1. At a public talk someone asks you, "okay, I understand what you reject, but I wonder what you are for? What institutions do you want that you think will be better than what we have, for the economy, polity, gender, race, ecology, or whatever you think is central to have vision for?”
The Great Recession, just like the Great Depression three generations ago, is a major demand crisis leading to mass unemployment and underemployment. It won’t be solved until the collective fruits of social productivity finally accrue to the employed and unemployed instead of managers and financiers. This requires massive fiscal redistribution from the tiny élites to the precarious multitudes. Free public health and education, basic income and leisure expansion, green jobs and new labor and property laws are the first-aid tools to address the crisis and ferry us toward a postcapitalist society, where corporations and investment banks are dismantled, credit is socialized, copyright is abolished, culture and knowledge are freely shared, the global economy is regionalized, food distribution networks are localized, energy production is decentralized, and political power is federalized, in regional and transnational federations of autonomous cities and liberated lands.
2. 다음으로, 같은 행사에 참석한 누군가가 "당신이 하는 일을 왜 합니까? 즉, 당신은 우리에게 말하고 있고, 당신이 글을 쓰고, 정리할 수도 있다는 것을 알고 있는데, 당신은 왜 하는 것입니까? 당신은 무엇을 합니까?"라고 묻습니다. 내년, 혹은 향후 XNUMX년 동안의 목표는 무엇입니까?
Because I believe in real freedom, social equality, climate justice, and in activism, organizing, direct action to achieve these ends within the next decade.
3. 당신은 집에 있는데 새로운 조직이 국제적으로 전국 지부 연합 등을 결성하려고 한다는 이메일을 받았습니다. 이 노력에 동참할 것을 요청합니다. 나는 이미 참여하고 있는 나머지 사람들과 함께 그것을 실현하기 위해 나의 에너지를 바칠 것이라고 말할 수 있는 그럴듯한 조건을 상상할 수 있습니까? 그렇다면 그 조건은 무엇입니까? 아니면 의제 내용과 참가자 구성에 관계없이 아이디어가 지금 또는 앞으로도 가치가 없다고 생각하십니까? 그렇다면 왜 그렇습니까?
Yes, I would join a revolutionary organization of some kind if: it were pink, black, green, i.e. postcommunist; it spoke to and organized the precarious, women, poor, immigrants at the european/ continental level; if its theory and practice were rooted in a radical vision of what the informational economy can be and immaterial labor can do to transform society and defend the biosphere; if its final aim wouldn’t be the emancipation of the industrial proletariat, but global climate justice for the reconstruction of urban and rural society meeting social needs and thermodynamic constraints. Redistribution of wealth and power toward the precarious, growth of immaterial knowledge, cultural enrichment of society and massive expansion of leisure are fundamental social preconditions for the horizontal eco-social design of a resilient postcapitalist society, freeing the time to pursue ecohacktive and permacultural activities, giving the time and money back to precarized people to work for environmental remediation and think collectively about their own future, cutting the need for quick consumption and instant satisfaction.
4. 운동, 프로젝트, 우리 조직을 조직하려는 노력이 현재 미래의 씨앗을 구현해야 한다고 생각하십니까? 그렇지 않다면 왜 그렇습니까? 그렇다면, 당신이 선호하는 조직에 어떤 영향이 미칠 것이라고 대략적으로 말할 수 있습니까?
Since I joined the antiglobalization movement a decade ago, and then with other fellow european radicals started the euromayday network, I have always looked at the t+1, which means seizing emerging social trends in the labor market and the economy, in order to plan and enact innovative forms of media activism and direct action syndicalism. Most of all, it means rejecting the ideological conservatism that has too often been the default response to neoliberalism of existing radical traditions. Since ideological differences dividing reds (a diehard breed in europe, but blossoming in South America) from greens (a rising force in Europe and North America, altho too often co-opted by dawning green capitalism), and – to a lesser degree – autonomists (those with the best new theory, but often too leninist for their own good) from anarchists (more in tune with the cyberlibertarian zeitgeit, but hobbled by their desire of unattainable political purity) are still too great to create a new radical political ideology that supersedes both socialism and anarchism, I think a revolutionary biosyndicalism based on natural and digital commons, that organizes people in communities, cities, workplaces, environments, probably stands a greater chance to see the day, altho it probably takes a longer time to structure itself than a new political movement (unions move at a slower speed than parties). We need something like the 21st equivalent of the IWW in early 1900s or the CIO in the 1930s to fight for global redistribution during the Great Recession. Existing unions are not gonna do it on their own, since they are too moderate, and mostly tied to the industrial fordism of yore; they have yet to come to terms with pink collars, knowledge workers, and indeed the whole precariat, which they treat either with paternalism or suspicion.
5. 이번 인터뷰에 응한 이유는 무엇인가요? 다른 사람들은 왜 대답하지 않았다고 생각하시나요?
Because it’s the 3rd reminder;)
ZNetwork는 독자들의 관대함을 통해서만 자금을 조달합니다.
후원