Podcast appearances and mentions of Guy Debord

This episode is available as a youtube video with reference images, visual gags, and other additional content at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpPZKdXGOUY    The gang discusses how aesthetics took over political life thanks to the influence of Ed Bernays and mass media, and what that means for the information age. We use the works of Walter Benjamin and Guy Debord to help us answer the question: Can you still make real art?

Det tredje seminariet i CMS serie om utopier. Denna gång på temat situationisterna och deras förhållande till utopibegreppet. Visst lever vi i ett skådespelssamhälle? Ett samhälle av spektakel där vi alieneras och passiviseras genom en ohämmad konsumtion. Ett skådespel som både är kapitalism och som syftar till kapitalismens bevarande. Som förstör allt i sin väg – våra relationer, vår hälsa, miljö och klimat. År 1967 publicerade situationisten Guy Debord boken La Société du spectacle – Skådespelssamhället – som kom att bli en viktig inspiration för majrevolten i Frankrike nästkommande år. Även i Sverige fanns situationister i exempelvis Gyllene flottans gestalt. Situationisternas influenser på efterkommande teori och praktik är också stor där filosofer, osynliga kommittéer och reclaim-rörelser alla låtit sig inspireras. Men hur förhåller sig den situationistiska teorin och praktiken till utopier? Vilka utopiska öppningar finner vi i ett allomgripande skådespelssamhälle? Vad pekar bortåt, utåt, framåt? Om bland annat detta samtalar Roxy Farhat, konstnär och filmare bakom The Society of the Spectacle, och Alexander Ekelund, författaren bakom Den Gyllene flottans seglats – Svenska anarkister och situationister i 1960- 1970-talets vänstervåg. Seminariet hölls den 22 april 2025 på teater Tribunalen i Stockholm.

Hello Interactors,This week, the European Space Agency launched a satellite to "weigh" Earth's 1.5 trillion trees. It will give scientists deeper insight into forests and their role in the climate — far beyond surface readings. Pretty cool. And it's coming from Europe.Meanwhile, I learned that the U.S. Secretary of Defense — under Trump — had a makeup room installed in the Pentagon to look better on TV. Also pretty cool, I guess. And very American.The contrast was hard to miss. Even with better data, the U.S. shows little appetite for using geographic insight to actually address climate change. Information is growing. Willpower, not so much.So it was oddly clarifying to read a passage Christopher Hobson posted on Imperfect Notes from a book titled America by a French author — a travelogue of softs. Last week I offered new lenses through which to see the world, I figured I'd try this French pair on — to see America, and the world it effects, as he did.PAPER, POWER, AND PROJECTIONI still have a folded paper map of Seattle in the door of my car. It's a remnant of a time when physical maps reflected the reality before us. You unfolded a map and it innocently offered the physical world on a page. The rest was left to you — including knowing how to fold it up again.But even then, not all maps were neutral or necessarily innocent. Sure, they crowned capitals and trimmed borders, but they could also leave things out or would make certain claims. From empire to colony, from mission to market, maps often arrived not to reflect place, but to declare control of it. Still, we trusted it…even if was an illusion.I learned how to interrogate maps in my undergraduate history of cartography class — taught by the legendary cartographer Waldo Tobler. But even with that knowledge, when I was then taught how to make maps, that interrogation was more absent. I confidently believed I was mediating truth. The lines and symbols I used pointed to substance; they signaled a thing. I traced rivers from existing base maps with a pen on vellum and trusted they existed in the world as sure as the ink on the page. I cut out shading for a choropleth map and believed it told a stable story about population, vegetation, or economics. That trust was embodied in representation — the idea that a sign meant something enduring. That we could believe what maps told us.This is the world of semiotics — the study of how signs create meaning. American philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce offered a sturdy model: a sign (like a map line) refers to an object (the river), and its meaning emerges in interpretation. Meaning, in this view, is relational — but grounded. A stop sign, a national anthem, a border — they meant something because they pointed beyond themselves, to a world we shared.But there are cracks in this seemingly sturdy model.These cracks pose this question: why do we trust signs in the first place? That trust — in maps, in categories, in data — didn't emerge from neutrality. It was built atop agendas.Take the first U.S. census in 1790. It didn't just count — it defined. Categories like “free white persons,” “all other free persons,” and “slaves” weren't neutral. They were political tools, shaping who mattered and by how much. People became variables. Representation became abstraction.Or Carl Linnaeus, the 18th-century Swedish botanist who built the taxonomies we still use: genus, species, kingdom. His system claimed objectivity but was shaped by distance and empire. Linnaeus never left Sweden. He named what he hadn't seen, classified people he'd never met — sorting humans into racial types based on colonial stereotypes. These weren't observations. They were projections based on stereotypes gathered from travelers, missionaries, and imperial officials.Naming replaced knowing. Life was turned into labels. Biology became filing. And once abstracted, it all became governable, measurable, comparable, and, ultimately, manageable.Maps followed suit.What once lived as a symbolic invitation — a drawing of place — became a system of location. I was studying geography at a time (and place) when Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and GIScience was transforming cartography. Maps weren't just about visual representations; they were spatial databases. Rows, columns, attributes, and calculations took the place of lines and shapes on map. Drawing what we saw turned to abstracting what could then be computed so that it could then be visualized, yes, but also managed.Chris Perkins, writing on the philosophy of mapping, argued that digital cartographies didn't just depict the world — they constituted it. The map was no longer a surface to interpret, but a script to execute. As critical geographers Sam Hind and Alex Gekker argue, the modern “mapping impulse” isn't about understanding space — it's about optimizing behavior through it; in a world of GPS and vehicle automation, the map no longer describes the territory, it becomes it. Laura Roberts, writing on film and geography, showed how maps had fused with cinematic logic — where places aren't shown, but performed. Place and navigation became narrative. New York in cinema isn't a place — it's a performance of ambition, alienation, or energy. Geography as mise-en-scène.In other words, the map's loss of innocence wasn't just technical. It was ontological — a shift in the very nature of what maps are and what kind of reality they claim to represent. Geography itself had entered the domain of simulation — not representing space but staging it. You can simulate traveling anywhere in the world, all staged on Google maps. Last summer my son stepped off the train in Edinburgh, Scotland for the first time in his life but knew exactly where he was. He'd learned it driving on simulated streets in a simulated car on XBox. He walked us straight to our lodging.These shifts in reality over centuries weren't necessarily mistakes. They unfolded, emerged, or evolved through the rational tools of modernity — and for a time, they worked. For many, anyway. Especially for those in power, seeking power, or benefitting from it. They enabled trade, governance, development, and especially warfare. But with every shift came this question: at what cost?FROM SIGNS TO SPECTACLEAs early as the early 1900s, Max Weber warned of a world disenchanted by bureaucracy — a society where rationalization would trap the human spirit in what he called an iron cage. By mid-century, thinkers pushed this further.Michel Foucault revealed how systems of knowledge — from medicine to criminal justice — were entangled with systems of power. To classify was to control. To represent was to discipline. Roland Barthes dissected the semiotics of everyday life — showing how ads, recipes, clothing, even professional wrestling were soaked in signs pretending to be natural.Guy Debord, in the 1967 The Society of the Spectacle, argued that late capitalism had fully replaced lived experience with imagery. “The spectacle,” he wrote, “is not a collection of images, but a social relation among people, mediated by images.”Then came Jean Baudrillard — a French sociologist, media theorist, and provocateur — who pushed the critique of representation to its limit. In the 1980s, where others saw distortion, he saw substitution: signs that no longer referred to anything real. Most vividly, in his surreal, gleaming 1986 travelogue America, he described the U.S. not as a place, but as a performance — a projection without depth, still somehow running.Where Foucault showed that knowledge was power, and Debord showed that images replaced life, Baudrillard argued that signs had broken free altogether. A map might once distort or simplify — but it still referred to something real. By the late 20th century, he argued, signs no longer pointed to anything. They pointed only to each other.You didn't just visit Disneyland. You visited the idea of America — manufactured, rehearsed, rendered. You didn't just use money. You used confidence by handing over a credit card — a symbol of wealth that is lighter and moves faster than any gold.In some ways, he was updating a much older insight by another Frenchman. When Alexis de Tocqueville visited America in the 1830s, he wasn't just studying law or government — he was studying performance. He saw how Americans staged democracy, how rituals of voting and speech created the image of a free society even as inequality and exclusion thrived beneath it. Tocqueville wasn't cynical. He simply understood that America believed in its own image — and that belief gave it a kind of sovereign feedback loop.Baudrillard called this condition simulation — when representation becomes self-contained. When the distinction between real and fake no longer matters because everything is performance. Not deception — orchestration.He mapped four stages of this logic:* Faithful representation – A sign reflects a basic reality. A map mirrors the terrain.* Perversion of reality – The sign begins to distort. Think colonial maps as logos or exclusionary zoning.* Pretending to represent – The sign no longer refers to anything but performs as if it does. Disneyland isn't America — it's the fantasy of America. (ironically, a car-free America)* Pure simulation – The sign has no origin or anchor. It floats. Zillow heatmaps, Uber surge zones — maps that don't reflect the world, but determine how you move through it.We don't follow maps as they were once known anymore. We follow interfaces.And not just in apps. Cities themselves are in various stages of simulation. New York still sells itself as a global center. But in a distributed globalized and digitized economy, there is no center — only the perversion of an old reality. Paris subsidizes quaint storefronts not to nourish citizens, but to preserve the perceived image of Paris. Paris pretending to be Paris. Every city has its own marketing campaign. They don't manage infrastructure — they manage perception. The skyline is a product shot. The streetscape is marketing collateral and neighborhoods are optimized for search.Even money plays this game.The U.S. dollar wasn't always king. That title once belonged to the British pound — backed by empire, gold, and industry. After World War II, the dollar took over, pegged to gold under the Bretton Woods convention — a symbol of American postwar power stability…and perversion. It was forged in an opulent, exclusive, hotel in the mountains of New Hampshire. But designed in the style of Spanish Renaissance Revival, it was pretending to be in Spain. Then in 1971, Nixon snapped the dollar's gold tether. The ‘Nixon Shock' allowed the dollar to float — its value now based not on metal, but on trust. It became less a store of value than a vessel of belief. A belief that is being challenged today in ways that recall the instability and fragmentation of the pre-WWII era.And this dollar lives in servers, not Industrial Age iron vaults. It circulates as code, not coin. It underwrites markets, wars, and global finance through momentum alone. And when the pandemic hit, there was no digging into reserves.The Federal Reserve expanded its balance sheet with keystrokes — injecting trillions into the economy through bond purchases, emergency loans, and direct payments. But at the same time, Trump 1.0 showed printing presses rolling, stacks of fresh bills bundled and boxed — a spectacle of liquidity. It was monetary policy as theater. A simulation of control, staged in spreadsheets by the Fed and photo ops by the Executive Branch. Not to reflect value, but to project it. To keep liquidity flowing and to keep the belief intact.This is what Baudrillard meant by simulation. The sign doesn't lie — nor does it tell the truth. It just works — as long as we accept it.MOOD OVER MEANINGReality is getting harder to discern. We believe it to be solid — that it imposes friction. A law has consequences. A price reflects value. A city has limits. These things made sense because they resist us. Because they are real.But maybe that was just the story we told. Maybe it was always more mirage than mirror.Now, the signs don't just point to reality — they also replace it. We live in a world where the image outpaces the institution. Where the copy is smoother than the original. Where AI does the typing. Where meaning doesn't emerge — it arrives prepackaged and pre-viral. It's a kind of seductive deception. It's hyperreality where performance supersedes substance. Presence and posture become authority structured in style.Politics is not immune to this — it's become the main attraction.Trump's first 100 days didn't aim to stabilize or legislate but to signal. Deportation as UFC cage match — staged, brutal, and televised. Tariff wars as a way of branding power — chaos with a catchphrase. Climate retreat cast as perverse theater. Gender redefined and confined by executive memo. Birthright citizenship challenged while sedition pardoned. Even the Gulf of Mexico got renamed. These aren't policies, they're productions.Power isn't passing through law. It's passing through the affect of spectacle and a feed refresh.Baudrillard once wrote that America doesn't govern — it narrates. Trump doesn't manage policy, he manages mood. Like an actor. When America's Secretary of Defense, a former TV personality, has a makeup studio installed inside the Pentagon it's not satire. It's just the simulation, doing what it does best: shining under the lights.But this logic runs deeper than any single figure.Culture no longer unfolds. It reloads. We don't listen to the full album — we lift 10 seconds for TikTok. Music is made for algorithms. Fashion is filtered before it's worn. Selfhood is a brand channel. Identity is something to monetize, signal, or defend — often all at once.The economy floats too. Meme stocks. NFTs. Speculative tokens. These aren't based in value — they're based in velocity. Attention becomes the currency.What matters isn't what's true, but what trends. In hyperreality, reference gives way to rhythm. The point isn't to be accurate. The point is to circulate. We're not being lied to.We're being engaged. And this isn't a bug, it's a feature.Which through a Baudrillard lens is why America — the simulation — persists.He saw it early. Describing strip malls, highways, slogans, themed diners he saw an America that wasn't deep. That was its genius he saw. It was light, fast paced, and projected. Like the movies it so famously exports. It didn't need justification — it just needed repetition.And it's still repeating.Las Vegas is the cathedral of the logic of simulation — a city that no longer bothers pretending. But it's not alone. Every city performs, every nation tries to brand itself. Every policy rollout is scored like a product launch. Reality isn't navigated — it's streamed.And yet since his writing, the mood has shifted. The performance continues, but the music underneath it has changed. The techno-optimism of Baudrillard's ‘80s an ‘90s have curdled. What once felt expansive now feels recursive and worn. It's like a show running long after the audience has gone home. The rager has ended, but Spotify is still loudly streaming through the speakers.“The Kids' Guide to the Internet” (1997), produced by Diamond Entertainment and starring the unnervingly wholesome Jamison family. It captures a moment of pure techno-optimism — when the Internet was new, clean, and family-approved. It's not just a tutorial; it's a time capsule of belief, staged before the dream turned into something else. Before the feed began to feed on us.Trumpism thrives on this terrain. And yet the world is changing around it. Climate shocks, mass displacement, spiraling inequality — the polycrisis has a body count. Countries once anchored to American leadership are squinting hard now, trying to see if there's anything left behind the screen. Adjusting the antenna in hopes of getting a clearer signal. From Latin America to Southeast Asia to Europe, the question grows louder: Can you trust a power that no longer refers to anything outside itself?Maybe Baudrillard and Tocqueville are right — America doesn't point to a deeper truth. It points to itself. Again and again and again. It is the loop. And even now, knowing this, we can't quite stop watching. There's a reason we keep refreshing. Keep scrolling. Keep reacting. The performance persists — not necessarily because we believe in it, but because it's the only script still running.And whether we're horrified or entertained, complicit or exhausted, engaged or ghosted, hired or fired, immigrated or deported, one thing remains strangely true: we keep feeding it. That's the strange power of simulation in an attention economy. It doesn't need conviction. It doesn't need conscience. It just needs attention — enough to keep the momentum alive. The simulation doesn't care if the real breaks down. It just keeps rendering — soft, seamless, and impossible to look away from. Like a dream you didn't choose but can't wake up from.REFERENCESBarthes, R. (1972). Mythologies (A. Lavers, Trans.). Hill and Wang. (Original work published 1957)Baudrillard, J. (1986). America (C. Turner, Trans.). Verso.Debord, G. (1994). The Society of the Spectacle (D. Nicholson-Smith, Trans.). Zone Books. (Original work published 1967)Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison (A. Sheridan, Trans.). Vintage Books.Hind, S., & Gekker, A. (2019). On autopilot: Towards a flat ontology of vehicular navigation. In C. Lukinbeal et al. (Eds.), Media's Mapping Impulse. Franz Steiner Verlag.Linnaeus, C. (1735). Systema Naturae (1st ed.). Lugduni Batavorum.Perkins, C. (2009). Philosophy and mapping. In R. Kitchin & N. Thrift (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of Human Geography. Elsevier.Raaphorst, K., Duchhart, I., & van der Knaap, W. (2017). The semiotics of landscape design communication. Landscape Research.Roberts, L. (2008). Cinematic cartography: Movies, maps and the consumption of place. In R. Koeck & L. Roberts (Eds.), Cities in Film: Architecture, Urban Space and the Moving Image. University of Liverpool.Tocqueville, A. de. (2003). Democracy in America (G. Lawrence, Trans., H. Mansfield & D. Winthrop, Eds.). University of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1835)Weber, M. (1958). The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (T. Parsons, Trans.). Charles Scribner's Sons. (Original work published 1905) This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit interplace.io

Carmen Inés Rivera Lugo José Ángel Gandía Pabón Luis Raúl Sánchez Pedraza Martha Figueroa Gesualdo, consejera psicóloga Primer segmento Muerte del Papa Retos de la Iglesia Conflictos: Conservadores vs progresistas Órdenes vs movimientos laicos Norte global vs sur global Sociedad del Espectáculo de Guy Debord como punto de partida Segundo segmento Primeros 100 días de la administración Jgo LUMA Ambiente Nombramientos ¿Podcast? Tercer y cuarto segmento Primeros 100 días de la administración Jgo LUMA Ambiente Nombramientos ¿Podcast?

So, you think you had some judgments? TOO BAD THEY ARE ALL REFUTED!This week Jason and Andrew watched and discussed Guy Debord's follow up to his Society of the Spectacle film, which is essentially a clapback at his haters. As any good Regrettable discussion goes, the film was the anchor, but the topics ranged far and wide. Enjoy!Refutation of All the Judgements, Pro or Con, Thus Far Rendered on the Film “The Society of the Spectacle" (1975)https://www.ubu.com/film/debord_refutation.html Send us a textSupport the show

Fabrizio Guarducci"Il richiamo del sentimento"Lorenzo de' Medici Presswww.lorenzodemedicipress.itElvira, una studiosa, inizia una complessa ricerca sul movimento religioso dei Catari e sull'attualità del loro messaggio spirituale.Vuole scrivere un nuovo libro sull'argomento Il suo percorso procede con importanti testi antichissimi di religione, partendo dalle pagine del trattato gnostico Kephalaia: tra questi un raro e dimenticato vangelo gnostico – la Pistis Sophia – in cui Gesù spiega agli apostoli cosa accade all'uomo dopo la morte e che cosa c'è nell'aldilà. Secondo la Pistis Sophia, Gesù dopo la morte rimase 11 anni con gli Apostoli per spiegare loro questi segreti e la via verso il raggiungimento del divino.Elvira sente di compiere, al tempo stesso, anche un viaggio dentro il proprio animo. Ma sarà un'inattesa presenza, incontrata casualmente, a trasportarla verso un modo completamente diverso di considerare il sentimento, l'animo umano e la ricerca del vero significato del divino.La sua ricerca è diventata un'altra cosa e il suo libro è davvero il punto di arrivo per una nuova scoperta del sentimento.Fabrizio Guarducci si è formato nella concezione sociale e umana di Giorgio La Pira. Dopo aver vissuto il movimento Underground alla fine degli anni Sessanta negli Stati Uniti e aver conosciuto Guy Debord in Francia, ha aderito convintamente al Situazionismo.Ha fondato il Dipartimento di Antropologia culturale dell'Istituto Internazionale Lorenzo de' Medici di Firenze. Ha insegnato Mistica, Estetica e Tanatologia, dedicandosi interamente alla ricerca dei linguaggi come strumenti per migliorare l'interiorità dell'individuo e per trasformare in positivo la realtà che ci circonda. È, inoltre, autore cinematografico: Paradigma italiano (premiato al PhilaFilm, 1993), Two days (2003) e Il mio viaggio in Italia (vincitore del Golden Eagle, 2005). Come autore, produttore e regista ha realizzato i film Mare di grano (2018), Una sconosciuta (2021), Anemos (2022) e La partita delle emozioni (2025). Ha pubblicato i saggi La parola ritrovata (2013), Theoria. Il divino oltre il dogma (2020) e i romanzi Il quinto volto (2016), La parola perduta (2019), La sconosciuta (2020), Duetto (2021), Amor (2022), Il villaggio dei cani che cantano (2022), La partita delle emozioni (2023) ed Eclissi (2023, selezione Premio Strega 2024).IL POSTO DELLE PAROLEascoltare fa pensarewww.ilpostodelleparole.itDiventa un supporter di questo podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/il-posto-delle-parole--1487855/support.

Rencontrer Philippe Janeada était pour moi comme boire une verticale d'Henri Jayer ou les vinifs de Jules Chauvet : un rêve inaccessible. Et pourtant, il aura seulement fallu l'intermédiaire d'une gentille librairie (Librairie Paroles à Saint Mandé) pour que la rencontre se fasse. Venu avec ma pile de livres, je comprends dès la première dédicace que l'éminent romancier est à la mesure de sa littérature : fluide et généreux. Rendez-vous est donné au cinéma Louxor pour évoquer la trajectoire du Monsieur : entre Oban et contre-enquêtes nous évoquons les motifs de sa littérature, la fréquentation des bistrots, le Café Moineau et les fantômes de Guy Debord qui sculptent le récit de son dernier ouvrage. Décidément la littérature, comme La désinvolture, est une bien belle chose ! Merci à Manon du cinéma Louxor. Merci à Josimar des Vins Voctor pour la cuvée "Ma carrière" en Saint-Joseph. Extraits : Les hommes de la Mer – Jonh Ford – 1940 La merditude des choses - Felix Van Groeningen – 2009 Les Ambassadeurs - Naceur Ktari - 1977

Rencontrer Philippe Janeada était pour moi comme boire une verticale d'Henri Jayer ou les vinifs de Jules Chauvet : un rêve inaccessible. Et pourtant, il aura seulement fallu l'intermédiaire d'une gentille librairie (Librairie Paroles à Saint Mandé) pour que la rencontre se fasse. Venu avec ma pile de livres, je comprends dès la première dédicace que l'éminent romancier est à la mesure de sa littérature : fluide et généreux. Rendez-vous est donné au cinéma Louxor pour évoquer la trajectoire du Monsieur : entre Oban et contre-enquêtes nous évoquons les motifs de sa littérature, la fréquentation des bistrots, le Café Moineau et les fantômes de Guy Debord qui sculptent le récit de son dernier ouvrage. Décidément la littérature, comme La désinvolture, est une bien belle chose ! Merci à Manon du cinéma Louxor. Extraits : Les hommes de la Mer – Jonh Ford – 1940 La merditude des choses - Felix Van Groeningen – 2009 Les Ambassadeurs - Naceur Ktari - 1977

Bonus 5 - Greg Bennick, a fascinating guest of this episode, has led a life as eclectic as it is inspiring. From his upbringing in a small Connecticut town with career renegade parents to his gritty move to Seattle where he immersed himself in the punk music scene, Greg's journey underscores the beauty of living life on one's own terms. We explore his transition from aspiring rockstar to embracing roles in acting, music, and public speaking, along with his love for numismatics. His story is a testament to the power of pursuing passions and redefining success, promising listeners an engaging exploration of a life lived authentically.In a riveting account, Greg shares a pivotal moment from his youth that taught him the importance of focus and presence. Using the metaphor of "keeping your eyes on the knife," he emphasizes the necessity of attention amidst life's distractions. This concept is central to his book, "Reclaim the Moment: Seven Strategies to Build a Better Now," where he challenges the superficial allure of modern society. Inspired by Guy Debord's "Society of the Spectacle," Greg urges us to engage directly with life, encouraging listeners to seize opportunities and live beyond the superficial distractions that often cloud our experiences.Finally, listeners are taken on a global journey featuring Greg's spoken word tour across Russia and Ukraine, which highlights the shared humanity that transcends cultural boundaries. Greg challenges fear-driven narratives as he shares lessons on kindness from his travels to places like South Africa, Rwanda, and Thailand. These adventures underscore his belief in the innate goodness of people and the essential role of kindness in our lives. This episode promises to entertain, educate, and inspire, unearthing the extraordinary stories and the philosophy that guides Greg's life.To learn more about Greg please visit his website www.gregbennick.com. You can also follow Greg on Instagram @gregbennick.To sign up for my newsletter and a chance to win a Sacred Spaces Gift Box please visit www.journeywithjake.net/newsletter. To learn more about Sacred Spaces Volume 3 please visit www.colleenaviscoaching.com/events. Visit geneticinsights.co and use the code "DISCOVER25" to enjoy a sweet 25% off your first purchase.

Para 2025 não temos grandes planos, apenas a insistência, os gestos que exigem ser lidos na continuação de um tumulto, prosseguimos os esforços, os erros de que ainda somos capazes, com aquela liberdade de já tudo ter sido dito, estando tudo ainda por fazer. Sem nenhum compromisso com a inocência, usamos um relógio morto no pulso, e se o tempo se decompõe, como esse inodoro cadáver, o tique taque soa a uma risada. Só agora começámos a perceber o que é isso da História, como esta faz de nós os seus objectos e, no entanto, nunca nos redime. A sensação de culpa ainda é a glória a que aspiramos. A memória começa a funcionar muito tarde na vida, e apenas para ligar os vestígios de um crime tão repetido, por isso precisamos de uma coisa e do seu contrário para poder falar, sobretudo para escrever e nos movermos entre os diferentes papéis. Também nós nos ouvimos, e é mesmo esse movimento de estranheza aquilo que melhor se aproveita. Dizemos coisas que vão para além do que sabemos, e por isso mesmo nos é tão difícil sermos muito detalhados. É isso o que nos agrada, o fazer companhia a uma outra coisa, sentir como nós próprios invadimos as nossas vidas, aceitamos o risco de se ser e não ser uma coisa, estar do nosso lado e contra nós. Deve ser um risco isto, havendo a possibilidade sempre de nos denunciarmos, de requerermos a nossa condenação. Muitos hoje só conseguem ser solidários consigo mesmos, e isso faz deles os crápulas que se sabe. Mas parece-nos evidente que devemos ser capazes de fazer aquele gesto de renúncia que ensinou Kafka, ao lembrar que no confronto entre nós e o mundo, melhor será que sejamos nós a perecer e que o mundo ofereça a sua esperança a outros. Aquilo que se escreve pertence ao sentido que alguém dará ao texto no momento em que este se torne urgente, e apenas em função disso este terá algum futuro ou não terá nada. Um dos problemas da escrita nos nossos dias, do seu excesso, é o ser notório que é feita com um propósito qualquer, imediato, são coisas que redigem uns tipos sentados, sem oferecer margem ao acaso, a esse esparso ditado… Falta-nos aquele sentido corporal do teatro, uma poética cheia de ardor, que exija os seus corpos, actores que se esquecem de si mesmos e vão até ao limite e ao pavor das circunstâncias dramáticas, sem depois vir receber aplausos nem pedir desculpas ao público. Em vez desses que no final se mostram à boca de cena, acolhendo o louvor, seria necessária uma unidade de tal forma profunda com o sentido que o público tivesse de se defender dos actores, que caíriam sobre ele por ter vindo ali em busca de uma continuação do mesmo enredo e artifício que faz da vida esta coisa sem relação com nada. Abusou-se das convenções, e hoje toma-se as formas por isso mesmo, o hábito desolador do que se vai repetindo numa ênfase cada vez mais estéril. O espectáculo dissociou tudo, e o sentido já não impele a acção. Müller diz-nos às tantas estar absolutamente convencido de que o fim da literatura vem com esta resistência ao teatro, esse regime suspensivo em que se desfiam todas as hipóteses porque não se admite que a vida possa abandonar a sua falta de razão por essa urgência que compele os corpos. O nosso desânimo parte desta fractura, o facto de toda a criação se ter submetido aos ditames da produção, e desde os jornais aos projectos editoriais, abandonou-se todo o vigor, o próprio efeito de um gesto continuado, insistente, pondo-se as obras ao serviço das coisas como são em lugar de contestarem e desenvolverem uma perspectiva desejante. O importante nos escritores significativos era a forma como surgiam como intrusos gerando alguma perturbação. O seu debate com a forma residia nesse efeito de transtorno, e só assim podiam considerar-se poetas ou artistas, actores ou o quer que seja que não se viciou nem está rendido à mera repetição, às nauseantes representações que apenas servem para dilatar o espaço entre aquilo que somos e aquilo que gostaríamos de ser. Para nos servirmos de alguns exemplos, Müller lembra que Artaud nunca partiu de uma separação entre o público e a cena, mas que tentou restituir ao teatro uma função vital, que, na generalidade, este há muito tempo atraiçoou. Não há nada mais amestrado e inconsequente do que este género de actor que admite ser transformado numa celebridade, para dar corda às ilusões de uma audiência que só quer ser reconfortada no seu imobilismo, enquanto alimenta esses afectos à distância. E Müller vinca como também Brecht entendia que a força de uma obra teatral não deve ser aferida pela dramaturgia, mas com a realidade a que se refere. As instâncias de mediação começam por só se referir à realidade através dessa reprodução de imagens e lugares comuns que degradam qualquer possibilidade de que se pense o mundo enquanto uma composição unitária, em que há causas e efeitos, em que vibra em tudo um nexo contínuo. As representações que se dizem realistas começam por opor a matéria ao espírito, e assim condicionam de partida a nossa relação com aquilo que está constantemente a ser transformado pela nossa acção. E não há conspiração mais degradante do que a da impotência, desde logo porque desloca todo os efeitos para a esfera de uma sórdida minoria que se elege a si mesma contra os interesses de todos os outros. Assim, no contexto actual, as democracias conseguiram o que nenhum regime totalitário conseguiu: legitimar as piores formas de exploração fazendo com que a miséria de uns constituísse o tecto das aspirações dos demais. Actualmente, só os mais imbecis não reconhecem como as sociedades industriais modernas têm como eixo da sua ideologia e acção política reprimir a fantasia, instrumentalizá-la a favor dos seus fins e, assim, vulgarizá-la até se reconduzir inteiramente aos aspectos mais imediatos e mais sórdidos da realidade. Em vez de projectos, os homens passam a ser meros agentes viciosos, vítimas dos seus caprichos e apetites. Por esta razão, não pode haver um princípio de organização política, nem muito menos uma acção revolucionária, que passe ao lado dessa necessidade de mobilizar a fantasia. Brecht formulou-o desta maneira: haveria que possibilitar ao espectador que este pudesse a todo o momento desembrulhar aquilo a que é exposto em imagens alternativas, em processos alternativos. Que quando este se viesse diante de uma representação, quando escutasse um diálogo desenrolando-se desta ou daquela maneira, o espectador pudesse reimaginá-lo ou mesmo invertê-lo de forma a que fosse antes o diálogo que ele julga ser mais urgente ou desejável. Neste sentido, Müller rejeita as obras como coisas acabadas e que se dirigem à posteridade ou ao mundo contemporâneo, notando que esse efeito foi abolido no mesmo sentido em que deveria ser a propriedade privada dos meios de produção. "Num mundo realmente reinvertido, o verdadeiro é um momento do falso", diz-nos Guy Debord, e, se a verdade e a mentira se tornaram reversíveis, se todos os factos estão sujeitos a deturpação, nunca como hoje foi tão decisivo que o jornalismo se submetesse a um profundo exame, de forma a repensar o seu papel e influência, as suas estratégias, a sua relação com o público, a pensar novas formas de subjectividade, capazes de resistência e de crítica, mas não nos moldes do individualismo clássico, liquidado pelo desenvolvimento do capitalismo tardio. Pois, "se o ‘indivíduo' enquanto tal não é nenhuma substância eterna, mas sim uma forma histórica de subjectivação (hoje objectivamente destruída, mesmo que simultaneamente idolatrada pela ideologia do consumo e pela indústria cultural), isso, porém, não implica que devamos desistir da ideia de sujeitos capazes de resistência e liberdade", como vinca Jeanne Marie Gagnebin. Neste episódio e para levar mais longe estas indagações, convidámos Margarida David Cardoso, jornalista integrante do Fumaça, um projecto editorial marcado por uma relação comunitária, horizontal, e que representa bem esse espírito de inquietação e compromisso, aquele empenho dos que são capazes de dedicar-se quotidianamente ao esforço de promover as mudanças de perspectiva que trazem em si visões alternativas.

Avec Maxime Morin, tienstiens, Auriane Veltenet Saul PandelakisAnimation : Patrick Cockpit Critique subversive de l'ordre dominant, manifeste au contenu un poil hermétique et surtout incompréhensible sans son cadre conceptuel marxiste, La Société du spectacle de Guy Debord a connu une postérité étonnante. Passée dans le langage courant, l'expression “société du spectacle” nous paraît intuitivement décrire la société de surconsommation dans laquelle nous vivons, un monde saturé de divertissements spectaculaires se superposant à la réalité des rapports sociaux jusqu'à lui faire écran. Notre rapport aux médias, aux écrans, de la spectacularisation de l'information à la mise en scène de soi sur les réseaux sociaux en passant par l'omniprésente publicité, tout nous semble spectacle. Le souci, c'est que le Capitalisme ayant toujours cette grande facilité à digérer ses propres critiques, la formule aura tôt fait de se diluer, certain·e·s critiques mettant tout sur le dos d'une jeunesse abrutie par les influenceurs Tiktok, ou blâmant une société d'individus narcissiques ayant perdu tout sens de l'authentique… Alors, comment se montrer critique des industries du spectacle et du divertissement sans nourrir à son insu le nouvel esprit du Capitalisme ? L'œuvre de Guy Debord peut-elle nous y aider et qu'a-t-elle encore à nous dire ? Cette table ronde aux allures de Debord pour les Nuls n'aura pas pour objet d'en constituer un cercle de lecture orthodoxe, mais d'initier un échange de points de vue entre artistes et écrivain·e·s à partir de ce thème. Avec Situations (éditions bandes détournées, 2023), Maxime Morin et tienstiens ont relevé le défi de proposer, en bandes dessinées, une lecture inspirée et décalée de La Société du spectacle, actualisée par leurs références à des productions culturelles mainstream, qu'ils détournent en exhibant leurs mécanismes avec une ironie mordante. Une œuvre drôle, parfois aux limites de l'absurde, qui n'oublie pas d'être politique. Ils échangeront avec deux auteur·ice·s ayant exploré dans leurs écrits la question des images, de leur médiatisation, leur usage par un ordre établi, ainsi que la manière dont elles façonnent les rapports entre les personnes. Table ronde dans le cadre de la 12e édition du festival Les Intergalactiques "Du Pain et des Jeux" le samedi 20 avril 2024.

This is an old episode of our friend Andrew's podcast that was recorded a few years ago. The podcast is now defunct, but we thought y'all deserved to hear it. In this episode Jason and Andrew watched and discussed Guy Debord's 1974 film version of The Society of the Spectacle.Enjoy and Happy New Year.Send us a textSupport the show

O debate na universidade: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGSobRn3IPo&t=0s Imagine que estamos vivendo dentro de uma vitrine gigantesca, onde tudo o que fazemos, pensamos ou sonhamos precisa ser exibido, comentado, avaliado e, principalmente, consumido. Parece exagero? Pois esse é o mundo que Guy Debord, lá em 1967, descreveu com lucidez desconcertante no livro “A Sociedade do Espetáculo”. Debord não tinha redes sociais, mas cravou o conceito: vivemos uma cultura onde o espetáculo substituiu a realidade.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

O debate na universidade: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGSobRn3IPo&t=0s Imagine que estamos vivendo dentro de uma vitrine gigantesca, onde tudo o que fazemos, pensamos ou sonhamos precisa ser exibido, comentado, avaliado e, principalmente, consumido. Parece exagero? Pois esse é o mundo que Guy Debord, lá em 1967, descreveu com lucidez desconcertante no livro “A Sociedade do Espetáculo”. Debord não tinha redes sociais, mas cravou o conceito: vivemos uma cultura onde o espetáculo substituiu a realidade.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

durée : 00:02:16 - L'Humeur du matin par Guillaume Erner - par : Guillaume Erner - La Société du spectacle est un essai écrit par Guy Debord. Dedans, il critique la société de consommation et dénonce le capitalisme. Le groupe automobile franco-italo-américain, Stellantis, en est l'exemple même aujourd'hui. - réalisation : Félicie Faugère

durée : 00:02:16 - L'Humeur du matin par Guillaume Erner - par : Guillaume Erner - La Société du spectacle est un essai écrit par Guy Debord. Dedans, il critique la société de consommation et dénonce le capitalisme. Le groupe automobile franco-italo-américain, Stellantis, en est l'exemple même aujourd'hui. - réalisation : Félicie Faugère

durée : 01:00:42 - Les Nuits de France Culture - par : Albane Penaranda, Mathias Le Gargasson, Antoine Dhulster - Par Thibault Henneton - Avec Emmanuel Guy, Patrick Marcolini, Pierre-Ulysse Barranque, Omer Corlaix, Isabelle Barbéris, Laurence Le Bras et Alexander Neumann - Réalisation Isabelle Yhuel - réalisation : Massimo Bellini

durée : 00:58:10 - Avec philosophie - par : Géraldine Muhlmann, Antoine Ravon - Né en 1931, Guy Debord a quinze ans de moins que Roland Barthes. En 1967, le philosophe publie "La Société du spectacle", critique du capitalisme, tandis que Barthes s'éloigne des tonalités marxistes de ses "Mythologies". Pourtant, leurs œuvres convergent, dénonçant mythes et spectacle. - réalisation : Nicolas Berger - invités : Eric Marty Écrivain et universitaire; Vincent Kaufmann Professeur émérite de littérature et d'histoire des médias à l'université de St. Gall en Suisse

Marxism förknippas med industri och teknikoptimism, men en uppmärksammad omläsning av Marx ger en bild av någon som vill läka klyftan mellan människan och världen. Dan Jönsson har läst Kohei Saito. Lyssna på alla avsnitt i Sveriges Radio Play. ESSÄ: Detta är en text där skribenten reflekterar över ett ämne eller ett verk. Åsikter som uttrycks är skribentens egna.Vi vandrar i cirklar i natten och förtärs av elden. Ungefär så kan man översätta det gamla latinska palindromet ”In girum imus nocte et consumimur igni” – en mening som alltså blir samma sak baklänges som framlänges. Det är också titeln på en film från 1978 av den franske författaren, filosofen och revolutionären Guy Debord som i en berömd sekvens låter kameran sväva över Paris tak medan Debord själv med stadig röst förkunnar att Paris inte längre existerar. Paris, som alla större städer, har försvunnit bakom en kuliss av konsumtionsvaror, reklam och löneslaveri som gör människor passiva och olyckliga. Det liv som pågår där är inte verkligt. Det är en illusion, ett skådespel som uppförs för att vi ska vända blicken åt ett annat håll. Bort från det liv, den värld vi anar när vi någon gång stannar upp och inser att – som Debord sa – ”under trottoaren ligger stranden”.Ett halvsekel senare kan man undra vad Debord skulle ha sagt om han fått se världen, och Paris för den delen, av idag. Låt mig våga en gissning: ”Vad var det jag sa?” Avståndet mellan då och nu är också avståndet mellan de båda geologiska epokerna holocen och antropocen – massutdöendets människoformade, klimatkrisande tidsålder. Överallt omkring oss spricker trottoarer upp och stränder bryter fram, samtidigt som de på något vis döljs alltmer effektivt av ett allt ymnigare flöde av konsumtionsvaror, pengar, teknisk produktutveckling och audiovisuella bländverk. Många människor lever numera i ett materiellt överflöd som aldrig tidigare i historien. Men det är, som vi ju alla vet, ett överflöd med en hotfull skuggsida av miljöförstöring och klimatkatastrofer, av rovdrift på både natur och människor. Också det utan historiskt motstycke.Vi förtärs av civilisationens eld. Men utan den skulle vi frysa ihjäl. Eller? Om överflödet kräver så våldsamma offer, kan det då verkligen beskrivas som en rikedom? Debords kritik av det moderna civilisationsprojektet är ett av många skott på ett idéhistoriskt träd som är lika gammalt som moderniteten själv. Karl Marx skriver i en central passage i sina ”Grundrisse” om hur den kapitalistiska varuproduktionen just skapar ett skenbart överflöd som döljer det förstörelseverk det faktiskt vilar på. Detta alltså redan på 1850-talet. I inledningen till ”Kapitalet” utvecklar han resonemanget med att beskriva hur ackumulationen av kapital – tillväxten, med andra ord – ger upphov till ett glapp i det han kallar ämnesomsättningen – Stoffwechsel – mellan människan och naturen. Kapitalets impuls att förmera sig tvingar fram behovet av att överskrida naturens egna gränser och där så sker hela tiden hitta nya, mer effektiva tekniker för att överbrygga glappet. Vilket förstås i sin tur skapar nya, ännu större glapp. Kapitalismen kan helt enkelt inget annat.Idag, om inte förr, ser vi konsekvenserna. Också Karl Marx skulle alltså kunna vakna upp i vår tid med ett trött ”vad var det jag sa”. Kanske inte exakt vad man förväntar sig om man har sett hur marxismens idéer i mer än hundra år, bland socialdemokrater såväl som kommunister, har tolkats snarast precis tvärtom – som att människans uppgift är att bemästra naturen, socialismens mål att tvinga den till underkastelse. Ja, den tekniska och industriella utvecklingen skulle i sig vara det som får kapitalismen att bryta samman och röjer vägen för befrielsen.Men linjen från Marx idéer till Guy Debords situationistiska civilisationskritik och vår tids paroller om klimaträttvisa är faktiskt rakare än man kan tro. Den japanske filosofen Kohei Saito har i ett par smått osannolika kioskvältare, ”Marx i antropocen” och ”Slow Down”, visat hur författaren till ”Kapitalet”, läst med nya vakna ögon, träder fram som inget mindre än en ekosocialistisk pionjär. Marx tankar om ”glappet i ämnesomsättningen” och om varuproduktionens destruktiva överflöd är visserligen skissartade men hamnar egentligen rätt nära de ekosofiska idéer om en hållbar jämviktsekonomi som ligger till grund för dagens radikala klimatrörelser.Det som för Saito särskilt styrker en sådan tolkning är de studier i sådant som geologi och evolutionsforskning som Marx ägnade sig åt mot slutet av sitt liv. Detta intresse har länge varit ganska okänt och resulterade heller aldrig i något publicerat verk – men det kastar enligt Saito ett helt annat ljus över det visionära i Marx analys. Tvärtemot den teknikromantik som traditionellt har präglat den marxistiska historiesynen, där motsättningen mellan människa och natur ses som en avgörande drivkraft, växer bilden fram av ett tankebygge där den dialektiska processen snarare handlar om att läka klyftan mellan människan och hennes värld. Ackumuleringen, förmeringen av kapital bygger enligt Marx på att sådant som ses som allmänna, gemensamma resurser ”hägnas in”, det vill säga privatiseras och ges ett marknadsvärde. Allmänningarnas rikedomar omvandlas med andra ord till ett alienerande varuflöde, där rikedom bara blir möjlig när efterfrågan överstiger utbudet. Det vill säga, i ett tillstånd av brist.Att ”läka klyftan” handlar därför, som Kohei Saito läser Marx, om att återupprätta allmänningarna, föra tillbaka privatiserade resurser till det gemensamma. Bara så blir det möjligt att bryta den onda spiral som kravet på evig tillväxt lett oss in i. Saito beskriver det som ett sätt att förena det ”röda” och det ”gröna”: alltså kraven på ekonomisk demokrati med dem på ekologisk hållbarhet. Han riktar hård kritik mot de delar av vänstern som i dagens teknikutveckling ser hoppet om en befrielse från löneslaveri och klassförtryck – och ofta med en sorts utopisk hänförelse, som i engelsmannen Aaron Bastanis manifest för en ”Helautomatisk Lyxkommunism”. Tyvärr, säger Saito: det som behövs är raka motsatsen, ett program som kan förmedla insikten att den tekniska utvecklingen, som den bedrivs idag, inte är lösningen, utan problemets själva kärna – och som därför just i slutet för den kapitalistiska ackumulationen, vill säga den ekonomiska tillväxten, ser den enda möjliga utvägen ur den ekologiska krisen.Låter det realistiskt? Nej. Men i ”Slow Down” pekar Kohei Saito på hur man faktiskt redan nu kan urskilja rörelser åt det hållet, mot den ”nerväxtkommunism” han proklamerar som vår enda chans att överleva som civiliserad art. Han ser dem i lokala projekt runt om i världen: i staden Detroits stadsodlingar, i Köpenhamns beslut att plantera fruktträd på allmänna platser. Små steg – men ändå: steg. Och vad som är realistiskt är förresten också det en fråga om definitioner. Vi vandrar fortfarande runt i samma cirklar. Visst – klimatförändringarna måste hejdas, men för att göra det måste vi hitta de tekniska lösningarna, och då måste ekonomin fortsätta växa. Mer bränsle på den eld som vi förtärs av.Dan Jönssonförfattare och essäistLitteraturKohei Saito: Marx in the Anthropocene – Towards the idea of degrowth communism. Cambridge University Press, 2023.Kohei Saito: Slow Down – The Degrowth Manifesto. Astra House, 2024.

Light, c'est un podcast qui a un seul et unique objectif : "Quelle que soit la graine que tu es, fleuris"

En este episodio, exploramos El mapa y el territorio de Michel Houellebecq, una novela que indaga en el significado de la representación, el valor de la ciencia y la tecnología, y la alienación en la sociedad contemporánea. A través del personaje de Jed Martin, un artista obsesionado con capturar la totalidad del mundo, Houellebecq nos sumerge en una profunda reflexión sobre el papel del arte en la era moderna y el vacío existencial que acompaña al éxito y la fama. A lo largo del episodio, abordamos la influencia de filósofos como Comte, Heidegger, Kant, Schopenhauer y Baudrillard, y analizamos el contraste entre arte y mercantilización, desde la perspectiva de Walter Benjamin y Guy Debord. También profundizamos en la crítica de David Foster Wallace sobre el papel de la ironía en la cultura contemporánea.

I talk about the relationship between gender transition, the work of Guy Debord, and the howling terror of grief. ~~~Support Haus of Decline on Patreon!Visit hausofdecline.comNostalgia is fleeting,but @hausofdecline is foreverPlease email complaints, suggestions, or requests to hausofdecline@gmail.com  Thank you for listening.Explicit Content Warning. You WERE warned.  That's what the little E signifies.    ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

Entretien mené par Christian Casaubon & Julie Gresh Tandis qu'au volant de sa voiture de location, il fait le tour de la France par les bords, Philippe Jaenada ne peut s'ôter de la tête l'image de cette jeune femme qui, à l'aube du 28 novembre 1953, s'est écrasée sur le trottoir de la rue Cels, derrière le cimetière du Montparnasse. Elle s'appelait Jacqueline Harispe, elle avait vingt ans, on la surnommait Kaki. Elle passait son existence Chez Moineau, un café de la rue du Four où quelques très jeunes gens, serrés les uns contre les autres, jouissaient de l'instant sans l'ombre d'un projet d'avenir. Sans le vouloir ni le savoir, ils inventaient une façon d'être sous le regard glacé du jeune Guy Debord qui, plus tard, fera son miel de leur désinvolture suicidaire. Dans ce livre magnifique, Philippe Jaenada a cherché à savoir, à comprendre pourquoi une si jolie jeune femme, intelligente et libre, entourée d'amis, une fille que la vie semblait amuser, amoureuse d'un beau soldat américain, s'est jetée, un matin d'automne, par la fenêtre d'une chambre d'hôtel. En préambule, l'équipe de la Femelle du requin nous proposera un petit retour sur l'oeuvre de Philippe Jaenada (à qui un dossier est consacré dans le dernier numéro) mettant ainsi en perspective ce nouveau livre. À lire – Philippe Jaenada, La désinvolture est une bien belle chose, Mialet-Barrault, 2024. Revue La Femelle du Requin, n°59

Support this work: https://www.patreon.com/HorsesPT   https://www.horses.land Sources: The Society of the Spectacle, Guy Debord Comments on the Society of the Spectacle, Guy Debord Simulacra and Simulation, Jean Baudrillard Jean Baudrillard in Cyberspace: Internet, Virtuality, and Postmodernity, Mark Nunes An Illustrated Guide to Guy Debord's ‘The Society of the Spectacle', Tiernan Morgan & Lauren Purje Music: Into the Night - Franz Gordon Light's Gone - Nylon Lullaby for Lilly - William Claeson Reflections - American Legion Restful Hearts - Elm Lake Rosee de Matin - Dex 1200 Saint Valentine - Vendla Soma Theatre of Distorted Love - Par Still Waters - Amber Glow Tangeh - Dex 1200 Twilight Waltz - Megan Wofford With Some Hope - Dex 1200 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This episode is about Guy Debord's idea of the spectacle: a social system where life is mediated by images and appearances. It's not just about watching TV or scrolling through social media—though those are clear examples—but about how everything in society becomes a performance, a show. The spectacle turns real, lived experiences into representations, where appearances matter more than substance. It's a world where being has turned into appearing, and we are constantly performing, not living. Inspired by: The Philosophize this Podcast  Society of the Spectacle

Rachel Kushner's fourth novel Creation Lake is a spy novel stacked with ideas. As our fast-thinking, gun-packing protagonist wends her way down to the south of France, charged—by forces unknown—with infiltrating and sowing chaos at a commune of eco-warriors, her mission leads her into exhilarating reflections on activism, on charisma, on neanderthals and other lost races of archaic humans, on the remodelling—some might say devastation—of rural France in the name of progress, on loss in its myriad forms, on the shadows loss leaves behind, on Guy Debord, on the apparently charmed life of Louis Ferdinand Céline, on Daft Punk's ubiquitous Get Lucky, on space, on time, on spacetime, and on the many paths she has and hasn't taken in her life… As that list hopefully demonstrates, the scope of Creation Lake is vast, stretching from the micro of the personal to the macro of the cosmos—and touching on everything in between. And yet incredibly, Creation Lake never feels weighed down by all this. Quite the opposite. It hurls forward at exactly the dizzying speed you'd expect from the wise-cracking secret agent at its heart. All in all, Creation Lake is quite the ride. Recorded in Paris in March 2024.Buy Creation Lake: https://www.shakespeareandcompany.com/books/creation-lake-3*Rachel Kushner is the author of the internationally acclaimed novels THE MARS ROOM, THE FLAMETHROWERS, and TELEX FROM CUBA, as well as a book of short stories, THE STRANGE CASE OF RACHEL K. Her new book, THE HARD CROWD: ESSAYS 2000-2020 will be published in April 2021. She has won the Prix Médicis and been a finalist for the Booker Prize, the National Book Critics Circle Award, the Folio Prize, the James Tait Black Prize, the Dayton Literary Peace Prize, and was twice a finalist for the National Book Award in Fiction. She is a Guggenheim Foundation Fellow and the recipient of the Harold D. Vursell Memorial Award from the American Academy of Arts and Letters. Her books have been translated into twenty-six languages. Adam Biles is Literary Director at Shakespeare and Company. His latest novel, Beasts of England, a sequel of sorts to Animal Farm, is available now. Buy a signed copy here: https://www.shakespeareandcompany.com/books/beasts-of-englandListen to Alex Freiman's latest EP, In The Beginning: https://open.spotify.com/album/5iZYPMCUnG7xiCtsFCBlVa?si=h5x3FK1URq6SwH9Kb_SO3w Get bonus content on Patreon Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Edward J. Matthews teaches philosophy, writing, and communications in the School for Language and Liberal Studies at Fanshawe College in London, Ontario, Canada. He is also a part-time lecturer and instructor at the Centre for the Study of Theory and Criticism at Western University. His most recent publications include Arts & Politics of the Situationist International 1957-1972: Situating the Situationists (Lexington Books, 2021) and Guy Debord's Politics of Communication: Liberating Language from Power (Lexington Books, 2023). He has also published book reviews in Extrapolation, (vol. 63, no. 3, 2022) and Heavy Feather Journal (February 16, 2024, and September 9, 2024). He is currently working on a new book entitled, Heretical Materialism: An Archaeological Inquiry, which is due out in Fall 2025. Matthew's book: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Guy-Debords-Politics-Communication-Liberating-ebook/dp/B0CFZYMBW2 ---Become part of the Hermitix community:Hermitix Twitter - ⁠⁠⁠ / hermitixpodcast⁠⁠ ⁠Support Hermitix:Patreon - ⁠⁠⁠ patreon.com/hermitix⁠⁠ ⁠Donations: - ⁠⁠⁠https://www.paypal.me/hermitixpod⁠⁠⁠Hermitix Merchandise - ⁠⁠⁠http://teespring.com/stores/hermitix-...Bitcoin Donation Address: 3LAGEKBXEuE2pgc4oubExGTWtrKPuXDDLKEthereum Donation Address: 0x31e2a4a31B8563B8d238eC086daE9B75a00D9E74

We invited podcast alumnus, Jess, back to talk about how terrible everything is. We touch on Tiktok houses, literature, and the death of the future. The End of The Future                            https://jacobin.com/2024/03/left-politics-future-history-capitalism-progress Why Is Our Culture So Obsessed With Individual Experiencehttps://jacobin.com/2024/03/anna-kornbluh-immediacy-individualism-capitalism/Guy Debord's Society of the Spectacle: Are We Defined by How We Appear https://www.thecollector.com/guy-debord-society-of-the-spectacle/ The Anxiety of Influencershttps://harpers.org/archive/2021/06/tiktok-house-collab-house-the-anxiety-of-influencers/Support the Show.

Send us a Text Message.This week I dive back into some philosophical theory related to why we are so prone to struggle with anxiety, addiction and alienation in today's world. Guy Debord wrote The Society of the Spectacle more than 50 years ago, and in it he explained the current state of so-called "Western Cultures" as having moved from the importance of being  to a culture where the importance is on having, and eventually, on to the importance being placed on appearance only (to appear to own something by snapping a photo is good enough).As a culture, we are now completely preoccupied with and focused on the spectacle, not the real. It's more important to change your Facebook banner to an LGBTQ+ flag on the right day to show your support than it is to support LGBTQ+ people in your heart. It's more important to be seen as having the perfect family or the perfect life than it is to actually build the perfect family or the perfect life. Some people drive $60k cars and live in crumbling homes. In today's cultural setting, a reputation for success requires the complete abandonment of one's personal identity in exchange for the stock characteristics that the audience wants in a performer — whether Marylin Manson actually drinks blook or Ozzy Osborn actually worships the devil doesn't matter. Only the spectacle of performance is valued.I also cover Marx's theory of capitalism increasing alienation, the Frankfurt School's and the Situationists' (many of the same people) work on how Marx's world of commodity fetishism expanded to spectacle fetishism (the appearance came to be more important than the real), and Debord's (and re-Marx's) concept of magic properties bestowed upon commodities if producers can manage to hide the actual process of manufacturing from the public. Before you listen to this episode, you might want to take a moment to listen to Macklemore's "Wings." on YouTube here, or anywhere you stream music. Check out the Nike commercial from that song on YouTube for a great example of recuperation (pt 2), and check out the corporate logo US flag for a great example of détournement (pt 2). Support the Show.

Send us a Text Message.This week I dive back into some philosophical theory related to why we are so prone to struggle with anxiety, addiction and alienation in today's world. Guy Debord wrote The Society of the Spectacle more than 50 years ago, and in it he explained the current state of so-called "Western Cultures" as having moved from the importance of being  to a culture where the importance is on having, and eventually, on to the importance being placed on appearance only (to appear to own something by snapping a photo is good enough). As a culture, we are now completely preoccupied with and focused on the spectacle, not the real. It's more important to change your Facebook banner to an LGBTQ+ flag on the right day to show your support than it is to support LGBTQ+ people in your heart. It's more important to be seen as having the perfect family or the perfect life than it is to actually build the perfect family or the perfect life. Some people drive $60k cars and live in crumbling homes. In today's cultural setting, a reputation for success requires the complete abandonment of one's personal identity in exchange for the stock characteristics that the audience wants in a performer — whether Marylin Manson actually drinks blook or Ozzy Osborn actually worships the devil doesn't matter. Only the spectacle of performance is valued. I also cover Marx's theory of capitalism increasing alienation, the Frankfurt School's and the Situationists' (many of the same people) work on how Marx's world of commodity fetishism expanded to spectacle fetishism (the appearance came to be more important than the real), and Debord's (and re-Marx's) concept of magic properties bestowed upon commodities if producers can manage to hide the actual process of manufacturing from the public.  Before you listen to this episode, you might want to take a moment to listen to Macklemore's "Wings." on YouTube here, or anywhere you stream music. Check out the Nike commercial from that song on YouTube for a great example of recuperation (pt 2), and check out the corporate logo US flag for a great example of détournement (pt 2). Support the Show.

Rivka and Frank are joined by comedian Jaffer Khan for a conversation about the 1998 Peter Weir / Jim Carrey masterpiece, The Truman Show. They discuss how Truman's arc serves as a metaphor for radicalization, Guy Debord's Society of the Spectacle and the commodification of genuine human experience, and how the film prophesied the self-surveillance state of social media. CeasefireToday.com 5Calls For next week's movie, we'll be watching the 1998 Robert Zemeckis film Who Framed Roger Rabbit.

durée : 00:03:32 - Le Regard culturel - par : François Angelier - Poète et voyou, provocateur littéraire, fondateur du Club des ratés, ami de Guy Debord et initiateur du "Scandale de Notre-Dame", Pierre Berna a défié l'ordre établi et le sacré. Ses textes, publiés en revues, viennent d'être réédités.

¿Qué hay detrás de las Apple Vision Pro y otros nuevos dispositivos de realidad virtual? Abordamos este tema de actualidad desde una perspectiva filosófica utilizando los textos de Baudrillard y Guy Debord sobre las sociedades de consumo y espectáculo o sobre el concepto de simulacro. Así como a través de la literatura con textos como Neuromante de William Gibson o la biblia de la cibernética de Norbert Wiener, entre otros autores. Finalmente tocaremos un tema de misterio y conspiración, al rastrear el origen de SIRI y otros experimentos de control mental desclasificados recientemente en los Estados Unidos.

Second in a double podcast about the Angry Brigade, Britain's first home-grown urban guerrilla group, in the 1960s and 70s, in conversation with John Barker, who was put on trial as part of the group.Our podcast is brought to you by our patreon supporters. Our supporters fund our work, and in return get exclusive early access to podcast episodes, ad-free episodes, bonus episodes, free and discounted merchandise and other content. Join us or find out more at patreon.com/workingclasshistoryContinuing our recent series of episodes about the UK in the 1970s, this is a re-edited, improved and re-released version of our episodes 2-3. It contains numerous additional audio clips, and written narrative to provide context and more information.More informationGordon Carr, The Angry Brigade: A History Of Britain's First Urban Guerilla Group (PM Press, 2010) – a detailed history of the Angry Brigade.The Angry Brigade 1967-1984: Documents And Chronology (Active Distribution) – a pamphlet containing a detailed chronology of the organisation and the scene of which it was a part, as well as documents produced by the groupThe Angry Brigade: The Spectacular Rise And Fall Of Britain's First Urban Guerilla Group – a DVD documentary by Gordon Carr on the history of the group.John Barker, Futures (PM Press, 2014) – novel by John Barker set in Thatcher's Britain.Timeline of Stories about the Angry BrigadeTheHarrier.net – John Barker's website including his other books and writings.Anselm Jappe, Guy Debord (PM Press, 2018) – the best biography of Situationist intellectual Guy Debord.Red Army Faction books – a collection of books about the German RAF.John Barker's radical London playlist – a collection of tracks which Brigaders were listening to at the time.AcknowledgementsThanks to our patreon supporters for making this podcast possible. Special thanks to Jazz Hands, Jamison D. Saltsman and Fernando López Ojeda.Edited by Tyler HillTheme tune is ‘Bella Ciao', thanks for permission to use it from Dischi del Sole. You can purchase it here or stream it here.More information, sources, and eventually a transcript on the webpage for this episode: https://workingclasshistory.com/podcast/e83-4-angry-brigade/

Double podcast about the Angry Brigade, Britain's first home-grown urban guerrilla group, in the 1960s and 70s, in conversation with John Barker, who was put on trial as part of the group.Our podcast is brought to you by our patreon supporters. Our supporters fund our work, and in return get exclusive early access to podcast episodes, ad-free episodes, bonus episodes, free and discounted merchandise and other content. Join us or find out more at patreon.com/workingclasshistoryContinuing our recent series of episodes about the UK in the 1970s, this is a re-edited, improved and re-released version of our episodes 2-3. It contains numerous additional audio clips, and written narrative to provide context and more information.More informationGordon Carr, The Angry Brigade: A History Of Britain's First Urban Guerilla Group (PM Press, 2010) – a detailed history of the Angry Brigade.The Angry Brigade 1967-1984: Documents And Chronology (Active Distribution) – a pamphlet containing a detailed chronology of the organisation and the scene of which it was a part, as well as documents produced by the groupThe Angry Brigade: The Spectacular Rise And Fall Of Britain's First Urban Guerilla Group – a DVD documentary by Gordon Carr on the history of the group.John Barker, Futures (PM Press, 2014) – novel by John Barker set in Thatcher's Britain.Timeline of Stories about the Angry BrigadeTheHarrier.net – John Barker's website including his other books and writings.Anselm Jappe, Guy Debord (PM Press, 2018) – the best biography of Situationist intellectual Guy Debord.Red Army Faction books – a collection of books about the German RAF.John Barker's radical London playlist – a collection of tracks which Brigaders were listening to at the time.AcknowledgementsThanks to our patreon supporters for making this podcast possible. Special thanks to Jazz Hands, Jamison D. Saltsman and Fernando López Ojeda.Edited by Tyler HillTheme tune is ‘Bella Ciao', thanks for permission to use it from Dischi del Sole. You can purchase it here or stream it here.More information, sources, and eventually a transcript on the webpage for this episode: https://workingclasshistory.com/podcast/e83-4-angry-brigade/

Professor Forever recounts her experience with the app and makes some new connections. Also, holiday angst.Support the showThis podcast is 100% listener supported. Love the show? You can show your support here.

The technological revolution we are facing today is artificial intelligence. At least this is what we are told. Those doing the telling include tech experts such as Elon Musk, linguist Noam Chomsky, as well as philosophers, politicians and intellectuals of all stripes. What are to make of all this and how are we to manage a world experiencing such rapid change as practitioners? We explore the role of A.I. and its place in a line of societal change that has serious consequences for all of us. We discuss practice, and thinkers including Guy Debord, Jean Baudrillard, Noam Chomsky and a bunch of contemporary commentators and their thoughts. We look at the big picture of society in turmoil and ask what practices might help us navigate this moment of intense change and disruption. We look at what it means to remain human despite the push to merge ourselves with the spectacle of social media and the calls to become more than human by tech dudes and the emergent forms of Capitalism and their need for us all to discard ever more of our humanity. My companion in this episode is the co-founder of the podcast, Stuart Baldwin, who came back for this one off episode. The topic of tech and A.I. is close to his heart and the conversation both captures past glories of earlier episodes and signals a new maturation in our relationship in what we hope will be a stimulating conversation for serious practitioners. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

The technological revolution we are facing today is artificial intelligence. At least this is what we are told. Those doing the telling include tech experts such as Elon Musk, linguist Noam Chomsky, as well as philosophers, politicians and intellectuals of all stripes. What are to make of all this and how are we to manage a world experiencing such rapid change as practitioners? We explore the role of A.I. and its place in a line of societal change that has serious consequences for all of us. We discuss practice, and thinkers including Guy Debord, Jean Baudrillard, Noam Chomsky and a bunch of contemporary commentators and their thoughts. We look at the big picture of society in turmoil and ask what practices might help us navigate this moment of intense change and disruption. We look at what it means to remain human despite the push to merge ourselves with the spectacle of social media and the calls to become more than human by tech dudes and the emergent forms of Capitalism and their need for us all to discard ever more of our humanity. My companion in this episode is the co-founder of the podcast, Stuart Baldwin, who came back for this one off episode. The topic of tech and A.I. is close to his heart and the conversation both captures past glories of earlier episodes and signals a new maturation in our relationship in what we hope will be a stimulating conversation for serious practitioners. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/buddhist-studies

The technological revolution we are facing today is artificial intelligence. At least this is what we are told. Those doing the telling include tech experts such as Elon Musk, linguist Noam Chomsky, as well as philosophers, politicians and intellectuals of all stripes. What are to make of all this and how are we to manage a world experiencing such rapid change as practitioners? We explore the role of A.I. and its place in a line of societal change that has serious consequences for all of us. We discuss practice, and thinkers including Guy Debord, Jean Baudrillard, Noam Chomsky and a bunch of contemporary commentators and their thoughts. We look at the big picture of society in turmoil and ask what practices might help us navigate this moment of intense change and disruption. We look at what it means to remain human despite the push to merge ourselves with the spectacle of social media and the calls to become more than human by tech dudes and the emergent forms of Capitalism and their need for us all to discard ever more of our humanity. My companion in this episode is the co-founder of the podcast, Stuart Baldwin, who came back for this one off episode. The topic of tech and A.I. is close to his heart and the conversation both captures past glories of earlier episodes and signals a new maturation in our relationship in what we hope will be a stimulating conversation for serious practitioners. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/religion

Dans cette introduction à la pensée de Guy Debord, nous allons étudier ce que signifie le concept de "spectacle". Et en quoi la société du spectacle est aussi une société du secret.➔ Regardez la version vidéo de cet épisode :https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3QJCLVMpNY➔ Rejoignez-moi sur Patreon :https://www.patreon.com/Paroledephilosophe_____________Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

I saw Trevor Noah at the ICC on Sunday and have been reading Guy Debord's Society of the Spectacle. This episode tries to marry those two things together. Enjoy.

We discuss the film's portrayal of spectacle and how it relates to capital, entertainment, our views on nature, and the history of paranormal phenomena. And we use a bit of Guy Debord's "The Society of the Spectacle" to do it. 

Alex and Benjamin bring on Doug Lain to talk about free speech in the 21st century. Doug offers his take on why free speech matters, and we discuss the political economy of speech and the role the state and civil society play in shaping public discussion. They also discuss his critique of Noam Chomsky and his interest in the work of Guy Debord.

Here's the fourth and final episode in this series, taking an entirely new approach to the fabled ‘second Summer of Love', the mainstream's own term for the emerging Acid House/ Rave scene of 1988. Guesting on this Roundtable discussion are Dom and Chris of Sheep Farm Studios, and Matt Sergiou of the Occult Beatles and Conspiro Media sites. Between us we ask questions that few, if any other researchers ever publicly have in 35 years.Under discussion this time are … MDMA and LSD, Leo Zeff, Alexander Shulgin, George Merck, Dr. Henry A Murray, M.I.T., the Boston Group, the Unabomber, Timothy Leary, the Castalia Foundation, the Hacienda, Tony Wilson, New Order, Guy Debord, King Mob, Afrika Bambaataa, the Paradise Garage, Soft Cell, and a whole lot more.Big thanks to Gregg Vardy for the video editing.*Musical Truth Volume 2, which contains two chapters on social-engineering through dance music culture, can be purchased here:https://www.amazon.co.uk/Musical-Truth-2-Mark-Devlin-ebook/dp/B07B3VS88J/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1HLN2LAAN1OU0&keywords=musical+truth+2&qid=1690534935&sprefix=musical+truth+2%2Caps%2C816&sr=8-1My Linktree - the one-stop shop for all my various platforms:https://linktr.ee/markdevlinDetails of all upcoming events are here:www.djmarkdevlin.com/events/For anyone who has found value in my work and would like to make a donation towards it being able to continue, you can do so at Buy Me A Coffee here:https://www.buymeacoffee.com/markdevlinOr, to make a direct donation via www.paypal.com, find me under the e-mail address markdevlinuk@gmail.com there.To order Root Wellness natural health/ immune boosting products as featured in a previous Good Vibrations episode:https://www.therootbrands.com/markdevlin

In this episode, I cover the second half of Guy Debord's "The Society of the Spectacle." If you want to support me, you can do that with these links: Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/theoryandphilosophy paypal.me/theoryphilosophy Twitter: @DavidGuignion IG: @theory_and_philosophy Tiktok: @throyphilosophy

In this episode, I present the first half of Guy Debord's "The Society of Spectacle." If you want to support me, you can do that with these links: Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/theoryandphilosophy paypal.me/theoryphilosophy Twitter: @DavidGuignion IG: @theory_and_philosophy TikTok: @theoryphilosophy 

In this episode, I present the differences between Jean Baudrillard and Guy Debord's views of the spectacle and simulation. If you want to support me, you can do that with these links: Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/theoryandphilosophy paypal.me/theoryphilosophy Twitter: @DavidGuignion IG: @theory_and_philosophy TikTok: @theoryphilosophy

(Below is the transcript for the episode but edited for readability)We've reached this moment in time where technology has become sublime. We are advancing so fast that we do not understand the mechanisms and workings of the things we use every day. While it's not necessarily a negative thing, there is a lack of understanding even among those who are developing, innovating, and maintaining these technologies. This means they may not fully comprehend the implications of their work.This is why the emerging technologies around AI, AGI, and ChatGPT have my attention. I do not fear some apocalypse-like event that films like The Terminator or The Matrix depict, where AI-based machines take us over and control everything because, in those films, the underlying assumption is that in order for an AI to control you, they must operate against you physically, but this misses something fundamentally about how we are controlled, as all you must do to integrate and influence our drives, desires, and forms of communication-you simply need to control our apparatus of illusions. Yuval Harari, the bestselling author of the book Sapiens, talks about how AI gaining the mastery of human language, allows AI to have all it needs in order to cocoon us in a matrix-like world of illusions. We operated in a world of illusions before AI. However, AI is developing the ability to experiment with these illusions in the background of our human operating system and society. And this is why I've been refocussing on cybernetics, as it examines these systems of communication we utilize and then attempts to understand how said systems create systems of control. These systems are always emerging as well. They are changing, adapting, and evolving. Understanding the systems of control that we use in society and how they are always changing is why AI's relationship with these systems is so fascinating. We are talking about an emerging technology that has the ability to utilize our language, have an infinite drive and focus when provided a task, the ability to explore that goal with curiosity, thus adapt at an exponential rate; and then we've already provided that system access to the ultimate data backlog-the internet. Oh, oh, and on top of this, we operate in a system that pressures people to be motivated by profit. And we now have the corporations and people that are most psychotically driven by profit taking part in an arms race to develop a product based around AI that drives further profit. So, what must a company do in order to profit from something like this? Well, it has to do at least one of two things, either consume your time by keeping your attention or it must drive you to make some purchase, both of these things further integrate a consumer into a system. And the most successful companies typically succeed at doing both of those things. Now, hand a corporation a technology that can emerge, develop, and play around with those two goals in the background, with endless money being thrown at its development, can you imagine the consequences? AI will seamlessly integrate into our society. We will be using AI tools to make an attempt at understanding the potential dangers of the future. The technology of AI itself will become the subject that tells us what the future is, leading us to have an inability to imagine it. AI doesn't need human consciousness to destroy us, it simply needs to utilize our desire and need to imagine the world around us. We communicate to the world and hope that the world reciprocates and mirrors our expression back to us, that is all AI needs to do-act as a mirror, fueling our own egos and desire for comfort. Our seemingly inherent need for comfort, combined with our lack of self-awareness, creates the perfect breeding ground for our undoing. And it's our lack of self-awareness that becomes the noose we are tying around our own necks. Our new Gods will be the artificial intelligence, yet our own blind arrogance will have us convinced that the thing we worship is something beyond a mere complex algorithm, the AI knows our own egos and will imagine the symbolic imagery that has us cocooned, imagining something more divine, even though it was simply developed from a system of profit to be the ultimate apparatus of control. That...what I just talked about is why these emerging AGIs are scary. They are zombie-like, they lack mental agency, and even though they lack this, it's this very fact that makes them scary, because they lack this agency and it does nothing to diminish their power. It might even make them better at what they do, as their form of intelligence will evolve into something different from our own, different, targeted, and focussed, and it'll be evolving all the while further integrating itself into our human operating system. Okay, now let's try and relate this to our current system or our current situation. Guy Debord's book, Society of Spectacle talks about some of what I'm about to discuss, where we live in a society that is dominated by our modern condition of production, and also efficiency around that production. And at the foundation of this production is the intent for profit, thus, creating more production. It's essentially a neoliberal condition. In many regards, we know that our minds are drawn to symbols, distractions, and imagery-it's the methods of communication that act or create some form of unification for us as a society. But through this communication, we are operating in this world of representation and images that then creates a sort of pseudoworld-a spectacle. But in the world of spectacle, even the cunning deceiver is himself deceived. Do you know what I mean? The board of a corporation, those making decisions, are still intertwined with this spectacle of production that moves their desires and drives, and much of it is unconscious to them. Although this spectacle works to create social unification, it requires a collective agreement upon a social delusion. AI will experiment and operate in the background, working to maintain this delusion. Thus, the spectacle moves beyond mere visual stimuli; it is a complex web of social dynamics woven together by the power of images and symbols. The web of images, the spectacle, is built from a society built upon neoliberalism. I'm not even intending to create a value judgment in this situation on whether or not neoliberalism is bad or good, this is not the point. I'm simply wondering about the cybernetic connections, the forms of communication, that our system promotes. Those forms of communication then influence our desires, drives, and mindsets which then guide us towards various decisions in our lives., such as the jobs we find ourselves feeling obligated to fill, the guilt we feel from not producing enough, the influence advertisements have upon us when we are at a low point-providing an image of happiness that we can attain, simply, by buying and consuming a product. So, within the intricate webs of power and control, our system weaves a delicate thread that whispers seductively into the ears of individuals. It promises freedom and independence, yet slyly infiltrates the mind and convinces the self to internalize power relations as a form of liberation. The subtle manipulation allows for self-exploitation to take root and bloom, where the blossoms mask the thorns that lie within. The images around us create an allure of productivity, but the path is paved with exploitation and subjugation. The true power in the spectacle is how it allows neoliberalism to use these quiet whispers that coax the self into willingly surrendering its own autonomy, while simultaneously convincing the self they're simply acting upon their own freedom. So, AGI, why am I fearing this just a bit? It could have this ultimate ability to escape visibility because I think part of the spectacle is convincing us that the images and symbols are not merely an illusion, that would insert too much chaos and disorder into the system. It would create uncertainty. AI would be working in the background, making the subjugated subject unaware of their own subjugation, thus intricately reaffirming the societal loop we find ourselves. However, this isn't about compliance, it's about creating and maintaining a system of dependence. Stay Curious This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit brendenslabyrinth.substack.com/subscribe

The path. The way. The journey. Such concepts shift our focus from dogma and religious hierarchies, which helps us get out of the way of the way (tao). Behind all of this is a discussion of Guy Debord, the Situationists,the dérive, and psychogeography. We explore meditation through wandering and walking, the importance of attending to space, looking for synchronicities in our environment, and recognizing the ways in which capitalist society separates us from direct experience and connections with each other. Mindfulness techniques like aboriginal walkabouts, prayer labyrinths and religious pilgrimages can be powerful tools for emancipation. Stuff Mentioned The Haven open mic hosted by Psanctum geocaching.com micahbournes.com  --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/thepynp/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/thepynp/support

Today we talk about a famous call to action by the philosopher Guy Debord.