a
diminishing number of human beings who have not yet been incorporated
into modern regimes of economic participation, and the kind of
hegemonic control it uses. In the previous post I said, “Haven’t we
reached a point where that biopower reserve is starting to shrink?”
I also postulated a role for the variety of ‘new media’ technologies,
many of them centered around the cellphone, as the main route to a
connection to a global information network for an increasingly large
percentage of the world’s population. If one imagines that linking
to that network, with its various capabilities for sharing text,
images, and audio-visual material is something like access to a
public sphere, then there is the possibility that that participation
is ‘political’. Since the discussion thread had roots in a
discussion of the ‘Twitter Revolution’ in Iran, this is a reasonable
assumption.
One of the questions that the notion of peak biopower opens up is
that of class consciousness, or at least political consciousness.
There are several other key questions I think. Does capitalism need
a biopower reserve, a kind of ‘consciousness standing reserve’ in
the same way that it needs a ‘reserve army of the unemployed’ and a
natural resource reserve to be able to function? Another question
that seems key to me is one around categorization, algorithms and
notions of the political.
Jodi Dean on another thread refers to efforts around ICT’s and
education in the third world which seem to be ‘a factory for
producing the subjects of communicative capitalism.’ I cant say that
is not happening. I referred to experiences I had, specifically
working with an NGO with communications technologies in Africa. But
what I am seeing is more self-organized effort and choices. I don’t
think these can be condemned out of hand, and what is more, it is
possible that those subjects will be resistant ones. Jodi also notes
in the Recursive Publics thread, “Whether or not people take
advantage of these publics to develop counter-hegemonic discourses
and new political powers is uncertain, it’s not implied by the form
of the technology, but it is enabled by it.”
I do suggest that capitalism will have big problems operating in a
world where a majority of humanity is organized in this way, a way
that puts larger and larger numbers of people in the position of
market, audience, and ‘produser’ My thought is that publics will
emerge, often from unexpected places. Here is an excerpt of a story
about a government mandated plan for inserting readable ID chips in
all cattle in the US:
“ Rebellion on the Range Over a Cattle ID Plan” (Erik Eckholm, NYT
June 28, 2009)
My main beef is that these proposed rules were developed by people
sitting in their offices with no real knowledge of animal husbandry
and small farms,” said Genell Pridgen, an owner of Rainbow Meadow
Farms in Snow Hill, N.C., which rotates sheep, cattle, pigs, turkeys
and chickens among three properties and sells directly to consumers
and co-ops. “I feel these regulations are draconian,” Ms. Pridgen
said, “and that lobbyists from corporate mega-agribusiness designed
this program to destroy traditional small sustainable agriculture.”
Paul Hamby, owner of Hamby Dairy Supply in Maysville, Mo., and a
vocal opponent of the plan, said, “It is very much an economic and
class warfare issue. Fifty years ago,” Mr. Hamby said, “hundreds of
thousands of farms raised hogs, and now very few players have control
of the market. I believe one of the reasons for this plan is to
consolidate the cattle industry.”
In other words, these are people who if one is categorizing by class
might be small business people, petit bourgeoisie, or farmers, who
define themselves in terms of class conflict -- a new kind of
conflict that is very much part of the information age. The article
suggests very much that they see the chip ID plan as being applied to
people next. A key point is that these people represent the tiny
percentage of American agriculture which is not beholden to
agribusiness. This is central, in the sense that they represent in
some way an emerging ‘mode of production’ and this gives them a
position in some way outside the corporate mode that controls most of
US agriculture and (although with increasingly diminished success)
food politics.
The other part of the Peak Biopower thesis is that these two
movements, one of a world where peasants are disappearing and the
other where global ecology is threatened are related; both affect
global capitalism. I believe that capitalism as a system is one that
must be buffered to work. It needs to be a subset of a larger world.
As reserves dwindle, the chaotic aspect of the system gets more
so. I used the analogy of ‘peak oil’ with its extreme price
volatility, but we have seen the same thing with many many
commodities recently. The other side of this coin is that as more
and more esoteric derivative financial instruments are developed for
a broader and broader variety of commodities the chaos increases as
well. In fact, the US government is actually planning a “crack down”
on futures trading. “U.S. Considers Curbs on Speculative Trading of
Oil”, NYT July 8, 2009.
On the Cusp of Shared Volition
To quote from Sean Cubitt’s post:
“If we understand the standing-reserve as biopolitical and
commodifying, we can add some terms: it concerns averages, and it
concerns whole-number enumeration. It thus misses both the
specificity and the ’starting’ micro-conditions and so opens itself
up to cascading chaotic and emergent structures in spite of itself.”
Chaos theory isn’t a modality of the state, as far as I, a non-
mathematician, can tell. Mandlebrot started with cotton prices.
Lorenz with weather patterns. It can be used also to predict orbits
in three body systems. Anyway, we’re talking about situations that
are deterministic (and not completely random).
More significant for systems of control, or at least of management,
is the search algorithm. The current state of the art offers us, as
users/consumers more and more sophisticated algorithms, which will
identify our future behavior based on our past practice. It is
interesting because it derives information from a more active
relationship than classic statistics, combining the large numbers of
surveys with the pinpoint accuracy of focus groups and other
marketing tools. And of course, the use of algorithms is billed as a
service to the customer. You can imagine yourself as a well of
subjectivity. That subjectivity is the final gold mine of
capitalism in a country like the the US that has been heavily
exploited for market potential.
Modern electoral politics are built around demographics, issues and
statistical assumptions. They are also built around internet-based
fundraising.
No matter how these systems function, however, they are not politics
imagined as a liberatory moment of action. However, while the
algorithm is still not politics, it might occupy the indeterminate
edge where politics meet systems of control. Somewhere on the other
side of the border might be people using Twitter to organize street
demos as in Teheran.
Algorith as Capitalist Utopia
The statement behind the algorithm would have to go something like
this: It is possible to organize a global economy along capitalist
lines. We will make markets as free as possible and organize
production and distribution by using new internet tools to arrange
the production and distribution of goods in such a way that the
desires of consumers are linked painlessly and effortlessly to the
productive capacities of global industry.
My suggestion here is that as the system gets more organized and
gains predictive power, it will become more chaotic, and less able to
prevent the kind of chaos it seeks to avoid.
In terms of governance, the 21st century state cannot capture
volition, although information management tools allow it to get close.
I think that the arrival of ‘peak biopower’ means more extensive
(extensively brutal and extensively sophisticated) efforts at global
control and management. I also believe that it is a moment we have
to engage with.
Marty Lucas
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.thing.net/pipermail/idc/attachments/20090710/ecfbaf85/attachment-0001.htm
More information about the iDC
mailing list