Since ProductRump is now officially in charge of the money-media complex that produced it, I take the liberty of reposting my earlier op-ed, “Corporate Idiocracy and the Manufacturing of ProducTrump,” which was originally published in CounterPunch. Click here to read.
I am very pleased to have had the opportunity to collaborate with Simon Critchley and Peter Catapano in making the following contribution to The Stone: “Why We Never Die.”
Excerpt: “Our existence has numerous dimensions, and they each live according to different times. The biological stratum, which I naïvely took to mean life in general, is in certain ways a long process of demise — we are all dying all the time, just at different rhythms. Far from being an ultimate horizon beyond the bend, death is a constitutive feature of the unfolding of biological life […read more].”
My op-ed, “Corporate Idiocracy and the Manufacturing of ProducTrump,” was just picked up by the Huffington Post. Click here to read it in full. A slightly different version was originally published here in CounterPunch.
Excerpt: “We must not forget that it is the system, not the person, that is the ultimate problem. In fact, there is not really a person here. There is productRump, the tail end of the corporate glitz machine, the rump of a debunk system of hype and distraction in the name of profit and power. Although this butt looms particularly large in its vulgar posturing and machismo, we must not let the backend mask what is behind it. It is only the protruding derrière of an enormous network of media-cracy—i.e. mediocrity—that has produced it [read more]”.
My most recent opinion piece–related to the publication of Interventions in Contemporary Thought–was just published here.
A Russian translation of my op-ed in Counterpunch “Revolution Never Sleeps: Nuit Debout in France and Beyond,” was published here.
Движението Nuit debout – “нощем накрак” или “изправи се нощем!” – е убедително напомняне за съществуването на една неуморна глобална борба срещу неолибералното верую и всичките му унищожителни последствия. […read more]
I came across this surprising article, entitled “Ready for the Ready-Laid,” by someone who presents themselves as Theodore Tucker. It cunningly unpacks the complexities of the recent case of a teenager who laid a pair of glasses on the floor of the MoMA in San Francisco, which were then taken to be a work of art by some of the spectators. Examining how the spectacles became a spectacle, thereby reframing the very horizons defining works of art, some of the themes in this piece oddly overlap with my own research concerns regarding the contradictions of the art of the commonplace. Click here to read in full.
“Is Censorship Proof of Art’s Political Power?” was just published in the Los Angeles Review of Books‘ “The Philosophical Salon.” A special thanks to Patricia Vieira and Michael Marder for their work curating this important platform.
Excerpt: “Does not the very existence of censorship prove, in reverse so to speak, that art is a sociopolitical force to be reckoned with? In other words, if censorship exists, isn’t it because aesthetics is perceived — at least by those in power — as a very real threat to the social and political order? […read more]”