...... and did some assignments
it's no good. they've butchered the language, written like hypocrites, and display profoundly bad logic.
Dorothy E. Denning would have a lot to say about this manifesto, given that she has expressed rather harsh opinions about hacktivism and cyber terrorism. If it comes to it, I'm not a fan of this manifesto, either. But maybe I'm just too much a part of the bunker to appreciate the opinions of the Critical Art Ensemble. I find that the things bothering me about this manifesto are the same things that bother me about much real life activism. I'm bothered by the unilateral stance that the authors take. If you're not with them, you must be against them. I'm bothered by their disturbance for the sake of disturbance attitude. Call me old fashioned, but I prefer to put my energy behind smaller projects that actually have a chance of succeeding and that I feel strongly about.
I suppose manifestos are meant to be unilateral. They're meant to express a point of view that a group of people have strong feelings about. Moderate people don't generally write manifestos. How would it look to have a manifesto that expressed an interest in balanced viewpoints and actions that are formulated to not offend anyone? I suppose I shouldn't read manifestos if I don't want to hear about strong opinions.
Disturbance for the sake of disturbance, then. The Critical Art Ensemble, in this particular manifesto is very concerned with a group they term the “Nomadic Elite.” The Nomadic Elite are the invisible wielders of power. They are decentralized and connected by the strings of numbers that zip around in the ether. They are not of a unified social class. What makes them a group is that they are all elite. I'll repeat that. The elite are elite because they are elite. Is that a tautology? I think so. I also think that the entire manifesto is chock full of tautologies and other imprecise uses of language, rhetoric and logic. There are some really spectacular ones, like the idea that alienating the alienated classes causes alienation. Impressive. Maybe that's a better topic than disturbance for the sake of disturbance.
The entire manifesto feels like a conceptual oxymoron. The Critical Art Ensemble is very concerned about the Nomadic Elite who control the world (I'd just like to point out that I thought I'd left conspiracy theories behind when I moved away from crazy hippy land. But no, instead I get artists writing manifestos about their conspiracy theories.). Even though they don't like the elite, they still use their language. They tell the stories of the elite and use their words. They are steeped in art history.
The metaphors deserve their own paragraph. Bunkers, dice, in fact, a pervading gambling metaphor, and of course, Ronald McDonald, it's all there. It's like the universe would implode if they used straightforward language. They drop names, too.
A couple of words, to finish, on the actual content of the manifesto. The writers express an interest in inciting panic. They present this as a way to shake people into action and realization. To me, that is the point at which actions cease to be those of activists. Inciting panic and fear is never productive.