Brampton Jobs 14 Years

Attacks Neoliberalism "You have to destroy the technological apparatus"

INTERVIEW

talked with the philosopher John Zerzan on alternatives to industrial development and the current model of economic progress in mass society.

Astor Simón Díaz (Editor)

Wednesday February 10, 2010. Number 119

                                                     Photo: Olmo Calvo.

DIAGONAL:

In a recent interview you said that emerging approaches to effectively challenge of modernity and progress. What do you think the movement

decrease and its responsiveness to the global economic crisis? John Zerzan:

a couple of years ago in Barcelona, \u200b\u200bthere was considerable discussion, especially from French groups, this trend. Some aspired to join the parliamentary game, what I consider bad idea, and I do not know what degree of radicalism imply its proposal. On the one hand, some of its concepts do not go too far, as the "slow cities", the "slow food" or the idea of \u200b\u200bsimplification. Furthermore, there is little scope for lack of criticism on the whole phenomenon. Everyone goes in the direction of unchecked industrial growth: China, India and many other countries move quickly to this reality. Thus, the decrease may be desirable, but we must raise a concrete struggle against all these dynamics, institutions and forces that push in the other direction. I think that promote a healthy thing, but if you chose the way of integration and other Green parties, I think his focus will be compromised by the dynamics of games, but perhaps be able to find an alternative.

D.:

What is your theoretical approach to this fight?

JZ:

The anti-industrial. Unless we tackle this problem, we are avoiding addressing the main manifestation of mass society, which already has a term of 9,000 years. We can only recognize a reality that almost anyone happy, they are reacting to the human groups on every continent, in every country. Industrial society poisoned the air, leading to the enslavement of millions of people, just with indigenous peoples and their ways of life. And today not even try to hide their true nature, its agents operate in the light of day. Copenhagen has been an entirely predictable disaster and Obama is another Bush, it seems that finally the illusion is over and maybe now we can deal with our real problems.

D.:

What you think about the Internet? Is it a sign of domestication or has a specific gravity as a tool for transformation?

JZ:

I think both. I do not know here, but in the U.S. we spend our lives in front of the screen. We are addicted to this type of interaction, suppose that the existing level of helplessness. Today a friend is someone you've probably never seen in person, go everywhere with your mobile phone to your ear. It seems nobody wants to be present in this ravaged world, we are always elsewhere. But there is another part. This world is defined by technology, techno-culture is expanding rapidly, despite being economically exclusive. And on the basis of this process is postmodernism, which is characterized by the unconditional adoption of technology, as well as the loss of the ideas of causation, value or meaning. Only leaves room for the momentary and trivial.

D.:

Do you think this system has been implemented from the top or the drift is that we have worked ourselves?

JZ:

I think that this system comes from our consumption. And it will not be dealt with effectively without applying a radical critique of this phenomenon, because the technology itself is neutral. If you do not politicize the issue of its use and the roots of their existence is impossible to stop this situation. The negative effects of this model are visible in the physical and mental health of our society. For example, the phenomenon of school shootings and institutions. These pathological manifestations occur in more developed countries-USA, Finland and Germany, as symptoms of a dysfunctional society, the emptiness of a standardized world that is destroying the idea of \u200b\u200bcommunity and many other important concepts in our lives. As we continue betting on a technological society mass, as does the left, we are not able to get rid of all this burden and return to direct experience of the world.

D.:

And how to deal with the practical process of changing the model?

JZ:

Putting the issue on the table, giving the importance it deserves and stressing the central role it should play in public discussion. Our approach involves destroying all the technological apparatus before it destroys us and to eliminate all value and texture of life. It tries to reconnect with the land, so our main inspiration are the livelihoods of indigenous peoples.

D.:

What if the system would fall morning and had the opportunity to intervene and implement specific changes?

JZ:

The problem is that most of the population of large cities would die in three days. Not last long without power, with rotting food, no skills to survive and the instinct atrophied. Do not know what to eat, what to plant is which, how to make fire, find water, shelter ... We have to prepare for that process, because the city is artificial and unsustainable, and does not represent the world we will face when the system stops ... In addition, these tools have empowered political survival, gives a sense of autonomy. If you want to exit the system, but do not have such knowledge, certainly not give the final step.