Skip to content

#Accelerate

Read the original post ↗

The Left co-optation of Accelerationism is a remarkable phenomenon, substantial enough to have made the 2013 accelerationist manifesto (#Accelerate) a document of indisputable significance. The twitter-format title attests both to its contemporaneity, and to the seamless fusion of its content with a strategy of promotion (which is to say, a practical politics). The success of this ideological venture has received a recent (and carefully calibrated) seal of approval in the form of a response by no less a figure than venerable warhorse of the European revolutionary Left, Toni Negri. Whatever the ultimate credibility and consequence of its analysis, Left Accelerationism has already demonstrated intrinsic cultural momentum.

As a creature of Right Accelerationism, Urban Future, naturally, is an antagonist (although a highly intrigued one). Engagement with #Accelerate will be stretched into a consistent thread here, over the course of the coming year. Among other things (and as Negri shows) such an engagement provides an opportunity to revisit very basic socio-economic questions within a re-dynamized micro-context. Even if the re-dynamization of the macro-context, or its opposite (deepening stagnation), has to be initially adopted as a problem — rather than any kind of fact — Accelerationist questions ensure the topic is not bypassed.

The authors of #Accelerate offer their own contextualization in a recent article, which takes “accelerationism’s sur­ging pop­ularity” as a fact to be explained:

The pas­sion that ac­cel­er­a­tionism mo­bil­ises is the re­mem­brance by the people that a fu­ture is pos­sible. In dis­parate fields — from politics to art to design to bio­logy to philo­sophy — people are working through how to create a world that is lib­er­ated from cap­it­alist in­cent­ives. Perhaps most prom­isingly, the classic dream of Keynes and Marx for the re­duc­tion of work and the flour­ishing of pos­itive freedoms, is making a comeback. In the push for uni­versal basic in­comes, and the move­ments for re­duced working weeks, we see the people them­selves be­gin­ning to carve out a space sep­arate from the wage re­la­tion and out­side of the im­per­at­ives of work. When the media stops re­porting the auto­ma­tion of jobs as being a tragedy and starts re­porting them as being a lib­er­a­tion from mundane work, we will know that the ac­cel­er­a­tionist dis­pos­i­tion has be­come the new common sense. We have reached a point in human his­tory where vast amounts of jobs can — and should — be auto­mated. Work for work’s sake is a per­versity and a con­straint im­posed upon hu­manity by capitalism’s ideo­logy of the work ethic. What ac­cel­er­a­tionism seeks is to allow human po­ten­tial to es­cape from the trap set for it by con­tem­porary capitalism.

The sole (querulous) rejoinder from UF at this stage: If this is accelerationism, what would an intentionally decelerationist program look like?

ADDED: Ray Brassier on Accelerationism and Communism (via Benedict Singleton, @benedict).