Self-Determination Has Been Negated by Technology – Communitarianism Is a Political Religion
Ed. note: Going through this material keep in the back of your minds that Israel may have been developed over the past 71 years or so, by the Soviet as a “back door to the west.” If all the prime ministers of Israel since David Ben-Gurion have all come from Poland (then Russia), Ukraine and Russia, does this not lead to some speculation? David Ben-Gurion publicly stated: “I am a Bolshevik”, after a visit to the Soviet Union in 1923. Doesn’t this realization as incredible as it may seem, become even more of a sobering thought when it is considered Joseph Stalin’s Soviet Union was once at the center of Israeli identity? Stalin himself was born in Georgia.
“They were not the only ones harboring such sentiments, of course. David Ben-Gurion returned in 1923 from a visit to the Soviet Union and declared: “I am a Bolshevik.” Moreover, many of this country’s early inhabitants were Russian-born.”
The surprising aspect to all this is that even Israeli sources have been reporting on this subject:
Mark Zuckerberg is the tech front man. What it looks like taking shape here is to fuse communtarianism to technology. Surveillance capitalism (“we are the pawns“) was pioneered at Google and later Facebook. The “poisoning of the business world” is not the result of an outcome because of developing technology, it was intentional. All these concepts developed out of the military-industrial complex.
“These are bald-faced interventions in the exercise of human autonomy.” — Shoshana Zuboff
In this age of surveillance capitalism “everything is even worse than we even thought”. Facebook is the “Model T of A.I.” (Artificial Intelligence):
Source: Sage Journals
Condemned to connection? Network communitarianism in Mark Zuckerberg’s “Facebook Manifesto”
by Karina Rider, David Murakami Wood • October 18, 2018
This article considers Mark Zuckerberg’s 2017 open letter titled “Building Global Community” as a political manifesto. Published just prior to an ongoing series of scandals involving Facebook and the misuse of customer data, the letter outlines Zuckerberg’s plans for the future direction of the company. Using an approach based on Luc Boltanski and Eve Chiapello‘s connexionism, [cognitive science, that hopes to explain mental phenomena using artificial neural networks (ANN)] combined with Benjamin Bratton‘s understanding of platforms and John Bellamy Foster [is a professor of sociology at the University of Oregon and also editor of Monthly Review. He writes about political economy of capitalism and economic crisis, ecology and ecological crisis, and Marxist theory] and Robert W. McChesney‘s, as well as Shoshana Zuboff’s, analysis of surveillance capitalism, this article argues that the letter remains significant because it constitutes a coherent statement about ubiquitous social media and the future of government in an era characterized by a global turn to authoritarianism. Evoking Japanese philosopher Hiroki Azuma’s reworking of Rousseau’s concept of “General Will” in the social media age, this article warns that one of the most dangerous aspects of the Manifesto is that it might be, in some ways, correct. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1461444818804772
Quote from the Intercept article linked below:
Shoshana Zuboff’s “The Age of Surveillance Capitalism” is already drawing comparisons to seminal socioeconomic investigations like Rachel Carson’s “Silent Spring” and Karl Marx’s “Capital.” Zuboff’s book deserves these comparisons and more: Like the former, it’s an alarming exposé about how business interests have poisoned our world, and like the latter, it provides a framework to understand and combat that poison.
The global communitarian network will require a global database of every human being on the planet.
In Etzioni’s bio we find that he participated in a Palmach operation to blow up a British radar station near Haifa being used to track ships carrying illegal Jewish immigrants attempting to enter Palestine. That is evidence that Etzioni compared to anything else he has worked on is dedicated totally to Israel. Etzioni does not like the idea of individualism. That should be obvious, he attempted killing British soldiers.
In all fairness though, Etzioni who is of course Jewish, blames the individual for the current economic crisis (which one hey?). If anyone needs verification the “individual has run rampant”, look no further than Wall Street and all the top financial firms who looked to Roger Stone’s connections. Connections to Davis Investments and his go to girl in New York for, well, we’ll let you all figure that out…as these global communitarian technological systems and databases are built. Will it be impossible for the individual to “get out of hand” like with what we have seen in New York with Kristin Davis and Roger Stone? An interesting thought. Roger Stone “telling the truth?” It is difficult to begin entertaining the thought of even asking that question.
We have the makings of an intelligence apparatus (databases being built) at work here determining where Wall Street will be investing trillions while Donald Trump threatens China with a trade war and tariffs? Only problem with that scenario with tariffs and a trade war is, where will China turn to for trade? Like what Roger Stone was doing with Richard Nixon handing American industrial know-how over to China back during Nixon’s heyday. Roger Stone knows all that because he was with Nixon and Trump. Without Roger Stone it would have been impossible for Donald Trump to have come to power in the White House. And Kristin takes the fall…imagine the database Roger Stone has access to and who else might have access to that database?
Source: Liberty Blitzkrieg
Two Roads Diverged in a Digital Wood
Michael Krieger | Wednesday | Jan 30, 2019
By now it’s no longer restricted to individual companies or even to the internet sector. It has spread across a wide range of products, services, and economic sectors, including insurance, retail, healthcare, finance, entertainment, education, transportation, and more, birthing whole new ecosystems of suppliers, producers, customers, market-makers, and market players. Nearly every product or service that begins with the word “smart” or “personalised”, every internet-enabled device, every “digital assistant”, is simply a supply-chain interface for the unobstructed flow of behavioural data on its way to predicting our futures in a surveillance economy.
– From the must read piece: ‘The Goal Is to Automate Us’: Welcome to the Age of Surveillance Capitalism
A lot of my content over the past couple of years has focused on the momentous geopolitical changes I see on the horizon, and this macro perspective reaches two significant conclusions. First, that the planet is moving away from a unipolar world dominated almost entirely by the U.S. toward a more multi-polar world. [Ed. note: the US isn’t in control of its circumstances in regards to Israel] Second, that this fundamental shift in geopolitical landscape, [Ed. note: this shift is to China’s Belt & Road Initiative] coupled with what appears to be a forthcoming reckoning with the largest global debt bubble in human history, will lead to a once in a generation reset of the world economy and the global financial system that keeps it functioning.
As has become increasingly clear in recent months, the two primary protagonists in this major historical shift are the U.S. and China. While I’ve speculated about how increased tensions between these two economic giants will likely usher in the end of globalization as we know it (and possibly a bifurcated global economy), I’ve spent less time talking about what the internal situations will look like within individual countries themselves. This is a major oversight because what really matters to Chinese and U.S. citizens ten years from now isn’t which nation has more military bases abroad, but what will everyday life be like for regular people?
In this regard, China and the U.S. [Ed. note: Israel has been left out] both seem to be headed in similar and very dystopian directions when it comes to the freedom-destroying marriage of overbearing government and ubiquitous surveillance technology. I read a couple of excellent articles on this topic over the past week, which forced the issue to the top of my mind. In other words, does it really matter who wins the geopolitical game of risk if “we the people” end up being controlled, surveilled and completely subjugated by the very technology we so eagerly embraced and assumed would make the world a more liberated place just a few years ago?
Everyone reading this is probably aware of the mind-bogglingly creepy and terrifying social credit system being unveiled in China. The first paragraph of a recent must read Wired article, Is Big Tech Merging with Big Brother? Kinda Looks like It, puts the situation into stark terms:
A friend of mine, who runs a large television production company in the car-mad city of Los Angeles, recently noticed that his intern, an aspiring filmmaker from the People’s Republic of China, was walking to work.
When he offered to arrange a swifter mode of transportation, she declined. When he asked why, she explained that she “needed the steps” on her Fitbit to sign in to her social media accounts. If she fell below the right number of steps, it would lower her health and fitness rating, which is part of her social rating, which is monitored by the government. A low social rating could prevent her from working or traveling abroad.
Most Americans will read this and think there’s no way this could happen here, but the truth is a lot more complicated, and in some respects we’re at least headed in a similar direction.
We live in a situation where we still have Constitutional protections like freedom of speech on paper, but with so much of the public discussion being dominated by a couple of tech giants who ban people arbitrarily, it’s being eroded in practice. As I noted in last year’s piece, Americans Need Social Media Guided by the Rights Enshrined in the U.S. Constitution:
I say in theory because in practice we’re learning how easily speech can be marginalized to the point of becoming erased from public discourse. We’ve allowed the digital public square to be dominated by corporations focused on profit maximization and whose policies quite explicitly do not reflect the law of the land and values that we supposedly hold dear.
Please go to Liberty Blitzkrieg to read the entire article.
Ed. note: Once the technology takes over including artificial intelligence (A.I.) and the total domination of cybersecurity, any intellectual discussions concerning academic political theory revolving around all of these the so-called “liberal-communitarian discussions on liberalism, individual rights, the common good, equality, social justice and the welfare state” will be immediately tossed in the rubbish can of history.
The “good”, the “bad” and the dissenters…