Without community, there is no liberation …
Audre Lorde
From scott crow, we share an important reflection on mutual aid as a liberatory practise and thought, in response to the different and multiple disasters brought on upon all of us by capitalism.
Insurrectionary Utopias: Ideas towards a Liberatory Mutual Aid
scott crow
“…years ago, a few people scratched history, and, knowing this, they began calling to many others so that, by dint of scribbling, scratching and scrawling, they would end upending the veil of history, and so the light would finally be seen.
That, and nothing else, is the struggle we are making. And so if you ask us what we want, we will unashamedly answer: “To open a crack in history.”
— Subcomandante Marcos, E.Z.L.N.
Despair, grief, and fear color much our days, often challenging our hopes for the future. These emotions have seeped into daily conversations, media portrayals, and the very fabrics of our lives. Our fragile social bonds in civil society have been pushed to the brink due to ongoing disasters, crisis and seeming uncertainity we all face.
Despite the beautiful, historic gains made against Power, and the inspiring uprisings and rebellions since the turn of the millennium — undermining the very foundations of U.S. historical and systemic oppression — a loss for what-to-do characterizes much of our reflections.
Civil society is unraveling due to an unsustainable civilization, the multi-year coronavirus pandemic, an ongoing climate emergency, and the usurping of 20th century “democratic” institutions by right-wing forces with fascistic dreams. Amidst this, unaccountable corporate social media platforms fuel the unraveling,[1] compounding these ongoing, intertwined disasters and crises, revealing the shortcomings of our fragile house-of-cards-like society. What is needed are alternatives not rooted in fear or domination — but in our desires for something better for all of us..
I still find places where hope exists and projects are happening that can open the “crack in history.” Places where communities and neighbors haven’t given up and are not paralyzed by fear, that offer alternative paths forward that allow for shared visions of something better. We ALL need tempered hope, ideas, and visions to counter the collapse narratives of the media and fascists who want to use it for their own power or control. Rather than sticking our heads in the sand in denial, we can counter the fear and despair that leads to inaction and not give in.
Continue reading →
Giorgio Agamben: On artificial intelligence and natural stupidity
“An age of barbarism is beginning, and science will be at its service.” The age of barbarism is not yet over, and Nietzsche’s diagnosis is now being confirmed. The sciences are so attentive to satisfying and even anticipating every demand of the age that, when it decided it had neither the desire nor the capacity to think, they immediately provided it with a device called “artificial intelligence” (abbreviated to AI). The name is not transparent, because the problem with AI is not that it is artificial (thought, insofar as it is inseparable from language, always involves art or a degree of artifice), but that it is located outside the mind of the subject who thinks or should think. In this respect, it resembles Averroes’ separate intellect, which, according to the brilliant Andalusian philosopher, was unique to all men. For Averroes, the problem was therefore that of the relationship between the separate intellect and the individual. If intelligence is separate from individuals, how can they unite with it in order to think? Averroes’ answer is that individuals communicated with the separate intellect through the imagination, which remains individual. It is undoubtedly a symptom of the barbarism of the time, as well as its absolute lack of imagination, that this problem is not raised with regard to artificial intelligence. If it were simply an instrument, like mechanical calculators, the problem would indeed not exist. If, on the other hand, it is assumed, as is in fact the case, that, like Averroes’ separate intellect, AI thinks, then the problem of the relationship with the thinking subject cannot be avoided. Roberto Bazlen once said that in our time intelligence has ended up in the hands of the stupid. It is possible that the crucial problem of our time then takes this form: how can a stupid person—that is, a non-thinker—enter into a relationship with an intelligence that claims to think outside of him?
Quodlibet, October 12, 2025