[Marxism] Why celebrities love twitter and I hate it
clayclai at gmail.com
Mon Dec 30 18:46:16 MST 2013
Twitter is what you make of it.
A high school student organized a group that provided field manuals on
weapons, triage, emergency care, bomb defusing, weapons ID, etc in 3
languages that were used on virtually every opposition front in the Libyan
Bombing co-ordinates were passed to NATO via twitter.
Someone is maintaining a sniper map of Aleppo based on reports tweeted to
When bombs fell on Tripoli, I knew almost before they hit the ground,
thanks to reports from twitter and multiple reports from different areas of
Tripoli allowed for quick determination of what was being bombed.
All the CW attacks in Syria were first reported on twitter.
I think Brown Moses would tell you that twitter is essential to his work. I
know its essential to mine.
Twitter is no more or less than a way to send 140 character to any device
that speaks Internet of SMS. What you do with it depends on what you and
those you interact with use it. 20 characters can be traded for a link and
the link and lead to anything that can be posted on the Internet.
It makes as much sense to condemn twitter for what celebs do with it as it
does to condemn the telephone because of the way teenage girls use it.
Clay Claiborne, Director
Vietnam: American Holocaust <http://VietnamAmericanHolocaust.com>
Linux Beach Productions
Venice, CA 90291
Read my blogs at the Linux Beach <http://claysbeach.blogspot.com/>
On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 1:49 PM, Jeff Rubard <jeffrubard at gmail.com> wrote:
> Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> In seriousness, Twitter is a terrible medium for activism because it is
> primarily a means of careerist "burnishing" of a public image. In the era
> of blogs ignoramuses like me could try to wrap their heads and those of
> others around weighty topics previously confined to journals; there was a
> genuine learning process for anyone able to pay the extremely minimal entry
> cost. Twitter consolidates previously gained "social capital"; the premise
> is that everybody tweeting already was someone, and wants to engage in a
> relaxed game of Internet badminton with similar somebodies. Kind of like an
> world-wide electronic Studio 54; precisely the people one would want to get
> involved in mass agitation, "round the way dudes" and gals, are practically
> Sunkara is not an especially egregious example; his "New Wave" enthusiasm
> for instant nostalgia for "old" Nas records and suchlike is just the kind
> of conference-cred I was talking about. The Sawant nonsense is really a
> problem with Jacobin, a fantastically flattened perspective on the
> Democratic Party even congenital Democrats like me could not maintain in
> the face of the most minimal knowledge of the "Second American
> Revolution" of the Civil War and Reconstruction. (Sunkara is reading James
> Macpherson; will he follow it up with John R. Commons?) The "soft spot"
> Jacobin writers show for liberal Dixiecrats is just unhistorical; the
> precise point of already-existing American Socialism was to break the
> enthusiasm of American Girondins for cigars made by white men.
> Sunkara's own weaknesses show up in analyzing the "Militant Tendency" in
> Labour in textbook academic-pinko terms as "entryism", when it was really
> about as legitimate an expression of autochthonous British working-class
> consciousness as anything else in the 80s. Of course there is really no
> problem with people from the Trotskyist tradition vaulting into popular
> representation; there will be a little bit of a learning curve necessary to
> repeat the Sawant success, but the kind of pathetic "horse-trading"
> Jacobinites have learned is essential from their Clintonian mentors is
> precisely what a newly relevant socialist tradition must eschew.
> Jeff Rubard
> Send list submissions to: Marxism at greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
> Set your options at:
More information about the Marxism