nºmadic institute fºr ethnºmathematics

June 5, 2014 at 10:52pm
0 notes

Bolo Bolo →

via Anja Groten

March 7, 2012 at 5:56pm
1 note

October 26, 2011 at 12:11pm
0 notes
http://www.creativereview.co.uk/cr-blog/2011/october/brixton-pound


The Brixton pound, which launched as the UK’s first urban local currency in 2009, has been redesigned featuring images of four notable cultural figures from the area…
The currency (known as the B£) is designed to help support local businesses and encourage trade in the area. It is used largely by independent shops in the SW2 and SW9 postcodes in south London.

http://www.creativereview.co.uk/cr-blog/2011/october/brixton-pound

The Brixton pound, which launched as the UK’s first urban local currency in 2009, has been redesigned featuring images of four notable cultural figures from the area…

The currency (known as the B£) is designed to help support local businesses and encourage trade in the area. It is used largely by independent shops in the SW2 and SW9 postcodes in south London.

10:38am
0 notes

Schismogenesis: Systems of holding back
Systems of holding back are also a form of schismogenesis. They are defined as “mutually aggregating spirals which lead people to hold back contributions they could make because others hold back contributions they could make.”[6] . In Systems intelligence literature it is held that human interaction has a tendency to fall into such systems unless conscious effort is made to counter this tendency. For example, although most managers would want to give support to their team and most team members would like to receive such support many times support does not result. This is because both parties might feel that the other party is not giving enough and thus they will themselves hold back what they in the best case could give. It has been suggested that systems of holding back are “the single most important key to life-decreasing, reciprocity-trivializing and vitality-downgrading mechanisms in human life.” [7]

Schismogenesis: Systems of holding back

Systems of holding back are also a form of schismogenesis. They are defined as “mutually aggregating spirals which lead people to hold back contributions they could make because others hold back contributions they could make.”[6] . In Systems intelligence literature it is held that human interaction has a tendency to fall into such systems unless conscious effort is made to counter this tendency. For example, although most managers would want to give support to their team and most team members would like to receive such support many times support does not result. This is because both parties might feel that the other party is not giving enough and thus they will themselves hold back what they in the best case could give. It has been suggested that systems of holding back are “the single most important key to life-decreasing, reciprocity-trivializing and vitality-downgrading mechanisms in human life.” [7]

October 13, 2011 at 4:59pm
0 notes

the politics of counting →

September 20, 2011 at 2:18pm
2 notes

a diagram that will appear w/ a piece i am writing for the upcoming issue of the journal of aesthetics and protest.

fig. 4 military-coinage-complex: state and market emerge as two sides of the same coin

the sovereign issues payment to soldiers in a form that can retain its value over distance and time (i.e. gold). the sovereign subsequently demands the same form of payment through taxation (enforced by the soldiers), from the population under its domain, thereby systematically incentivizing the service of solders and the consequent emergence of markets.

July 11, 2011 at 9:56am
0 notes
“New Associationist Movement” recognizes from the history of the various social movements - utopian socialism, communism, anarchism - devoted to the goal of abolishing capitalism and the state, that they invariably failed to achieve their goal principally because they misunderstood the relationship between the two. While nation-state and capitalism have developed separately, they were bonded during the period of the monarchical state and thereafter established a modus of mutual interdependence despite their autonomous origins.
“Marx sought to unveil the secret of money. But what sort of counter-measures become possible by his analysis of money-form? Engels and Lenin sought to abolish capitalism through state regulation and through a centralized planned economy, which resulted in the abolition of the market economy of free exchanges between individuals and in the withering away of freedom. They overlooked the specific function that characterizes money. Money is not simply an indicator of value; it actively coordinates the value systems of all products and production as they are exchanged through it. Money functions as the unavoidable medium of this system of relations - it plays an indispensable role. The superiority of market economies over planned economies is due to this function of money; planned economies which hope to establish their value systems without money can’t but result in an enormous concentration of power in the hands of the State. In the capitalist market economy, of course, a substanceless money becomes substantialized as a principal object of desire, which results in money fetishism and the movement of capital as the self-reproduction of money. But to abolish the market economy on the grounds that its money transforms into capital is to throw out the baby with the bath water. To echo the antinomy of Marx’s Capital: we can’t live with money, and we can’t live without it. The question is how to overcome the money-form while simultaneously conserving a market that permits free exchanges between individuals.”


(photo, Kojin Karatani)

“New Associationist Movement” recognizes from the history of the various social movements - utopian socialism, communism, anarchism - devoted to the goal of abolishing capitalism and the state, that they invariably failed to achieve their goal principally because they misunderstood the relationship between the two. While nation-state and capitalism have developed separately, they were bonded during the period of the monarchical state and thereafter established a modus of mutual interdependence despite their autonomous origins.

Marx sought to unveil the secret of money. But what sort of counter-measures become possible by his analysis of money-form? Engels and Lenin sought to abolish capitalism through state regulation and through a centralized planned economy, which resulted in the abolition of the market economy of free exchanges between individuals and in the withering away of freedom. They overlooked the specific function that characterizes money. Money is not simply an indicator of value; it actively coordinates the value systems of all products and production as they are exchanged through it. Money functions as the unavoidable medium of this system of relations - it plays an indispensable role. The superiority of market economies over planned economies is due to this function of money; planned economies which hope to establish their value systems without money can’t but result in an enormous concentration of power in the hands of the State. In the capitalist market economy, of course, a substanceless money becomes substantialized as a principal object of desire, which results in money fetishism and the movement of capital as the self-reproduction of money. But to abolish the market economy on the grounds that its money transforms into capital is to throw out the baby with the bath water. To echo the antinomy of Marx’s Capital: we can’t live with money, and we can’t live without it. The question is how to overcome the money-form while simultaneously conserving a market that permits free exchanges between individuals.”

(photo, Kojin Karatani)

May 31, 2011 at 9:39pm
3 notes
Exodus Banking

Exodus Banking

April 10, 2011 at 5:39pm
0 notes

bureau d'études—GOUVERN PAR CRISES →

April 8, 2011 at 7:36pm
2 notes

brother west


Chris Lee (unitedunderwear)