Back to the Futurists: Accelerationism Left and Right (Prometheus Books 2019) (original) (raw)
Related papers
Futures of Accelerationism (3)
Noys (2016) one thing from this opening text: the final battle for the future is to be fought now, in our present. This, I think, is true. Not only true about the actuality of fighting to determine that future as the world seems to slide inexorably to various forms of barbarism, lacking any seemingly realistic figure of socialism, but also true about the fight over the image of the future as well. This battle over the image of the future is at the centre of the accelerationism debate. The defining feature of accelerationism, broadly-speaking the demand that we engage with forms of technology and abstraction as the means to reach postcapitalism, has been the claim to the future. The very title of Nick Srnicek and Alex Williams's book Inventing the Future suggests this, as does all the futuristic and sci-fi imagery that has surrounded accelerationism. The accelerationists claim they are the only ones to offer us a future: all that actually-existing neoliberal capitalism promises is more of the same, and 'there is no alternative' could be written as 'there is no future', except the market stamping on a human face forever; the left is often no better, mired in 'folk politics', driven by nostalgia for social democracy or the face-toface ideology of small communities resulting in a regression to the past. I, of course, dispute this claim to a monopoly on the future. 1 Here I want to give a brief history of the term accelerationism, which at least is part of the condition of understanding the debate. Then I want to recap and refine my critique of accelerationism in its dominant forms. My interest, however, lies not so much in repeating these already fading debates but considering the battle that is being fought over the future in the present. Here I suggest that accelerationism often presents a limited sense of what images are on offer of the future, particularly underestimating the problem of reactionary images of the future. I also want to
The debate about accelerationism has been violent and vituperative. Here I want to consider the battle over the notion of the future. Accelerationism, in its various forms, has often claimed a monopoly on the future. The argument is that only by engaging with capitalist forms of technology and abstraction can we envisage a future beyond capitalism. Neoliberal capitalism only provides more of the same, while accelerationism can force a new future into being or even invent the future. Restating and developing my critiques of these claims I probe the problems of the subject, time and politics in left and right accelerationism. I also consider the difficulties on coming to terms with reactionary, if not fascist, alternative 'futures' as one of the stakes of the present moment. In conclusion I try to develop a left response to these problems.
Accelerationism… and degrowth: The Left’s strange bedfellows
Uneven Earth, 2017
Degrowth and accelerationism, two increasingly popular terms on the left, have more in common than I initially thought—both in practical terms (policies and strategy), and in their general ideological positions. And they have a lot to learn from each other. What follows is a bit of a report: a conversation between the two proposals. There will be some critique, but also some cross-pollination. My discussion revolves around a couple of themes: the importance of utopian thinking, technology, economy, and political strategy. If there is commonality there is also difference. How is it possible that, considering so many agreements, they have such an oppositional framing of the problem at hand? By way of a conclusion, I suggest that the notion of ‘speed’—and their divergent views of it—is fundamental to each position.
Acceleration Theory, Temporal Regimes, and Politics Today. An Interview with Hartmut Rosa
Res Publica, 2021
Hartmut Rosa is currently one of the best-known sociologists in Germany. In this interview, we un-dertake a brief retrospective of his initial work on temporality. In doing so, we evaluate his theory 15 years after its first publication in German (Suhrkamp 2005). The interview seeks to examine the topicality of the acceleration theory through the voice of one of its main authors, having in mind current socio-polit-ical phenomena such as the pandemic deceleration, social discontents (both global and local), energy challenges, and the revival of old nationalisms.
Let me start with a caveat: my paper engages with sub-and lowbrow cultures only indirectly. I am interested in the relationship between technophile subcultures, especially cyberpunk fiction/films, and the recent theory current called "accelerationism." My interest goes in both directions: on the one hand, I want to show how accelerationism uses cyberpunk's subversive imaginary as inspiration for its politics. On the other hand, I would like to discuss in the seminar what potentially uneasy questions the appropriation of sub-/lowbrow culture by accelerationism pose to us.