Jump to content

Distopije i utopije (u filmu, knjizevnosti, filozofiji i stvarnom zivotu)


Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, noskich said:




Hvala ti za ovo. Poceo sam da gledam u nekom trenutku, pa me nesto prekinulo i nisam dogledao. Fantasticno je to sto rade Kurdi. Jedno od zdravijih (i napacenijih) drustava na svetu.

Link to comment



"And now we have reached that point of social development, where more than enough can exist for all. That is the point that we have reached. And in reaching that point, privilege has now become totally irrational. Hierarchy has become totally irrational. And scarcity today has to be planned. So that most of the plans that are made up in the united states, and i suspect to a great degree in Canada, not to speak of western Europe. are plans designed to provide work for people who shouldn't even be working. We have reached that insanity. We have reached the insanity where a planned economy in the western world, means planning scarcity, so that a vast portion of the technology can be devoted, must be devoted, to means of destruction, not even means of production and domination, but literally means of destruction. In the form of a vast arms economy, in the form of a vast nuclear bomb apparatus, rockets, planes, you name it. Not merely as instruments in engaged, engaging in a cold war, that has now become very luke warm. But also as means, and above all perhaps as means, of diverting the enormous resources of this technology, so that means of waste can be produced, and wasteful jobs created, wasteful professions, wasteful occupations, a wasteful way of life, that is wasteful not only of nature, but of the human spirit.
And here we have come to a key point that I have to emphasize. And that is, that all these forms, and institutions, the patriarchal family, the class society, the profiting (propertied??) system, the state apparatus, and even the city itself for anyone who has seen the cities of the united states particularly, and those of western Europe. have now reached their historical limits. They no longer even in evil perform the function that they traditionally performed. They no longer even act as stabilizing factors and elements in the society. Right now, the patriarchal family is not a source of order however coercive, it is a source literally of disorder. The system cannot even assimilate. Having shriveled from the extended family, to the nuclear family, finally down to the pompous male, it sits there, you know what i mean? Presiding over history, and invoking the system of religion, of authority, and finally of violence. It doesn't even make the bourgeois machinery work, and they themselves have to sit around with clinics, family clinics, child adjustment clinics, a whole system of psychology that has to be applied, psychology to deal with this dinosaur of history. Take it further, the class structure today is now making the economy unworkive, the factory hierarchy is beginning to produce massive sabotage. So that however well or ill designed the car may be, it may collapse not merely because it has been engineered for obsolescence but because there's a monkey wrench lying somewhere in the gas tank. And this has become a massive social liability on the system which goes now into the billions of dollars in the united states. And in terms of the property system leads to one rip off after another. They are now in New York City slowly staffing every single major store with a small army, with devices and a whole industry has emerged to validate the property system in the midst of this sick abundance. With a police system that sits around and scrutinizes and devices and television cameras. And i venture to say in time, there will be more television cameras in stores, than there are any place else. To find out who is taking what. and rightly so, and the worst thing that they find. Is that is is not only the freaks that are coming in, and not only the middle class ladies, with their chauffeurs behind them carrying the basket. Horrors of horrors it is within the bureaucracy itself, and even the guards are stealing. And this is no joke, this is a reality for them. So that the lie detectors, and the guy who interprets the lie detector, will have to be lie detected. So that the propertied system has literally become obscene. And already they sit around with vagueries about how they can go around and give everyone possibly a guaranteed annual income, or somehow provide, give it away, you know, in such a fashion. through coupons, through god knows how. So that we'll still seem to have the structure of scarcity, so that people will be still buyers and sellers, which is what the human being has been reduced to in our system. All of this at least to maintain the fabric. At least to maintain the fabric of a hierarchical society. And this is what the planning is for, this is what they plan.
We have reached the point where, all of these splits now, whatever they did for society, have now become exhausted. They have now reached their historical limits. And most significantly of all not only do these splits threaten to undermine civilization by producing a barbarism, urban, nuclear, or whatever you choose. Or human, and spiritual. But on top of that, these splits threaten to destroy the natural world itself. Because again to return to what i started with, the Promethean spirit of domination. The atomization of human beings and their reduction into objects. And the reduction of the natural world itself into an object to be dominated, to be exploited, to be literally ransacked for the sake of production. An insensate mindless production, defined exclusively by profit, and defined exclusively by the exchange relationship between buyers and sellers. To which the whole human spirit has been reduced today, threatens to undermine the natural world itself. And what i'm getting at here, is that this system is not only harmful because it produces pollutants, but because it is a parasite on the natural world. It is a pollutant. That must devastate the whole natural world if it is permitted to continue its present development. But that present development is its very law of life. Production for the sake of production, it makes no difference what you produce, as long as you can sell it. And since you've got so much to sell, you have to create consumption for the sake of consumption. Which means that if you don't consume, you are not a good citizen. Not only that your psyche has to be organized to find relief from this horror in buying a new dress, or buying a new pair of trousers, or buying a new car, or buying a new home, or refurnishing your home, or adding 3 television sets to 4 television sets, and 3 cars to 2 cars, if you're only stuck with 2 cars. And if you can get a summer home, and an autumn home, and a spring home! that'll settle it for them. And this is inherent in the system, it is not advertising, advertising is merely the expression of a law of life, a dialectic of the social system itself.
These splits have to be healed, and THAT is what anarchism is about. Anarchism is about the healing of these splits. And again, the restoration of a human community. Not going back to the past, the way the professors have been saying. Not stripping ourselves of technology, again the way the professors and academics describe anarchism. That is errant nonsense, errant nonsense. Bakunin and Kropotkin even in the 19th century, not to speak of anarchists now at the close of the 20th century, recognize that technology COULD BE turned from a means of domination, into a means of liberation. That is nonsense that anarchists want to go back to the peasant village, that they just want to go back to horticulture, and simply you know what i mean, the dibbling stick. Forget it, that is rubbish. What anarchists DO say, and this applies to our time more than anything else. Is that the splits have to be healed, and that society now has to be turned into free communities. Based on all that is ecologically viable, in this technology, and also on a highly sophisticated technology. That can be used on a small scale. That can be used to integrate the resources of a community. Into a kind of eco-community. an eco-technology. That will begin to utilize in patterns, the energy resources of the sun and wind, as well as fossil fuels. SO that you can have a balance, harmonious, ecological type of energy system. Tailored to a community, located within a region, or an ecosystem if you like to use ecological language. That does not act as a cancer on the carrying capacity of that ecosystem. That is what anarchists are today advocating. They claim today, and rightly, that all the institutions that in evil, carried us through a civilized form of barbarism, have now to be stripped away, and a true human type of relationship is to be established.
This would entail the decentralization of the cities, which are in their own sense, not the centralizing, but caving in. This would entail human relationships on the basis of personality, not on the basis of inferiority and superiority. Allowing for the diverse characters and individual qualities, integrating into a free community. Which would directly not merely through representatives. Directly. Manage society. We go back again to the Hellenic ideal on the basis of the new technology, and on the basis of a new body of knowledge. And a long history. Of a new type of Polis, which no longer exists in contradiction to the countryside. Which no consists of the assembly of free individuals. Whose working time has been reduced by technology. So that they can now literally appropriate the management of society. In councils and in assemblies, and in communities tailored in terms of size and in terms of technology, and with new technologies. Not going back to the bow and arrow. With new technologies that are now perverted, and whose development is today arrested such as solar power and wind power. To new technology that will harmonize humanities relationship with the natural world. A new psychic and personal relationships, as well as a new integration of free personalities. Which will overcome the splits, between mind and labor. Between conscious and unconscious. And finally, the elimination of all those institutions of hierarchy, and the restoration again of a new animism. A new way of looking at experience, an (Authic?) way (To use Marcus's language) That will restore again, that long legacy in the human experience. The I, Thou relationship and this that, or the I, It relationship.
And this today, is taking place unconsciously, no matter what I have to say, or any other anarchist have to say. Indubitably today, millions of people are begging to rebel. In their very gut. And in the forms of the counter-culture for all its limitations, perversions, one-sidedness's, and all the criticisms you've heard. Nonetheless intuitively. Reflecting the tension, between the exhaustion of what is, the exhaustion of all the institutions that make up what is today, and what could be. In the form of a free Utopian society. What I've described to you, is almost a hereditary vision, of Utopia. That was once dismissed nearly as utopia, and dismissed nearly as vision. The industrial revolution made that vision increasingly possible. And that vision was increasingly spelled out in the form of socialism, and Marxism, and even anarchism. Our own time has now made it necessary. We have now passed from the realm of vision and the realm of possibility, into the realm of necessity. The dictates of ecology itself, impel us to try to actualize that vision. At the peril of either destroying society, or destroying the whole world. The whole world of life, with the monstrous devices we have today. And if the French students could say: "Be practical, do the impossible." I would add to this: "If we don't do the impossible. We will wind up with the unthinkable." Thank You."
- Murray Bookchin
28:25 - 43:00
  • Hvala 1
Link to comment
  • 7 months later...



Vanishing Hippie Utopias

Half a century ago, a legion of idealists dropped out of society and went back to the land, creating a patchwork of utopian communes across Northern California. Here, the last of those rogue souls offer a glimpse of their otherworldly residences—and the tail end of a grand social experiment.

Edited by noskich
  • +1 1
Link to comment
  • 3 months later...




Zlatko Paković, Danas


U decembru 2019, televizijska mreža Al Jazeera English priredila je razgovor starog reditelja Kena Louča (1936), koji snima filmove o položaju radničke klase u Engleskoj, i mladog pisca Eduara Luja (1992) koji piše romane o položaju radničke klase u Francuskoj. Video zapis ovog važnog razgovora može se gledati na Youtubeu, a objavljen je i njegov transkript kao knjiga. Knjiga je prevedena i na naš jezik: Ken Loach & Edouard Louis, „Dijalog o umjetnosti i politici“ (Multimedijalni institut, Zagreb, 2021).


Na samom početku razgovora konstatovano je da se država i u Engleskoj i u Francuskoj povukla sa svoje bitne funkcije socijalne brige o nezaposlenima i radno nesposobnima, da su zakoni o radu prerađeni tako da štite isključivo prava vlasnika i privatnog poseda, da su uništena radnička udruženja, da je razorena radnička kultura, da su sindikati rastočeni, da su partije levice izgubile svoju oštricu i orijentaciju, pre svega, svoje političke ciljeve predstavljajući jezikom desnice, te da sam socijalni sistem funkcioniše po principu kaznenog sistema. 


U bogatim društvima Francuske i Engleske, glad i strah od gladi, oružja su vlastodržaca i posednika. Ukratko, „ili ćete umreti od gladi, ili ćete umreti (od rada) na poslu“.


Rad je postao nasilje. Tražiti posao – mazohistički je potez. Nemati posao – ubistvena je situacija. Radeći da biste preživeli, trpite nasilje radnih uslova i radnog procesa, naime, pristajete na nasilje, učestvujete u njemu i, neminovno, nevoljno, postajete nasilnik.


Nasilje rada, u nizu svojih reprodukcija, po liniji traumatičnog nezadovoljstva radnog čoveka, pretvara se u krajnjoj fazi u nasilje u intimnoj sferi: 


Vraćate se kući s posla, na kojem trpite nasilje, jer ste u podređenom položaju, jer radite ono što vam se ne radi, ono što morate, a da od toga jedva možete da podmirite bazične potrebe, hladni pogon svog života; dakle, vraćate se s posla kući (koja najčešće i nije vaša, ili uskoro neće biti vaša) pod konstantnim stresom (od posla i od gubitka posla, u strahu od smrti od siromaštva, u strahu od siromaštva vaših najdražih), „vraćate se kući iscrpljeni, postajete agresivni prema osobi koju volite. Ako se malo kasnije zapitate 'ali zašto sam bio toliko agresivan?', postajete svjesni da je preko vas prošao neki oblik agresivnosti, nasilja, koji nije dio vas, jer je to nasilje fluks koji je iskoristio vaše tijelo kao kanal“, kao provodnik.


Pri tome, nije jednostavno postati svestan ovog tuđeg učinka nasilja koje počini osnovnim svojim radom izrabljeni, osnovnim radom omalovaženi čovek, jer živi u kulturi kojom vlada vlastodržački i vlasnički diskurs: za svoj položaj, za svoje siromaštvo, za svoju nesigurnost, sam je odgovorn. Siromaštvo je „njegova krivnja, jer nije bio dobar u školi, nije dovoljno radio...“ Srami se svog položaja, nesigurnosti i sirotinje, jer je sam sebe i svoje bližnje dotle doveo svojom lenjošću, svojom glupošću, svojim neradom, svojim nemarom, svojim manjkavim ljudskim osobinama i radnim sposobnostima!


Šta činiti? Kako promeniti ovu nehumanu situaciju koja se svakim časom sve više i više učvršćuje?

Priprema je socijalno poreklo, kao živo blato. Njen diskurs fundira školstvo, cementiraju ga mediji, a prihvatile su ga i partije levice kao duh vremena.


„Mislim da se moramo riješiti onih koji su na vlasti! Oni se nikada neće promijeniti“, veli Ken Louč. 


Da bi se svrgnuli oni na vlasti, najpre treba svrgnuti njihov diskurs koji je dobio status opšteg, zajedničkog diskursa, kao da je sam temelj onog što se naziva res publica, iako je, zapravo, dinamit pod osnovama te stvari.


Eduar Luj kaže: „Ljevica i dalje govori o produktivnosti...“ 


Dakle, levica je prigrlila krucijalne želje nehumane ekonomije, ona se dodvorava pojmovima produktivnosti, efikasnosti, tržišne utakmice, konkurentnosti... 


Od starog pojma o radu, koji je čisto gubljenje vremena i ubijanje ljudskog bića na rate, mora se preći na novi pojam o radu, a iz njega – k novoj koncepciji rada, utemeljenoj na humanoj osnovi. To je prevashodni zadatak levice. Louč veli: „Želimo sistem u kojem će na vidjelo izaći najbolje od ljudi.“


Današnji sistem proizvodnje, političke ekonomije i politike, na videlo iz ljudi izvlači ono najgore. 


Bogatstvo bogatih zavisi od bede siromašnih. Kultura bogatih zavisi od nekulture siromašnih. Samopouzdanje bogatih zavisi od klasne nesvesti siromašnih. Uzoritost bogatih zavisi od toga što njihovim jezikom govore siromašni. 


Levica mora da progovori svojim jezikom, jezikom jarke konfrontacije.


Evo jasnog primera zamke u koju je levica upala! Uvek kažemo: branimo slobodu medija! Stvar je u tome da kažemo: stvorimo slobodu medija! Zašto?


Zato što nema slobodnih medija. Zato što su svi mediji u rukama desnice. Braneći njihovu slobodu, branimo prava desnice. To je vrzino kolo, u koje se uplela levica, a kolovođa joj je jezik desnice, koji štiti ideje i želje vlasničke klase i zida odbranu njenih privilegija. 


Da bi se manjina bogatih tovila, siromašna većina mora da umire od gladi. Da bi se ova manjina osećala sigurno, mase moraju da grcaju u strepnji za puki opstanak. Da bi kapitalisti i vlastodršci bili opušteni, mase moraju da glođu teskobu. 


Zato jezik konfrontacije, etika konfrontacije i estetika konfrontacije.



  • +1 2
  • Hvala 2
Link to comment
  • 2 months later...
  • 6 months later...
  • 3 months later...
  • 3 months later...
  • 3 months later...



"[S]everal billion people are deprived of access to basic goods and services. More than 40 percent of the human population cannot afford nutritious food; 50 percent do not have safely managed sanitation facilities; 70 percent do not have necessary health care. [... I]n the United States, nearly half the population cannot afford health care; in the United Kingdom, 4.3 million children live in poverty; in the European Union, 90 million people face economic insecurity. These patterns of deprivation are shot through with brutal inequalities of race and gender. [...] The key defining feature of capitalism that we must confront is that it is, as a condition for its very existence, fundamentally antidemocratic. [... D]espite extremely high levels of aggregate production—and levels of energy and material use that are driving ecological pressures well beyond safe and sustainable boundaries—deprivation remains widespread within the capitalist world economy. Capitalism produces too much, yes, but also not enough of the right stuff. Access to essential goods and services is limited by commodification; and because capital seeks to cheapen labor at every opportunity, particularly in the periphery, the consumption of the working classes is constrained. [...] If the workers and farmers had collective control over the means of production, they easily would be able to ensure what Kropotkin referred to as “well-being for all.” Mass poverty, deprivation, and the artificial scarcities that characterize capitalism could be ended more or less immediately. [... W]e must achieve democratic control over finance and production, as Kropotkin argued, and now organize it around the double goal of well-being and ecology. This requires that we distinguish, as Kropotkin did, between the socially necessary production that clearly needs to increase for social progress, and the destructive and less-necessary forms of production that urgently need to be scaled down. [... F]irst we must expand and decommodify universal public services [including] health care and education, yes, but also housing, public transit, energy, water, Internet, child care, recreation facilities, and nutritious food for all. [...] Second, we must establish ambitious public works programs, to build renewable energy capacity, insulate homes, produce and install efficient appliances, restore ecosystems, and innovate socially necessary and ecologically efficient technologies. [...] Third, we must introduce a public job guarantee, empowering people to participate in these vital collective projects, doing meaningful, socially necessary work with workplace democracy and living wages. [...] Next, as we secure and improve the socially and ecologically necessary sectors, we also need to scale down socially less-necessary forms of production. [...] Finally, we urgently need to cut the excess purchasing power of the rich using wealth taxes and maximum income ratios. [...] As even the influential capitalist economist John Maynard Keynes acknowledged—and as socialist economists have always understood—anything we can actually do, in terms of productive capacity, we can pay for. [... E]nvironmentalists must foreground the social policies I have listed above, organizing to abolish the economic insecurity that leads working-class communities and many unions to fear the negative ramifications that radical ecological action may otherwise have on their livelihoods. But the unions also need to move. [... P]rogressive movements in the core must unite with, support and defend radical and anticolonial social movements in the Global South. The workers and peasants of the periphery contribute 90 percent of the labor that fuels the capitalist world economy, and the South holds the majority of the world’s arable land and critical resources"

Link to comment



""We’re now in servitude, Varoufakis argues, to the fiefdoms of our new global masters, Lord Zuckerberg of Facelandia and Sir Musk of the rotten borough of X. [... I]n 2015, at the height of the Greek debt crisis, Varoufakis was catapulted from academic obscurity to minister of finance. He said – loudly and repeatedly – that the punitive terms the banks wanted to impose on Greece would lead to catastrophic austerity. A majority of Greeks voted to back him, and for a short time his strategy of simply refusing to agree to the IMF and EU’s terms led to a tense standoff. Right until the moment prime minister Aléxis Tsípras, the man who appointed him, accepted them. Either the only possible action to prevent the country going bankrupt, or a treacherous betrayal, depending on who you choose to believe. [...] In some ways, it’s a relief to have a politician – any politician – talking about this stuff. Because in Varoufakis’s telling, this isn’t just new technology. This is the world grappling with an entirely new economic system and therefore political power. [...] Jeff (Bezos, the owner of Amazon) doesn’t produce capital, he argues. He charges rent. Which isn’t capitalism, it’s feudalism. And us? We’re the serfs. “Cloud serfs”, so lacking in class consciousness that we don’t even realise that the tweeting and posting that we’re doing is actually building value in these companies. [...] The US kept interest rates at near zero from 2009 to 2022. This encouraged business models that promised world-changing outcomes, even if they were completely unrealistic and/or hostile to the public interest (eg the gig economy, self-driving cars, crypto, metaverse, AI). This came at a time of no regulation of tech and an accepted culture in business that said executives should maximise shareholder value at expense of everything else (eg democracy, public health, public safety)… had rates been at 5% the past 14 years, I doubt very much that the gig economy, self-driving cars, crypto, metaverse or AI would have gotten even 10% as much funding.” [...] “In big tech we face a totalising power that in key respects disqualifies itself from being understood as capitalism, but rather as a wholly new form of governance by the few over the many.” [...] The right, Varoufakis says, “thinks of capitalism as like a natural system, a bit like the atmosphere”. Whereas the left “think of themselves as people created by the universe in order to bring socialism over capitalism. I am telling you: you know what, you missed it. You missed it. Somebody killed capitalism. We have something worse.” [... Y]ou have these people taking over the anti-establishment mantle in a way that is functional to the interests of the establishment. I see no difference between Orbán, the Polish government, Trump, Farage, Johnson, Mussolini. [...] His views on the conflict are practically indistinguishable from Nigel Farage’s, rehearsing the same far right-meets-far left “horseshoe” rhetoric about doing a deal with Putin, and Crimea not really being Ukraine. But on the subject of technofeudalism, I could listen to him all day."

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...