Here are some responses to WR going bimonthly so that we can better focus on our online intervention:
Fred wrote on 6.9.12:
“‘..if we are to reinforce and adapt our web site, we need at the same time to reduce the effort we put into the paper press...’ Regarding the monthly press: by the time I get it I’ve already read everything
in it on-line a number of times. This doesn’t apply to everyone of course. But, although a latecomer
to the internet, I find now that I’d rather read your current articles there, than in the oldfashioned
paper format. It’s the immediacy. Also, if provoked by an article, a swift response is available
on the net. (This doesn’t necessarily improve the quality of thought in the response I know, but
there’s also something to be said for seizing the thoughtful, but fleeting moment before it’s gone.
At least I hope so.) I very much think you should reinforce and adapt your website, but don’t really
know how, or even exactly why! (Not much help.) But I always feel there’s space for a lot more posters, if only they could sense the possibility of speaking what they think, and weren’t afraid of saying the wrong thing, of saying something stupid, or of getting bashed by some superior guy of immense revolutionary credentials and an apparently Einsteinian intellect, who might suddenly jump out of nowhere and have them for supper. On the other hand I myself wouldn’t want a sudden invasion of vacuous one line posters with little or nothing to say. The Red Marx site seems to have attracted quite a few of them, nor would one welcome the type of vicious attack to be found sometimes on lib com. But that’s enough for now”
Reply from jk21, same day:
“I have mixed feeling about this. On the one hand, it seems like a practical adaptation to a reality
we all know to exist. Communication today is almost exclusively carried on through the Internet,
etc. In this sense, it is only logical for the revolutionary organiation to find ways to adapt
and remain relevant in this new envrionment. That said, on a substantive level, I think it is also
true that these new technologies are not ‘content neutral.’ They represent more than mere technological developments. The internet, social media, etc. have dramtically changed the nature of personal relationships, reorderded information and knowledge hierarchies, and contributed to a kind
of decentering of social life and the production of a new culture of eclecticism to go along with it. In
some ways this new culture represents a challenge to traditional authorities and the methods through
which captialist society has often been legitimated. But, I don’t think the story is all positive. In
some, ways these new communication mediums also play into social decomposition and produce
a highly individualized--everyone is worthy of having their own blog--culture that can work to
undermine the discipline necessary to construct an organization and promote all kinds of stylized,
individualist forms of pseudo-rebellion that do not, in the end, escape the captialist horizon.
In this sense, the printed press is kind of a bulwark against this tendency. By constituting a defined
(and limited) space, the printed press forces a kind of analysis that increasingly gets lost in the
cacophony of the Internet today. It forces the organization to focus, to plan, to decide what events
are worthy of analysis and reflection in a limited space and to come together on a regular basis to
produce a collective product. In this sense, it is good to hear that WR will not abandon the printed
press altogether. In the end, we must acknowledge and adapt to the new reality, but let’s not let this
site turn into a blog. There are too many of those already”.
Join the discussion!
World Revolution 8/9/12