| ... |
... |
@@ -1,0
+1,59 @@ |
|
1 |
+=1AC Deleuzian Graffiti= |
|
2 |
+ |
|
3 |
+ |
|
4 |
+https://www.fastcocreate.com/1682808/coldplay-tastefully-rocks-comic-book-fans-faces-off-with-mylo-xyloto |
|
5 |
+. |
|
6 |
+We begin with a story set in a Mark Osborne's "Silencia", a world without color ruled by Major Minus, a cruel dictator who controls the population through media and propaganda. Using an army of grey "silencers", his is aim is to take color off the streets, contorting society into believing only evil can come through expression and difference. The story follows Mylo, a soldier in an army tasked to hunt and track down "sparkers", people who have the power to project light and embed the ashen streets with color and vibrance. He encounters Xyloto, the sparker most wanted by Major Minus and his dark regime. Deciding not to capture him out of curiosity, Mylo discovers his own sparker abilities and is compelled to leave the police force. Feeling alone for all of his life, he now finds solace through the imprinting of luminous graffiti on the walls otherwise destined to be colorless. Along with Xyloto he joins the Sparker movement and discovers meaning and value in fighting against an oppressive regime. With each stroke of light, he falls in love with himself and his creation. The graffiti becomes more than art, it represents peace; a chance at a new future. It represents freedom. The government struggles to hold back his masterpieces. |
|
7 |
+ |
|
8 |
+Although his present is bleak, dead, and without hope, every luminous imprint brings new colors into the world. With each handstroke, a dream of revolution is painted. |
|
9 |
+ |
|
10 |
+ |
|
11 |
+====With each passing day, the story of Mylo Xyloto seems less like a comic-book fiction and more and more like an ominous prophesy. Militarized police, profit warfare, government tracking and the silencing of whistleblowers constitute the lived experience of an incapacitated population. The Orwellian state depicted in the story bursts from the graphic novel and becomes a gloomy foreshadowing of a future reality. Havens 15' |
|
12 |
+Ali Havens |
|
13 |
+"17 Ways The Government Exceeds Orwell's Fears About Big Brother" December 31, 2015 |
|
14 |
+Ali Havens was weekly co-host for the nationally-syndicaded, pro-liberty talk show Free Talk Live, and worked as a writer and co-host for Adam Vs. The Man. Her projects include ALP, a Liberty Radio Network podcast, and she has 4 years as a Free State Project participant in New Hampshire |
|
15 |
+http://libertyupward.com/ways-the-us-government-equals-or-exceeds-george-orwells-fears-about-big-brother/ |
|
16 |
+George Washington said it best when he described government in this way: "Government is not reason, it is not eloquence — it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action." Today, irresponsible action seems to be the only thing the government is capable of. How far we have come from the constitutional Republic George Washington fought for, and many others died for. Here is a list of things our government is doing to "we the people~|, that violates our rights in the same manner, or worse, than the horrific government of George Orwell's classic dystopian novel. 1984. 1.) The government searches your trash image: http://libertyupward.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/searching-the-trash.jpg government-woorkers-searching-the-trash In Seattle, wasting food will now earn you a scarlet letter — well, a scarlet tag, to be more accurate. The bright red tag, posted on a garbage bin, tells everyone who sees it that you've violated a new city law that makes it illegal to put food into trash cans. "I'm sure neighbors are going to see these on their other neighbors' cans," says Rodney Watkins, a lead driver for Recology CleanScapes, a waste contractor for the city. He's on the front lines of enforcing these rules. ~~read more~~ 2.) The government tracks the ~~your~~ location of your cellphone image: http://libertyupward.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/stingray-surveillance.jpg government-operated-stingray-surveillance A few months ago, EFF warned of a secretive new surveillance tool being used by the FBI in cases around the country commonly referred to as a "Stingray." Recently, more information on the device has come to light and it makes us even more concerned than before. The device, which acts as a fake cell phone tower, essentially allows the government to electronically search large areas for a particular cell phone's signal—sucking down data on potentially thousands of innocent people along the way. At the same time, law enforcement has attempted use them while avoiding many of the traditional limitations set forth in the Constitution, like individualized warrants. This is why we called the tool "an unconstitutional, all-you-can-eat data buffet." ~~read more~~ 3.) The government can see through the walls of your home image: http://libertyupward.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/sensor-sees-through-walls.jpg sensor-sees-through-walls WASHINGTON — At least 50 U.S. law enforcement agencies have secretly equipped their officers with radar devices that allow them to effectively peer through the walls of houses to see whether anyone is inside, a practice raising new concerns about the extent of government surveillance. Those agencies, including the FBI and the U.S. Marshals Service, began deploying the radar systems more than two years ago with little notice to the courts and no public disclosure of when or how they would be used. The technology raises legal and privacy issues because the U.S. Supreme Court has said officers generally cannot use high-tech sensors to tell them about the inside of a person's house without first obtaining a search warrant. The radars work like finely tuned motion detectors, using radio waves to zero in on movements as slight as human breathing from a distance of more than 50 feet. They can detect whether anyone is inside of a house, where they are and whether they are moving. ~~read more~~ 4.) The government attacks leakers who tell you about the illegal things the government does image: http://libertyupward.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Daniel-Ellisberg.jpg Daniel-Ellisberg The Obama administration has been carrying out an unprecedented crackdown on whistleblowers, particularly on those who have divulged information that relates to national security. The Espionage Act, enacted during the first World War to punish Americans who aided the enemy, had ~~has~~ only been used three times in its history to try government officials accused of leaking classified information — until the Obama administration. Since 2009, the administration has used the act to prosecute six government officials. Meet the whistleblowers. ~~read more~~ 5.) The government tortures image: http://libertyupward.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Cheney-Obama-Torture.jpg Cheney-Obama-Torture Human experimentation was a core feature of the CIA's torture program. The experimental nature of the interrogation and detention techniques is clearly evident in the Senate Intelligence Committee's executive summary of its investigative report, despite redactions (insisted upon by the CIA) to obfuscate the locations of these laboratories of cruel science and the identities of perpetrators. At the helm of this human experimentation project were two psychologists hired by the CIA, James Mitchell and Bruce Jessen. They designed interrogation and detention protocols that they and others applied to people imprisoned in the agency's secret "black sites." In its response to the Senate report, the CIA justified its decision to hire the duo: "We believe their expertise was so unique that we would have been derelict had we not sought them out when it became clear that CIA would be heading into the uncharted territory of the program." Mitchell and Jessen's qualifications did not include interrogation experience, specialized knowledge about Al Qaeda or relevant cultural or linguistic knowledge. What they had was Air Force experience in studying the effects of torture on American prisoners of war, as well as a curiosity about whether theories of "learned helplessness" derived from experiments on dogs might work on human enemies. To implement those theories, Mitchell and Jessen oversaw or personally engaged in techniques intended to produce "debility, disorientation and dread." Their "theory" had a particular means-ends relationship that is not well understood, as Mitchell testily explained in an interview on Vice News: "The point of the bad cop is to get the bad guy to talk to the good cop." In other words, "enhanced interrogation techniques" (the Bush administration's euphemism for torture) do not themselves produce useful information; rather, they produce the condition of total submission that will facilitate extraction of actionable intelligence. ~~read more~~ 6.) The government wants to control what you say image: http://libertyupward.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Free-Speech-Zone-Bundy-Ranch.jpg Free-Speech-Zone-Bundy-Ranch When protesters arrived in Bunkerville last week to join rancher Cliven Bundy's battle against the federal government, they came angry. They were angry about how the Bureau of Land Management was treating Bundy and his family, whose cattle feeding on public land were being rounded up because of his refusal to pay grazing fees over a 20-year period. But many of them seemed even more upset about what they saw as the trampling of their First Amendment right to free speech. They're not alone. Some First Amendent supporters say the "free speech zones" like the ones the BLM set up — and later dismantled after public outrage — are intended to stifle rather than encourage debate. The federal land agency said that all other areas in the 1,200-square-mile Gold Butte closure area were off-limits to people for stating their opinions. Regardless of the purpose, advocates say such zones are an inappropriate infringement of free speech. ~~read more~~ 7.) The government spies on all your internet activity image: http://libertyupward.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/NSA-all-seeing-eye.jpg NSA-all-seeing-eye George Orwell's fictional Big Brother monitoring everyone's lives is "nothing" compared to surveillance today, U.S. secrets leaker Edward Snowden says on TV. "Great Britain's George Orwell warned us of the danger of this kind of information," Snowden says, referring to Orwell's dystopian novel "Nineteen Eighty-Four," about a superstate in a world of perpetual war and omnipresent government surveillance that persecutes individualism and independent thinking as "thoughtcrimes." "The types of collection in the book — microphones and video cameras, TVs that watch us — are nothing compared to what we have available today," Snowden says in broadcast excerpts released in advance of a recorded Christmas message to air on Britain's Channel 4 at 4:15 p.m. (11:15 a.m. EDT). "We have sensors in our pockets that track us everywhere we go," he says, apparently referring to cellphones. "Think about what this means for the privacy of the average person. ~~read more~~ 8.) The government is fighting endless wars in your name and handing you and your children the bill image: http://libertyupward.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/endless-war.jpg endless-war Long before Americans were introduced to the new 9/11 era super-villains called ISIS and Khorasan, senior Obama officials were openly and explicitly stating that America's "war on terror," already 12 years old, would last at least another decade. At first, they injected these decrees only anonymously; in late 2012, The Washington Post – disclosing the administration's secret creation of a "disposition matrix" to decide who should be killed, imprisoned without charges, or otherwise "disposed" of – reported these remarkable facts: Among senior Obama administration officials, there is a broad consensus that such operations are likely to be extended at least another decade. Given the way al-Qaida continues to metastasize, some officials said no clear end is in sight. . . . That timeline suggests that the United States has reached only the midpoint of what was once known as the global war on terrorism." In May, 2013, the Senate Armed Services Committee held a hearing on whether it should revise the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF). A committee member asked a senior Pentagon official, Assistant Secretary Michael Sheehan, how long the war on terror would last; his reply: "At least 10 to 20 years." At least. A Pentagon spokesperson confirmed afterward "that Sheehan meant the conflict is likely to last 10 to 20 more years from today — atop the 12 years that the conflict has already lasted." As Spencer Ackerman put it: "Welcome to America's Thirty Years War," one which – by the Obama administration's own reasoning – has "no geographic limit." ~~read more~~ 9.) The government uses x-rays to search you and if you refuse they touch your private parts image: http://libertyupward.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/TSA-x-ray-molestation.jpg TSA-x-ray-molestation—by-the-government If you want to get on an airplane in America today, you either have to allow TSA security officials to gawk at your exposed body using the new full body scanners that literally show "everything", or you must submit to the new "enhanced pat-downs". These pat-downs are so intrusive that many of those who have experienced them are using the term "sexual assault". The truth is that TSA officials have been instructed to start using the fronts of their hands to feel the outlines of male and female genitalia during these pat-downs. Not only that, but instead of going over the clothing, in many instances it is being reported that TSA officials are actually reaching down the pants and up the skirts of air travelers. Some TSA officials are doing this hundreds of times a day, and they do not put on clean gloves each time they perform an examination. This is what America has sunk to. Today, in the "land of the free and the home of the brave", Americans are groped like farm animals by tyrannical thugs who get to do pretty much whatever they want with us. Things have gotten so bizarre that now even a columnist for Forbes magazine is calling for the TSA to be abolished. The following are 7 TSA horror stories that are almost too shocking to believe. But all of them are actually true…. ~~read more~~ 10.) The government is monitoring, encrypting and storing nearly every you make in public Recent reports published by WikiLeaks have revealed that the US government is using highly advanced spyware to watch its own citizens. The system, called TrapWire, allegedly accesses all surveillance cameras nationwide and sends collected data to a main database, where the images are stored. RT's Marina Portnaya reveals more about the mysterious software. 11.) The government uses unmanned drones to monitor you from above, all the time A new camera developed by the Pentagon's research arm was highlighted in a recent special on PBS' "Nova" in an episode called "Rise of the Drones." It's a camera system so detailed it can discern specific movements and even what a subject is wearing. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency's (DARPA's) Autonomous Real-Time Ground Ubiquitous Surveillance Imaging System (ARGUS) has 1.8 billion pixels (1.8 gigapixels), making it the world' highest resolution camera. The sensors on the camera are so precise, PBS stated it is the equivalent to the capabilities of 100 Predator drones in a medium city. In the clip from PBS, it is said this is the first time the government has allowed information to be shared about these capabilities. "It is important for the public to know that some of these capabilities exist," Yiannis Antonaides with contractor BAE Systems said in the clip, but noted the sensor itself cannot be revealed. "Because we are not allowed to expose some of the pieces that make up this sensor, so you get to look a pretty plastic curtains." The technology allows the user to open up a specific windows of interest in the camera's view while still keeping up an image of the larger picture (sort of like split screen). Antonaides explained that the colored boxes in the image show that the sensor recognized moving objects. "You can see individuals crossing the street. You can see individuals walking in parking lots. There's actually enough resolution to see the people waving their arms or walking around or what kind of clothes they wear," he said. PBS noted that ARGUS can actually see much more details than just attire. It can see objects as small as six inches. At 2:23 in the clip, Antonaides points out that from 17,500 feet, a white object in the field of view is a bird flying. PBS pointed out that DARPA put a time crunch on creating the camera, which lead Antonaides to look into technology that you probably have in your purse or pocket at this very moment. Taking similar imaging systems used in smartphones and putting 368 together, is essentially how Antonaides and other engineers at BAE Systems created ARGUS. It is this "mosaic" of cameras that allows the system to zoom in on specific sections in extreme detail. As for data, the system stores up to 1 million terabytes a day. Putting this into perspective, PBS notes this is equal to 5,000 hours of HD footage. "You can go back and say 'I would like to know what happened at this particular location three days, two hours, four minutes ago' and it would actually show you what happened as if you were watching it live," Antonaides said. It is still classified information whether ARGUS has been used in the field yet. ~~read more~~ 12.) The government can turn on your cellphone and and listen to you The FBI can turn on the mic on your cell phone and eaves drop even with the phone is turned off. Our rights as AMERICANS are being torn away by this corrupt government. 13.) The government ~~it~~ wants to control your thoughts image: http://libertyupward.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/hate-speech.jpg hate-speech The insidious thing about evolutionary tyranny is that it's gradual progression. It doesn't beat you over the head with the iron fist of a despot or sweep you aside with a wave of revolution, but, rather, is a death by a thousand doses of bad medicine that makes benign neglect seem~~s~~ utopian. One example of this brand of tyranny is the proliferation of hate—crime laws in the Western World. The very concept of hate—crime law itself is an offense against freedom and, as such, is quintessentially un—American. Yes, I hate hate—crime laws. And so should you. The main problem with hate—crime law is that it is an effort at thought—control masquerading as legitimate criminal—justice legislation. Let's examine why this is so. ~~read more~~ 14.) The government has corrupted the media you watch Udo Ulfkotte, a former editor of Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (which is one of Germany's largest newspapers), has decided to go public about the corruption of himself and the rest of the Western 'news' media, because he finds that this corruption is bringing Europe too close to a nuclear war against Russia, which he concludes the U.S. aristocracy that controls the CIA wants to bring about, or else to bring closer to the brink. ~~read more~~ 15.) The government is massively subsidizing mind altering pharmaceutical medications image: http://libertyupward.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Big-Pharma-Subsidies.jpg Big-Pharma-Subsidies Has there ever been a nation more hooked on drugs than the United States? And I am not just talking about illegal drugs – the truth is that the number of Americans addicted to legal drugs is far greater than the number of Americans addicted to illegal drugs. As you will read about below, more than 30 million Americans are currently on antidepressants and doctors in the U.S. wrote more than 250 million prescriptions for painkillers last year. Sadly, most people got hooked on these drugs very innocently. They trusted that their doctors would never prescribe something for them that would be harmful, and they trusted that the federal government would never approve any drugs that were not safe. And once the drug companies get you hooked, they often have you for life. You see, the reality of the matter is that some of these "legal drugs" are actually some of the most addictive substances on the entire planet. And when they start raising the prices on those drugs, there isn't much that the addicts can do about it. It is a brutally efficient business model, and the pharmaceutical industry guards their territory fiercely. Very powerful people will often do some really crazy things when there are hundreds of billions of dollars at stake. The following are 22 facts about America's endless pharmaceutical nightmare that everyone should know… ~~read more~~ 16.) The government has turned the police into a military force that violates your rights image: http://libertyupward.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/militarization-police-state.jpg militarization-police-state The intensive militarization of America's police forces is a serious menace about which a small number of people have been loudly warning for years, with little attention or traction. In a 2007 paper on "the blurring distinctions between the police and military institutions and between war and law enforcement," the criminal justice professor Peter Kraska defined "police militarization" as "the process whereby civilian police increasingly draw from, and pattern themselves around, the tenets of militarism and the military model." The harrowing events of the last week in Ferguson, Missouri – the fatal police shooting of an unarmed African-American teenager, Mike Brown, and the blatantly excessive and thuggish response to ensuing community protests from a police force that resembles an occupying army – have shocked the U.S. media class and millions of Americans. But none of this is aberrational. It is the destructive by-product of several decades of deliberate militarization of American policing, a trend that received a sustained (and ongoing) steroid injection in the form of a still-flowing, post-9/11 federal funding bonanza, all justified in the name of "homeland security." This has resulted in a domestic police force that looks, thinks, and acts more like an invading and occupying military than a community-based force to protect the public. ~~read more~~ 17.) The government keeps putting more and more Americans in prison image: http://libertyupward.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/prison-industrial-complex-2.jpg prison-industrial-complex-2 The growth of the private detention industry has long been a subject of scrutiny. A recenteight-part series in the New Orleans Times-Picayune chronicled how more than half of Louisiana's 40,000 inmates are housed in prisons run by sheriffs or private companies as part of a broader financial incentive scheme. The detention business goes beyond just criminal prisoners. As a Huffington Post investigation pointed out last month, nearly half of all immigrant detainees are now held in privately run detention facilities. Just this week, the New York Times delved into lax oversight at industrial-sized but privately run halfway houses in New Jersey. We've taken a look at some of the numbers associated with the billion-dollar and wide-ranging for-profit detention industry—and the two companies that dominate the market: General Statistics: 1.6 million: Total number of state and federal prisoners in the United States as of December 2010, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics 128,195: Number of state and federal prisoners housed in private facilities as of December 2010 37: percent by which number of prisoners in private facilities increased between 2002 and 2009 217,690: Total federal inmate population as of May 2012, according to the Bureau of Prisons ~~read more~~ The government has forgotten this… Read more at http://libertyupward.com/ways-the-us-government-equals-or-exceeds-george-orwells-fears-about-big-brother/~~#7hvUoX4jsgmTc0dj.99==== |
|
17 |
+ |
|
18 |
+ |
|
19 |
+====In this world of constant surveillance, we can't stay visibly active. The government is watching our every move, conceding the right to revolt to the technocratic elite marks the end of freedom, in this world, we need secret forms political agency that provide new subcultures with avenues of resistance |
|
20 |
+**Tsianos explains Deleuze and Guattari ** |
|
21 |
+Vassilis, teaches sociology at the University of Hamburg, Germany, Dimitris Papadopoulos teaches social theory at Cardiff University, Niamh Stephenson teaches social science at the University of New South Wales. "Escape Routes: Control and Subversion in the 21st Century" Pluto Press |
|
22 |
+ |
|
23 |
+In this sense imperceptible politics does not necessarily differ from or oppose other prevalent forms of politics, such as state-oriented politics, micropolitics, identity politics, cultural and gender politics, civil rights movements, etc. And indeed imperceptible politics connects with all these various forms of political engagement and intervention in an opportunistic way: it deploys them to the extent that they allow the establishment of spaces outside representation; that is, spaces which do not primarily focus on the transformation of the conditions of the double-R axiom (rights and representation) but on the insertion of new social forces into a given political terrain. In the previous chapter we called this form of politics outside politics: the politics which opposes the representational regime of policing. Imperceptibility is the everyday strategy which allows us to move and to act below the overcoding regime of representation. This everyday strategy is inherently anti-theoretical; that is, it resists any ultimate theorisation, it cannot be reduced to one successful and necessary form of politics (such as state-oriented politics or micropolitics, for example). Rather, imperceptible politics is genuinely empiricist, that is it is always enacted as ad hoc practices which allow the decomposition of the representational strategies in a particular field and the composition of events which cannot be left unanswered by the existing regime of control. If imperceptible politics resists theorisation and is ultimately empiricist, what then are the criteria for doing imperceptible politics? There are three dimensions which characterise imperceptible politics: objectlessness, totality, trust. Firstly, imperceptible politics is objectless, that is it performs political transformation without primarily targeting a specific political aim (such as transformation of a law or institution, or a particular claim for inclusion, etc). Instead imperceptible politics proceeds by materialising its own political actions through contagious and affective transformations. The object of its political practice is its own practices. In this sense, imperceptible politics is non-intentional - and therein lies its difference from state-oriented politics or the politics of civil rights movements, for example - it instigates change through a series of everyday transformations which can only be codified as having a central political aim or function in retrospect. Secondly, imperceptible politics addresses the totality of an existing field of power. This seems to be the difference between imperceptible politics and micropolitics or other alternative social movements: imperceptible politics is not concerned with containing itself to a molecular level of action; it addresses the totality of power through the social changes which it puts to work in a particular field of action. The distinction between molar and molecular (Deleuze and Guattari, 1987, p. 275) has only analytical significance from the perspective of imperceptible politics. In fact imperceptible politics is both molar and molecular, because by being local situated action it addresses the whole order of control in a certain field. Imperceptible politics is located at the heart of a field of power and at the same time it opens a way to move outside this field by forcing the transformation of all these elements which are constitutive of this field. In this sense, imperceptible politics is a driving force which is simul¬taneously both present and absent. We described this in the previous chapter by exploring the importance of speculative figurations for the practice of escape. On the everyday level of escape (a level we called in this chapter imperceptible politics) speculative figuration can be translated into trust. This is the third characteristic of imperceptible politics; it is driven by a firm belief in the importance and truthfulness of its actions, without seeking any evidence for, or conducting any investigation into its practices. This is trust. Imperceptible politics is driven by trust in something which seems to be absent from a particular situation. Imperceptible politics operates around a void, and it is exactly the conversion of this void into everyday politics that becomes the vital force for imperceptible politics.==== |
|
24 |
+ |
|
25 |
+ |
|
26 |
+====In educational spaces that allow for new, radical ideas and their contestation, resistance through key — the role of the judge is to be a critical intellectual and endorse the debater whose praxis best challenges power structures. |
|
27 |
+Rabinow explains Foucault ==== |
|
28 |
+Rabinow, Paul, "Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics, 202" University of Chicago Press Hence, we must return again, one last time, to the problem of the analyst. For surely these dramatically new characterizations of power relations must put the analyst in a different position from that of the traditional intellectual or philosopher. Foucault has provided some indications of how he sees the problem. He has systematically criticized the self-proclaimed master of truth and justice, the intellectual who claimed to speak truth to power and thereby resist power's supposed repressive effect. The "speaker's benefit" was revealed as a component in the advance of bio-power. Foucault generalizes this point. He advises intellectuals to abandon their universal prophetic voice. He urges them to drop their pretensions about predicting the future and, even more, their self-proclaimed legislative role. "The Greek wise man, the Jewish prophet, the Roman legislator are still models that haunt those, who today, practice the profession of speaking and writing." In more recent times, our model of the intellectuals has been the writer-jurist who claims to be outside of partisan interest, to speak in the universal voice, to represent either God's law or that of the state, to make known the universal dictates of reason. The exemplary figure in the Classical Age was perhaps Voltaire-proclaiming the rights of humanity, unveiling deceit and hypocrisy, attacking despotism and false hierarchies, combating injustices and inequalities. The function of the modern intellectual is to bring the truth to articulate clarity. Today the supposedly free subject, the universal intellectual, can offer us little guidance. But this does not mean that those who seek to understand human beings and to change society are either outside of power or powerless. Rather, as Foucault's account of the rise and spread of bio-power makes clear, knowledge is one of the defining components for the operation of power in the modern world. Knowledge is not in a superstructural relationship to power; it is an essential condition for the formation and further growth of industrial, technological society. To take only the example we most recently discussed, that of the prisons, the categorizing and individualizing of prisoners was an essential component for the operation of this field of power; this disciplinary technology could not have taken the form it had, achieved the spread it did, or produced delinquents in the way it did, if power and knowledge were merely external to one another. But power and knowledge are not identical with each other either. Foucault does not seek to reduce knowledge to a hypothetical base in power ~~but~~ nor to conceptualize power as an always coherent strategy. He attempts to show the specificity and materiality of their interconnections. They have a correlative, not a causal relationship, which must be determined in its historical specificity. This mutual production of power and knowledge is one of Foucault's major contributions. The universal intellectual plays power's game because he fails to see this point. Foucault is not claiming to be outside of these practices of power; at the same time, he is not identical to them. First, when he shows that the practices of our culture have produced both objectification and subjectification, he has already loosened the grip, the seeming naturalness and necessity these practices have. The force of bio-power lies in defining reality as well as producing it. This reality takes the world to be composed of subjects and objects and their totalizing normalization. Any solution that takes these terms for granted-even if it is to oppose them-will contribute to the hold of bio-power. Through interpretive analytics, Foucault has been able to reveal the concrete, material mechanisms which have been producing this reality, while he describes with minute detail the transparent masks behind which these mechanisms are hidden. |
|
29 |
+That outweighs- ethical subjects are constructed by structures of power that demarcate recognition. Without breaking down structures- obligations can't be imposed because they are based in normalized desires that have no basis. This means my framing is a pre-requisite to ethics. |
|
30 |
+ |
|
31 |
+ |
|
32 |
+====As the world steps further toward authoritarian control, subaltern populations find themselves alone, demoralized and suffering. In the face of this misery, graffiti culture cultivates close bonds and connections forged through mutual suffering and love of art. These spaces become key survival strategies for minority voices. |
|
33 |
+Halsey and Young |
|
34 |
+Mark Halsey and Alison Young "'Our desires are ungovernable' Writing Graffiti in Urban Space" University of Melbourne, Australia Mark Halsey teaches in the Department of Criminology, University of Melbourne, and is an adjunct senior lecturer, School of Law, Flinders University of South Australia.. Mark is the author of Deleuze and Environmental Damage (published by Ashgate) and his work has appeared in such journals as Punishment and Society, British Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice. Alison Young teaches in the Department of Criminology, University of Melbourne. She is the author of Femininity in Dissent (1990), Imagining Crime (1996) and Judging the Image (2005) and has published numerous articles on the intersections of law, crime and culture. She is currently working on a book examining cinematic images of violence and justice. Her research on graffiti was funded by a Discovery Grant from the Australian Research Council. The research has more recently been extended to examine stencil artists and street artists, and graffiti writers' narratives of cultural belonging. ==== |
|
35 |
+ |
|
36 |
+Reasons for writing For many who catch sight of a tag or a mural on a wall, their glance leads quickly to speculation as to why someone wrote that word or drew an image in such a place. Commonplace assumptions include the writer's supposed boredom, or the writer's desire to damage and deface, or the writer's lack of respect for others' property. Many of these assumptions also drive municipal graffiti management policies.7 One of the aims animating our research was a desire to go beyond such assumptions in order to discover writers' motivations for engaging in graffiti and for their involvement in graffiti culture. Interviewees overwhelmingly indicated that their original involvement in graffiti derived from a combination of its aesthetic appeal for them and a sense that it was a gregarious activity through which they might make friends with others (in much the same way as other young people are drawn to dance venues or the football team for social interactions).8 Once immersed in graffiti culture, continuing to write was characterized by several factors viewed in highly positive ways by the respondents and describing ~~describe~~ powerful emotional and physical sensations in the act of writing (a dimension of writing we have called affective or visceral). These sensations include pride, pleasure, the enjoyment derived from sharing of an activity with friends, as well as the recognition obtained from the writing community. Subsidiary motivations related to less positive sensations of boredom and rebelliousness (these were mentioned by fewer writers). Pride relates to the sense of accomplishment writers experience upon completing a piece because, for the writer, it is art, and because it has taken a great deal of their labour: AL felt pride when he looked at a completed piece because 'it's a piece of artwork that I did' (4: 17), and W endorsed that view, stating 'when I stand back and look at a piece I feel proud of myself . . . 'cos I put a lot of hard work into it' (25: 21). Many attribute a desire for recognition as a motivation for graffiti writing, as one police officer commented: 'They want to be recognized, they want to be praised within their circle of friends.' 9 Our research did bear out the notion that recognition is important: the sense of publicity that graffiti can provide for writers is another important reason for participating in the culture. AG stated, '~~Y~~ou get a mention, you know, people know you, you get well known and that. . . . I thought, "Oh yeah, you know, I'd like to be well known"' (2: 20). Writers refer most often to the importance of recognition by other writers (in relation to their style, their prolific tagging or for getting up in inaccessible places). According to AR: I don't know, it's just getting to have your name well known all around the place . . . They'll be like, they'll see your tag and they'll be like, that's good . . . and they'll be like, I know who writes that, I'm his friend . . . he's heaps cool. (7: 30) Some writers rejected the idea that graffiti was mainly about getting recognition: Researcher: So who do you piece for? Interviewee: Me. Researcher: You did them for you? Interviewee: I don't have to prove anything. I don't want to make anyone else happy. It makes me happy, that's all I care about. (6: 20) Still, this individualism of approach was often situated within an acknowledgement of the importance of the writing community. And for some, the writing community was so significant that it came to stand in for their families or for the wider community: Interviewee: It is related to a, a recognition and a self-affirmation, it's like at home I got no attention like, you know, no praise for whatever I did, everything I did was criticized, I was, you know, there was tension at home, there was violence, I was kicked out of home age 15, um, my friends were very important to me . . . Through this connection with graffiti I found a new family on the street . . . I found a new form of recognition . . . A new form, my ego was nourished and . . . Um my god it felt good to, ah you know, put up my tag and then friends to say, yeah I saw, yeah I saw your piece on the weekend, yeah and whatever . . . Sort of like it's, it was, it was a communication amongst the family on the street um so . . . Yep, it was, it was, yeah for a kid with bloody low self-esteem and I speak for most teenagers, um they're finding a form of yeah, a form of self-esteem amongst their peers, and recognition amongst their peers. (AL, 8: 12, emphases added) It should be noted that discussions of graffiti which cite the desire for peer recognition as a factor in graffiti writing can tend to imply that such a desire is a product of adolescence, of the need for affirmation experienced by an immature psyche. Such an approach seems unnecessary. Taking pleasure in publicity about one's activities and desire for affirmation by one's peers (and acknowledgement of the importance of peer recognition) animate many individuals and activities, such as awards ceremonies, citation indexes for academic journals, the pleasure of seeing one's name in print. Compartmentalizing such pleasures as adolescent in relation to graffiti writing would seem to be an unfortunately blinkered approach to what is, after all, a very commonplace pleasure. Regarding graffiti writers as all-too-human in this respect may help to defuse some of the more negative archetypes that coalesce around the body of the writer. The sociality of shared peer activity is another important reason why writers are attracted to graffiti culture. AQ was motivated to begin graffiti through the encouragement of friends: 'Friends going, c'mon man, it's heaps good, people can see it and everything like, it's out there' (AQ, 4: 15). It is crucial to emphasize that this is not a question of peer pressure whereby individuals give in to demands to participate in something that they otherwise would avoid (only one writer, U, described his experience in those terms). Rather, it is a matter of developing activities that can be enjoyed by a group of friends as a group. The gregarious nature of graffiti culture is hence enormously significant: participants share knowledge of safe or exciting locations to write, discuss websites, display their photographs and go on group writing expeditions. Few respondents represented their involvement in graffiti in terms that would be part of the conventional stereotype of the graffiti writer. Boredom and rebellion were the only negative motivating factors mentioned. AQ speculated that boredom was an impetus for other writers (as did W and U) although none saw boredom as a factor in their own involvement.10 The desire to rebel was seen as important by AR (21: 5) and admitted by AI, who stated 'I wanted to be a bad little rebel kid' (2: 13). Thus, the overwhelming results of the research, in terms of writers' reasons for writing, is that graffiti is a positive, pleasurable experience for them, on the whole unrelated to deliberate, 'anti-social' or negative motivations. Many of the affective or visceral elements of writing that encourage writers to continue with graffiti come together in the notion of pleasure. Writers derived pleasure from many aspects of writing, but particularly from the physical experience of writing (that is, holding the spray can, seeing the finished work, feeling a bodily thrill and so on). Writers often simply expressed this as 'fun' (AR, AB, Z, N). Taking pleasure in the aesthetic was recounted by T: If I'm pleased with it it's . . . a pretty good feeling really, like I've gone home a few times with big smiles on my face, it's just, oh yeah I'm hell chuffed cos I've just done this, like, big thing that looks pretty cool. The degree of excitement is demonstrated by AN's comment, ~~I~~t's just like you're winning a grand final, . . . just like you just wanna scream out and say, 'Yeah', you know, like you just actually done something good and then you know that you're not supposed to be able to do it, which is even better, I s'pose . . . (4: 28) And such pleasure is intensely physical, as AC makes clear: Interviewee: I tried and I tried and I tried and I kept on getting better every time and it feels good because, like, you know, with my hand it feels really good . . . Researcher: So, do you get a sensation from it through your . . . Interviewee: Yeah, yeah from my hand. Researcher: . . . your body, or your hand when you're doing the actual tag itself? Interviewee: Yep. Researcher: Right. Can you describe that sensation to me? Interviewee: Feels, like, good like, cos just doing it like slow motion, it relaxes you . . . (2: 14) The physical act of writing the tag delivers a corporeal pleasure to the writer. Writing, with pen or spray can, and seeing the word or image take shape on the selected surface is thus a powerful physical experience for the writer. Since many discussions of graffiti assume that its main motivational pleasure for writers is the sight of its effects or knowledge of the annoyance that it might bring about for property owners, there has been little discussion of the pleasures derived for writers through the act of writing: seeing the can or pen in the hand, seeing the words take shape, feeling a connection between their control of the implement and the writing as it appears on the surface. That this pleasure is powerful should not be mistaken: many writers described graffiti as a physical thrill (AL, B), or as an 'adrenaline rush' (B, AR, AK, AN, U). U expressed this in the strongest terms, likening the pleasures of graffiti to that obtained from drug use: When you start out in graffiti you don't think of ~~fights between writers~~ and by the time that you sort of catch on to that sort of thing happens, you're pretty much, you, it's like a drug, you're pretty much hooked on it . . . (7: 15) To that extent, graffiti can deliver pleasure that is similar to that derived from extreme sports (such as bungee jumping) or by other physically demanding activities such as skateboarding. Its illicit nature probably overlays the actual activity with a further charge, making it similar to joyriding for its ability to deliver more pleasure than would be expected from the simple physical acts (writing on a wall, driving a car). Graffiti's pleasurability thus is complex and multiple: writers take emotional satisfaction in evidence of their increasing skills as they command more ability to write more complicated lettering; they obtain a physiologically potent rush of adrenaline from its illegality (and sometimes from attempting graffiti in inaccessible or dangerous locations); and, perhaps most importantly, something in the act of writing feels 'right' to graffiti writers. This last aspect is perhaps the hardest for a non-writer to grasp, and is certainly related to the fact that writers perceive the urban landscape very differently from nonwriters (writers see the landscape as a series of surfaces waiting to be written on, of which more later). It is this 'rightness' that motivates most writers to continue in the activity, in the face of possible arrest, security dogs and possible injury. |
|
37 |
+ |
|
38 |
+ |
|
39 |
+====We affirm the political methodology of the Graffeteur |
|
40 |
+ |
|
41 |
+Thus the Advocacy: Public Colleges and Universities in the United States ought not restrict constitutionally protected free speech performed through tagging spaces with graffiti. |
|
42 |
+ |
|
43 |
+==== |
|
44 |
+ |
|
45 |
+ |
|
46 |
+====This form of expression ceases to be physical, and begins to register on an spiritual plane. Mapping the way that the body, the paint, the surface and the atmosphere interact reveals unique characteristics about this new form of counter-cartography. Tagging is no longer a spray-paint adventure, it is an affective transformation that turns the body into a vessel of urban resistance and allows becoming. |
|
47 |
+Halsey, Massumi and Young |
|
48 |
+Mark Halsey and Alison Young "'Our desires are ungovernable' Writing Graffiti in Urban Space" University of Melbourne, Australia Mark Halsey teaches in the Department of Criminology, University of Melbourne, and is an adjunct senior lecturer, School of Law, Flinders University of South Australia.. Mark is the author of Deleuze and Environmental Damage (published by Ashgate) and his work has appeared in such journals as Punishment and Society, British Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice. Alison Young teaches in the Department of Criminology, University of Melbourne. She is the author of Femininity in Dissent (1990), Imagining Crime (1996) and Judging the Image (2005) and has published numerous articles on the intersections of law, crime and culture. She is currently working on a book examining cinematic images of violence and justice. Her research on graffiti was funded by a Discovery Grant from the Australian Research Council. The research has more recently been extended to examine stencil artists and street artists, and graffiti writers' narratives of cultural belonging. ==== |
|
49 |
+Image, sign, affect: writing the corporeal Graffiti writers—at least those interviewed during our research—recognize their works form a critical part of the plane of signification investing urban landscapes. Moreover, writers know that writing graffiti is far from a static or two-dimensional activity involving simply the application of paint to a surface. Instead, most understand graffiti writing to be ~~it is~~ an affective process that does things to writers' bodies (and the bodies of onlookers) as much as to the bodies of metal, concrete and plastic, which typically compose the surfaces of urban worlds. In short, where graffiti is often thought of as destructive, we would submit that it is affective as well. The concept of affect has only recently been given serious attention within criminological scholarship (see Freiberg, 2001; De Haan and Loader, 2002; Karstedt, 2002; Sherman, 2003). Our main criticism of such work is that most commentators merge the idea of affect with emotion (terms which are in no way interchangeable).4 We do not intend to offer an extended theoretical overview of the development and deployment of the notion of affect in various arenas. Instead, we invoke the work of Brian Massumi (1992, 2002a, 2002b) who in turn draws on such authors as Baruch Spinoza, Henri Bergson as well as Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari.5 Massumi writes that affect is akin to the 'ways in which the body can connect with itself and with the world' (1992: 93). Elaborating, he remarks, In affect, we are never alone. That's because affects . . . are basically ways of connecting, to others and to other situations. They are our angle of participation in processes larger than ourselves. With intensified affect comes a stronger sense of embeddedness in a larger field of life—a heightened sense of belonging, with other people and to other places. (Massumi, 2002a: 214) Affect, therefore, has to do with intensity rather than identity. This is important because it allows questions to be asked not only of writers (what does it feel like to write illicitly?) but of those who name or respond to graffiti in various ways (what feelings emerge from encountering graffiti? How do these relate to the politico-cultural and legal factors which limit what it is possible to say and do about a particular image?). It allows questions to be asked of these bodies on the understanding that one is ~~are~~ never just 'a writer', or 'an observer', or 'a young person', or 'an outraged citizen', so much as locales of potential whose subjectivities are made and remade according to the (social) roles ascribed to them as well as the desire which invests various networks (familial, residential, pedagogical, cultural and so on). To side with affect is to admit that graffiti connects bodies known and unknown through the proliferation of images. The connection might be a minor or substantial interruption to one's sense of the proper, or it might be a reinforcement of one's view of 'the sad state of the youth of today', or of the 'vibrancy' of counter culture, or of the failure of zero tolerance and rapid response removal policies. Whatever the case, graffiti as image connects bodies. But graffiti also forges connections in a way that is largely unremarked by those thinking and writing about its occurrence. Specifically and critically, graffiti connects the writer to the city through the very act of writing since it is this act which places quite strict demands on writers' bodies (whether intellectually in terms of having to transfer a design to a less than ideal surface, whether physically in terms of having to put up with cold, dark or generally inclement conditions for several hours while writing, whether culturally in terms of feeling the pressure to execute a good piece that will not be marked up by rival writers, whether legally in terms of the omnipresent threat of getting busted, whether financially in terms of what the writer forwent in order to be able to afford quality paint in the right range of colours and so forth). In the act of writing—that is, by using the aerosol can and the felt tip marker as key prosthetics for connecting 'self' and 'world' (but also as a means of collapsing such distinctions)—graffiti writers connect themselves to all the possible reactions the city can muster with respect to a particular image or set of images produced over time.6 Graffiti, therefore, should not be divorced from the event of writing illicitly. And, more directly, it should not be equated to the cultivation or search for identity. Fame (attaining the status or identity of a king) is in many instances important, but, as explained later, pleasure (the intensity of feeling which, for instance, accompanies the motioning of the aerosol can) is equally significant. Indeed, our conversations with graffiti writers indicate that writing induces a series of singular moments where identity is put asunder through the performance of what Deleuze and Guattari have called becomings-immanent (denoting moments where a body—for whatever period—inhabits space and time in ways which resist subjective and objective attempts to classify, name or order events). Our contention is that illicit writing cannot be adequately described in binary terms (good versus bad art, criminal versus legal activity, creative versus destructive images, etc.). Instead, graffiti needs to be considered in a both/and manner. Certainly graffiti will always tend to be a target for debates about good and bad art or appropriate versus inappropriate placement. But graffiti also involves something beyond this—something intangible, something which resists attempts to capture its meaning, its purpose, its 'final' referent. This intangible, is, for want of a better term, the passing of affect. As Massumi puts it, 'Affect as whole, then, is the virtual co-presence of potentials' (2002a: 213). Beginning with motivation for writing, we offer in the following an account of these potentials as relayed by writers themselves. |
|
50 |
+ |
|
51 |
+ |
|
52 |
+====The 1AC is a method of "nomadic grammatology", speech that exists in an affective dimension un-diagnosable to external power structures but coherent communication to the hidden subaltern. We give minoritarian voices a way to articulate themselves without revealing them to state writ large |
|
53 |
+Fieni |
|
54 |
+David Fieni "What A Wall Wants, Or How Graffiti Thinks Nomad Grammatology In The French Banlieue" '13 David Fieni teaches at Sarah Lawrence College. He has also published on Jean Genet, Ernest Renan, and Algerian women writers. He is currently editing a special issue of Expressions maghrébines on the work of Abdelkébir Khatibi, and an issue of The Journal of Postcolonial Writ-ing , entitled "The Global Checkpoint.==== |
|
55 |
+ |
|
56 |
+The populist rage that Sarkozy articulated by using the term racaille (rabble, scum) received most of the attention, including an essay in Le Monde that explored the word's etymology (intended as a lesson in the politics of language for the French interior minister).3 It is the Kärcher reference, however, that most interests me here. Kärcher, a company based in Germany, whose own website touts it as "the most recognized and trusted name in high-pressure cleaning equipment," manufactures machines used to clean city walls and public latrines. By proclaiming that he wanted to "kärcherize" the "racaille," Sarkozy evoked a specific technology of urban cleansing that vividly illustrates the increasingly brutal approach to the banlieue that marks French urban policy since the 1980s. The Kärcher water blaster is not a mere metaphor, but an actual machine used to scour graffiti from a variety of hard-to-clean surfaces. Sarkozy's comments thus equate banlieue youth (la racaille) with their signs of passage through urban space (le graff, as graffiti is often called). The young banlieusards themselves become illegible signs on the new smooth spaces of the HLM housing estates. The rhetorical dehumanization of young people from "troubled neighborhoods," combined with hostility to graffiti, reveals the neo-logocentrism operative in the penal republican state that reiterates colonialism's pseudo-scientific rationale for depriving supposedly illiterate peoples of history, reason, and even the very capacity for thought, a rationale that ultimately justifies their exclusion from the entire chain of civilizational benefits and rights attendant upon literacy and reason. One piece of anti-Sarkozy graffiti in Brest near the port de commerce, depicting Sarkozy as the national cop wielding a billy club, displays an explicit awareness of this interpretation of what nettoyer au Kärcher means (fig. 1). Text accompanying the cartoonish caricature reads, "Article 1: Nettoyage des graffitis au Kärcher" (Article 1: Cleaning graffiti with a Kärcher).4 It would be an error, however, to suggest that the category, "banlieue youth," exists independent of the statements that construct it as an identifiable group. Mustafa Dikeç's recent demonstration of the way that French urban policy "produces" the banlieue as a space to be policed and contained also extends to the way that specific groups within these spaces are produced through the media, statistics, law, and other techniques.5 The 74 DIACRITICS 2012 40.2 act of naming the racaille effectively produces them as a social category precisely at the same moment that the necessity of cleansing their living inscription from the cité is asserted. I am calling this nettoyage or erasure of these groups "neo-logocentric" because part of its target is graffiti, which, as I hope to demonstrate, represents an important emerging global practice of inscription that produces multiple transnational connections among ghettoized spaces around the world. Graffiti functions as a kind of alternative literacy that operates within a plane that connects with literacy in the narrow sense of the term,1 but remains independent from it. The strong reactions that graffiti elicits, as adduced by Sarkozy's remarks (and one could cite dozens of other examples), suggest that the new technologies of thought, mobility, and inscription that graffiti engineers are what make it so dangerous to its detractors. These new forms of writing that graffiti produces are dismissed as mere vandalism; the situational critiques of power, space, and law that graffiti traces are instead seen as unreadable marks of defilement and delinquency. It is in this context of graffiti—understood as a critical practice of writing, defined primarily by its illegality, its ephemerality, and its public positioning against the logocentric state apparatus— that what I am calling "nomad grammatology" comes into play. By graffiti, I intend a heterogeneous critical concept that intersects with the variety of phenomena commonly called tags, graffiti, graffiti art, pieces, murals, and stencils, but which does not exhaust their potential. Not all actually existing graffiti does the things I suggest graffiti can do, even less does all graffiti think in the same way. That most ambivalent of urban signs, graffiti indicates either urban decay or youthful creativity; it evokes both the illegible signs of gang violence and the sublimation of art. The word "graffiti" in a contemporary context can refer to almost any kind of marking. Even a cursory taxonomy of its forms would prompt a rather long list of styles, techniques, and schools. There are the supposedly "lower forms," not easily commodified, such as quickly done tags, indicating just the pseudonym of a gang, a crew, or an individual; the more stylized hip-hop paintings or "pieces," often emphasizing the shape and outline of the letters; stencils, stickers, and posters of various kinds; and even the writing in bathroom stalls that Alan Dundes has termed "latrinalia."6 Then there are the assimilated or commodified "higher forms," such as graffiti art hung in galleries (I Figure 1. Graffiti depicting Nicolas Sarkozy with a billy club Brest, France, 2005 Photo: Mathieu Gonnet What a Wall Wants, or How Graffiti Thinks David Fieni 75 refer you to "Le TAG au Grand Palais," at the Palais de Tokyo in Paris in spring 2009, featuring over 300 works by graffitists from around the world, or the exhibition at the Fondation Cartier, "Né dans la rue," also in 2009); sponsored public art installations such as murals; and the use of graffiti-style fonts or typography in advertising and merchandise. In order to think about the specific potential in graffiti most relevant to the question of walls, sovereignty, and ghettoized spaces, my use of the term will highlight three elements of graffiti's field of writing-production in particular: its illegality, anonymity, and ephemerality. As understood in this paper, graffiti is a fugitive set of illegal operations performed by semi-anonymous interacting bodies in motion. To see graffiti from this perspective is also a way of underscoring the specific position of the letters of graffiti in relation to the letter of the law; by definition, the graffitist positions him or herself ~~themselves~~ outside the law, while also writing on the very material surfaces of the law (property, the walls built by the state); graffiti does not simply stand outside or against the state, but always links up with the state, disfigures the representatives of the state, and becomes barred by state science (what Deleuze and Guattari call "royal science"7 ). Graffiti decodes the performances walls enact as a theatrical disavowal of the porousness of sovereignty—by deforming, inflating, playing with letters, making them something you can see but cannot necessarily read. Graffiti would have the letter of the law succumb to a liquefaction of its own material ontological guarantee as public writing, at least at the moment of the encounter with graffiti, at the moment of inscription or viewing. |
|
57 |
+The 1AC allows us to activate our agency through the creation of subaltern spaces of |
|
58 |
+AND |
|
59 |
+and define the grafitiscape within the context of the archaeograph (Figure 105) |