Friday, September 3, 2021

 Well, I’m with you with the analysis of our brittle, spiritually denuded, out of joint /out-of-balance... for a while my blog had the subtitle ‘very far from grace’ which is how I feel about the way I live my life. The internet has been a disaster for me and then when my wife encouraged me to get a smartphone that was like more or less injecting smack direct into my veins.

However I think the truth is we don’t know how pre-industrial people felt.  They lived closer to nature and natural cycles, daylight hours, the seasons – but they were also at the mercy of them.  Terrible weather or pestilence would be catastrophic.  They might have had mythology that made them feel integrated with reality in a way that was psychologically beneficial – but they also had superstitions, fear of evil spirits, scapegoats and sacrifices.

With pre-industrial societies, for the majority of the population it was a grim struggle for basic survival and shelter etc.

 Going back isn’t an option anyway.

 I have been rereading Shulamith Firestone’s The Dialectic of Sex which I first read when I was 19 -  came across these passages... 

“Reproduction of the species cost women dearly, not only emotionally, psychologically, culturally but even in strictly material (physical) terms: before recent methods of contraception, continuous childbirth led to constant ‘female trouble’, early ageing, and death.”

 In other words, for half the population, the hunter-gatherer life wasn’t particularly Arcadian.

 Shulamith Firestone thought the only way forward was to go through the technological

 “Humanity can no longer afford to remain in the transitional stage between simple animal existence and full control of nature. And we are much closer to a major evolutionary jump, indeed, to direction of our own evolution, than we are to a return to the animal kingdom through which we evolved. Thus in view of accelerating technology, a revolutionary ecological movement would have the same aim as the feminist movement: control of the new technology for human purposes, the establishment of a new equilibrium between man and the artificial environment he is creating, to replace the destroyed ‘natural’ balance”

 

2 comments:

  1. Leaving aside Firestone's thought (which I have complex feelings about), I'm deeply suspicious of this 'can't fight the future' mentality, which I think is both morally wrong (or at least avoidant) and incorrect ('progress', of any kind, is not a straight line.) More specifically, I think that the immediate future will not be an expansion of the last few decades' digital conquering of space and time, but a rapid and sharp contraction.

    For one thing, Moore's Law, that driver of the past half-century's tech gains, is effectively dead: https://www.theregister.com/2021/08/05/moores_law_what_next/ For another, the primary funder of social media and the Internet, algorithmic advertising, increasingly seems like a ticking time bomb. https://www.wired.com/story/ad-tech-could-be-the-next-internet-bubble/

    I doubt the entire digital apparatus we've built will collapse, but I do think that a great reexamination of how and why we use it is coming, if for no other reason that the majority of what we use it for is far more fragile than we think.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Simon you can join Grimes and me in the movement for the rights of the no mobile phone people. She twitted once she didn´t use a phone, I replied and told her i didn´t either and she said we should fight together for us phoneless people. Unfortunately that twitter account has robbed by some jihadist guy, and i lost proof i actually twitted with Grimes.

    ReplyDelete

 this blog now closed because of problems with the feed - archive remains here but posting resumes here at Thinkige Kru 2 https://thinkigek...