Me aia aes Dictionary im JOHN ZERZAN’ qanuv-zuisza 40 Wuunor V :AHDUWNY 8 VIGAWONOLOYBolgs; 1 Niceism Niceism a. tendency, more orks socal codified, to approach realty in terms of wheter others behave cordily: tyranny of decorum which dsalows thinking or acting for oneself mode of interaction based upon the above absence of critical judgement or ‘utonony. But in an immiserated worid of pervasive and real er is, which should be causing all of us to radically reassess everything, the nice can be the false he face of domination is often a smiling one, a cul {ured one. Auschwitz comes to mind, with its managers who fnioyed their Goethe and Mozart. Similarly, it was not evi Jooking monsters who built the A-bomb but nice liberal rg ctuals. Ditto regarding those who are computersing Ii and those who in other ways are the mainstays of partie ipation in this rotting order, just as it is the nice busi, Ressperson (self-managed of otherwise) wino is the bacle one of @ cruel work-and-shop existence by concealing its real horrors, Cases of niceism include the peaceniks, whose ethic of rceness puts them—again and again and again-—in stupid, ‘ritualized, no-win situations, those Earth Firstlers whe ‘refuse to confront the thoroughly rep. sible ideology at [\ jo Prefer what is fiendly, sincere, pleasant-—nicethe op of the organization, and Fh Ete, whos high Ivimporeantconsbtons now sem fo ben danger of an clipe by liberalism. Al the sngedstue causes, fom ecole fism to feminism, and al the mltancy in thet Serie re Only ways of evading the necesiy of + guatatv Bedk ‘wh more than jute excesses ofthe system The nice a8 the perfect enemy of tac oranlytal thinking Be agreeable; don et having ral ieas make waves In your personal behavior. cept the pre packaged methods and inte ofthe daly strangulation. Ingained Seferenee, the conditioned response to play by the ralee—sthory’s geist rel Fith Column the one witin ws Oe Inthe context of mauled soci ie that demands the drastic asa minimum cesponse toward health, nleism becomes more and more ifn, conformist and danger out. It eannot grant Joy, only moe routine and seat, ‘The plenire of autho exits only against the gan sociey Nei keep ual in ur places, confuse epro- ducing a that we sopposedyeohor Lets op being ceo this nghtmare an al who would Kep usin finding its current apotheosis in Virtual Reality. ‘The escapism of VR is not the issue, for which of us could get by without escapes? Likewise, itis not so much @ diversion from consciousness as it is itself @ consciousness of complete estrangement from the natural world. Virtual Reality testifies to a deep pathology, remii Baroque canvases of Rubens that depict armored knights mingling with but separated from naked women. Here the ‘altemative’ techno-junkies of Whole Earth Review, pioneer promoters of VR, show their true colors. A fetish of ‘tools’ ‘and a total lack of interest in critique of society's direction, lead to glorification of the artifical paradise of VR. “The consumerist void of high tech simulation and manipu- lation owes its dominance to two increasing tendencies in society, specialization of labor and the isolation of individuals. From this context emerges the most terrifying aspect of evil it tends to be comthitted by people who are not particularly evil. Society, which in no way could survive a conscious inspection is arranged to prevent that very inspection. ‘The dominant, oppressive ideas do not permeate the whole of society, rather their success is assured by the frag- mented nature of opposition to them. Meanwhile, what society dreads most are precisely the lies it suspects it is built upon. This dread or avoidance is obviously not the same as beginning to subject a deadening force of circum- stances to the force of events. ‘Adomo noted in the ‘60s that society is growing more ‘and more entrapping and disabling. He predicted that even= tually talk of causation within society would become mean- ingless: society itselfis the cause. The struggle toward a soci- ety—if it could still be called that—of the face-to-face, in and of the natural world, must be based on an understanding of, society today as a monolithic, all-encompassing death march.survey of high schoolers released 9/19/91, which found that 27 percent of them “thought seriously” about suicide in the preceding year. It could be that the social, with its growing testimony to alienation—mass depression, the refusal of literacy, the tise Of panic disorders, ete.—may finally be registering politica 'y. Such phenomena as continually declining voter turnout send deep distrust of government led the Kettering Foundation in June 91 to conclude that “the legitimacy of ur political institutions is more at issue than our leaders imagine,” and an October study of three states (as reported by columnist Tom Wicker, 10/14/91) to discern “a danger- ously broad gulf between the governors and the governed.” The longing for nonmutilated life and a nonmutilated world in which to live it collides with one chilling fact: Underlying the progress of modern society is capital’ insa- tiable need for growth and expansion. The collapse of state capitalism in Eastern Europe and the USSR leaves only the ‘triumphant’ regular vatiety, in command but now confront ed insistently with far more basic contradictions than the ones it allegedly overcame in its pseudo-struggle with ‘socialism’, OF course, Soviet industrialism was not qualita- tively different from any other variant of capitalism, and far more importantly, no system of production (division of labor, domination of nature, and work-and-pay slavery in ‘more or less equal doses) can allow for either human happi- ness or ecological survival We can now see an approaching vista of al the world as 4 toxic, ozone-less deadness. Where once most people looked to technology as a promise, now we know for certain that it will kill us. Computerization, with its congealed tedi- lum and concealed poisons, expresses the trajectory of so% ety, engineered sleekly away from sensuous existence and 2 Technology Technobo-gy n. According to Webster's: industrial or applied $eience. In reality: the ensemble of division of laborfproduction) {industrials ond its impact onus and on nature. Technology isthe sum of mediatons between us and the natural world and the sum Of those separations mediating us from each other. It is all the Atrudgery and tity required to produce and reproduce the stage of yperatienaton we languish in, Is the texture andthe form of Aomination at any given stage of hierarchy and commodification. ose who stil say that technology is “neutral,” “merely | a tool,” have not yet begun tg consider what is involved. Junger, Adorno and 1i-WTeimer, Ellul and a few others over the past decades—not to mention the crush. ing, all but unavoidable truth of technology in its global and Personal toll—have led to a deeper approach to the topic, ‘Thirty-five years ago the esteemed philosopher Jaspers ‘wrote that “Technology is only a means, in itself neither ‘g00d nor evil. Everything depends upon what man makes of For what purpose it serves him, under what conditions he places it.” The archaic sexism aside, such superficial faith in specialization and technical progress is increasingly seen as ludicrous. Infinitely more on target was Marcuse when he suggested in 1964 that “the very concept of technical reasonple been so infantilized, made so dependent on the machine For everything; as the earth rapidly approaches its extinction due to technology, our souls are shrunk and flattened by its pervasive rule. Any sense of wholeness and freedom can only. return via the undoing of the massive division of labor at the heart of technological progress. Ths isthe liberatory project in all its depth, ‘course, the popular literature does not yet reflect @ books seem to offer a judgement that the face of mass pro-tech propaganda, but 2 they reach their conclusions. Murphy, Mickunas and edited The Underside of HighTech: Technology and the Deformation of Humans@)bltes, whose ferocious ttle is com- pletely undercut by an ending that says technology will fe human a8 soon as we change our assumptions ab iegel and Markoff's The High Cost of High ig the various levels of technologt- ‘enhancing human comfort freedom and peace.” This kind of ‘cowardice andlor dishonesty owes only in part to the fact that, 9 Society Sorcivety n, from L.socus, companion. 1. an organized aggre- {ote of interrelated individuals and groups. 2. totalizing racket, advancing at the expense ofthe individual, nature and hurman sok idrity everywhere is ow den by the treadmill of Se an consmrion. This hamesed movement, So ry from a sae of companionship, docs not take place without agony and disaffection, Having more never Compensates for being les as witness rampant aiton fo drops, work, exer, sex, ee Vitully anything ean be an raved in the dese fr satan in a socey whose ark i dil of station Bu such excess least Hucksters purvey every kind of dodge, for example, New Age panaceas, disgusting materialistic mysti ‘mass scale: sickly and self-absorbed, apparent! looking at any part of reality with courage or honesty. For New Age practitioners, psychology is nothing short of an ideology and society is irrelevant. the victimized by citi “moral emptiness.” The depth of immiseration might best be summed up by the federal“Kiqent2ouod ‘aauanbasuoa aug pu °s,19889piay, Jo aunyey e sp 07 JBpUIUD! & 2q pinoys J988oproq Jo ase> aueziq ay, «349140 [eapy WaUwanD|YDe [e03eUN Ie Wt $> {S828s0d ABojouyparasyepos feuoney “yuids pue wioy worn saai8 uepy “sBunyp feLoiew aie auors pue a1ai2u05,, sem SiN at and warsks peoy uewua5 ayp 404 so;>0dsu 9 OF6L Ut “st Aea4 a1 se 20U “AiJeap1 poorssapur soar Moy Jo uonsanb © ulede ‘si IN Jo 21O.9UU 342 puyDg, Ieqo18 usamaaq sazunosUa, uDWaAOU! ZEN 24 UI PUL) O2 sem UoN, 1 “ABojouypa “sept ie “puny azpugnd 01 ysun 30U op stoneiodoa 3 ‘sue sno 03 aretidosdde Pue s1ew189} st “Aayunwuso> auars}xa jo soysoBare> ayy 404 aduraiuos uo Xpy>yidxa paseg ,."Aajunuutod, aaneFou # Alu ‘2uo siya 67 doueyquiasa4 ou sueaq 224 PlIOM e Ut ssoupo;auuo> auelqia ple Uo|unUIIOD Jo UoIstA e wiEapa1 02 Uo aAow om ue> aueu si¥ Ul Yo passed st yey But3 Culture Culture n. commonly rendered as the sum of the customs, ideas, ‘arts, patterns, ete. ofa given society. Civilization is often given as 2n—as in domestication — 1960, had it that “cut. 4 synonym, reminding us that is right in there, too. The Situationist, ‘ture can be defined as the ensemble of means through which soci ely thinks of itself and shows itself to Barthes remarked that itis “a machine to showing you desire. To NE." Getting warmer, desire, always to desire but never to understand.” ture was more respected once, seemingly, some- thing to ” Now, instead of concern for how emphasis is on how culture has failed us. Definitely something at work that thwarts us, does ‘not satisfy and this makes itself more evident as we face hin us the death of nature. Culture, as the the thinner and thinner air of symbolic activity. High culture or low, palace or hovel, it's the same prison. house of consciousness; the symbolic as the repressive. It is inseparable from the birth and continuation of jenation, surviving, as ever, as compensation, a trade of the real for its objectification. Culture embodies the split between wholeness and the parts of the whole turni showing that with the “community” of industrial modernity Jacques Camatte discussed capital's movement from the to that of real domination. But ant grounds from which to project of support for existing community ine solidarity and freedom. is decomposing...t is a good time for peo- its sanity, its masks and armors, and go mad, ready being ejected from its pretty polis.” of community might be termed a self- estrangement of ci least amount to naming that brating it by cal The defense of community isa conservative gestut faces away from the radical break required. Why defend that to which we are held hostage? In truth, there is no community. And only by abandon-duis snorago aya ang 2} .shyodo.5yuy, 5 {ons Supnpur ,* 40 eipadojo4aug ays, syueq exep ut spu 2411 saes0Uy>—9 astjesnaonssisod ays Jo yset-Ystu pappfoa1 243 Jo uUoy at) UI we parsneYXd {wou "985 01 aupAiana Joy axa ase sutns aun utero ‘98uens A/Bupaaoxa 51 248noyp Jo 240} & aq 03 aweD Sumseajun us: aup pue aanjuid 218 40) wisesmipUD Moy Jo A10%S ayp, :2uMs]No Jo ssoundia lewawepuny oyp Suipiedas aouesous) 2 BU aoueLANOP ay8Nos suyAAapUe aDUIS $0 wo df spip uaayi sy asaya fu asow! aya “pau ale fowo2sip pue Aresiu [euosiad AlvowWoD aiou! ay, rey Fpstne> 28es aya.@yo.2u8uug ‘Eq “aumno uo sfess9 jo Uoh, “pai auapas e uy “Sanunue>[euap axsseul ‘aynueayy «suouunsuo> £q payseu stedsap Jo asus e, pue ‘asn yosay Zuysea.our “x08 ssafanoy Jo swan W siuapnas-e9 Joy 42 9yods 94s “uoreiaUa$ uo Jay aqunsap o1‘sBUNNa J21N0 Buowe ‘S09, aun anoge Sure saye sot) poyse | aap ain Buoje a1oysodios pue squas 3:9 € yum UoBa19 o fareAI08 Woy apie 208 | O88 Jeak e anogy ‘ie0s 02 anulpuon sore! 2nigesip jeuonowa pue ‘aprons ‘asn Snap puey se "uayns 02 >ueiq wioys ues voIyse; Jo s3>e} aun yoda usapouns. UG p05 uy ase lewnof pue sourzeseyy “wo sfoxp Jo s9At] ya sn aieurwop 03 aul09 aney reNp suoR -sodut jeanyjn>- jenBue} ‘ow ‘uoneujwop -Wuo> se ‘uoneurwop sajueduionoe Ajeas yeyen ‘pie sie uy “woneDASOUOp Ups 3S1X9-09 ED ‘yf up suoyuny Ay Anunumuso>, rey ssuy030 ISBNs asnw diysmoljay wewny asnevag *Ayunumuros Jo 22u2sgo aya s]9aj auoKiang ‘UORDY e s} uonou Aiozesoqy e se Inq ‘s|eo3 40 sasodind Jo Aiea e 10} payor 9s J2ueeyLY psej-oroad ayy 01 ypeoidde uoneindiuews-snid-aoyuives s1aup Yat sista] ,ajdoad ays ans 391 seajonu eau squawduresua asyyoed ay3 wos} ‘1 02 U0sas 40 J@utteW je 338) Uf “anjea feo!pes Jo auorsyan: a) ‘Asopyos fo 1008 jonayod pasos 2 orsonlfo 2042 fo su2140> yonaso 243 uaye 40 auasqo 5) ons sof 350q 243 uayn wayfo asopyos ysyqorse o7 payorus daa Woo 0 ¢“suoruas yoru yam susjuoBi0 fo 210821830 uo [29 atowy aus ay1 Sumoy adoad fo fpog wv “t- Ke-wu-nw-wioy Ayunwuwoy) g Zz)toms of a general fragmentation and despair. Peter (Critique of Cynical Reason) points out that cynicism is the effort to create synthetic life via computer simulation, the progress of which was the big news from the second ‘Antfcal Life Conference at Santa Fe in February 1990. What it ‘means to be alive is also undergoing a cultural redefinition, Relatedly, another wonderful development is the Human Genome Project of the Nation: a $3 bik lion government attempt to decipher the three+ gen hat encodes human growth. The m Genome Project is yet another example of the dehumanizing Paradigms engulfing us: one Nobel laure knowing the whole sequence would lly are. Add to this awful red deep neurological level. The trend, if unchecked, proposes ‘nothing less than the cyborganization of the species, includ- ing the possibilty of permanent genetic changes in us, In the February 5, 1990 Forbes, David Churchbuck wrote of “The Uttimate Computer Game: Why Settle for the Real Thing if You Can Live in a Dream th Easier to afer, Cheaper and and empty world. ‘Those who still see technology as “neutr ‘existing apart from the dominant values and criminally blind to the will to nullity of a death“aumajno J9wnsuo> pazjwxew e Jo sa: sea 3282e3 asnu ypueasos rayseu! pue soddnsaud pinom 2843 ‘oN cuonesyunuUlo> paseaisu £q pazpareveY> a8y uorewojuy uy 9x1] a10W ‘pazinUEjU uo} indwo> Kq .paramodwg,, “uo! Peag jessaaun ayy awedea azow siopuas osqe a10u! Kysanod & pUueLY UeK iw ‘Aayofew asen ay 40) A 1 J0 1yslam e 03 Sununowe anuataneUy ay pue ssaussa/SujueaW ayi Jo Aaswwi0uD Bays 24) ‘2aMeU MO JMO Jo UINL ay puE euNaeU Jo suIMY 2414 ‘ssajaunauou ‘pantosjuo> aie aq4 je9u98 uy AyANDaf -ans (paveonsawos@pue 23ueid ay Jo ou aaey e areydwa1ue> 03 0u But ‘ou a1oyeaqi0% aiddné ‘quo x0u 8131 Kepoy “Souapuadap ypory -3eIpoU ayp pue wsyoUnsu09 Jo 9,49 Mi ‘wonpansawop wouf a10%s pin aya 09 payi2%2r Zumoy ‘squnyd 40 syouyuo Sus -4no00 deaif so ‘aunsou fo 2y0¥s © uy Bursa 10 “pu ‘po je-s04 [e1o4 7 “auetd 49199 uaK 4 ‘2fqiSuer a1ous e ug “toxndwiod asea aUO st P atf 02 Buped| ‘sassazoid ay are>1\da4 AIpasoddns wesjjom, faandwod ayy ‘oyyaueayy ‘sanmaisuas uewny 4 91 51 284m yAIM pastyuoD ag [IM pu pa: siainduioo jo 2q 03 sueaw 3) jap-24 & sapny wlum “Dafgns ajoym oy ZuspseBas aBueyp-e9s Woneuate Sumory “soys> aanany 8 sauyypew so aye3s 949 ‘uon>Ipestod Jo 489} an saunpew Jo yeads ©} ate 2q iM auo ey YMUH Os pasd3}e axeY jlIM UoUIdo Pateonpo [e12u98 pue spuom jo skyd Sussin220- Uuanaas asioisdyd yo st Wed uang ,'ssousnopss inoqueg ayn si—yjasi axeuluuya 02 wey inows 31 K0}8 s03e018 asoum or pur few 01 SwuEM SUryUIID YoIYa—sDIndwHOD wo jo ND2UY. 9K 03 pareDIPap “E961 s9quia> Aiojoyasg puss 03 seo PIU ,’suoROW aAeH ILM sI0q0y Aum. 2104M sOUpNOsD eDIOWY pue UBWOIS Losey L861 UL “afesn seindod 03 uaa sauy wapede Woy sua4sT™ ‘Suypopour saandwoy “purus jo Ay ue ABojoypKsd aan, 30 3247 MBM aaIsuaNxa-09 Mou S! TY Jo play a4) ‘paapuIn the upside-down alienation-induced drug use is a medi as embarrassing as the hundreds of in any person representing another, these petuate just one more home for protest, in liew of the r in its every (uniform. ly pathetic) gesture, that it property and passivity. One 1989, on the 20th anniversary of B ‘thousand people rose up businesses and injuring 15 cops; de: students in Tiananmen Square fad begun ying to prevent workers fom fighting the gov- Cnment oops, deve general rth that the university is the number one soute ofthat slow strangulation known 35 ‘malignant) but many of cies could become wild. 7 Artificial Intelligence, Artificial Life igh somewhat slowed in the past decade, the pur- | suit of Artificial Intelligence proceeds apace toward the highest moment of science and technology so far. The achievement of Al would mark a qualitative change in the actions, culture and self-perception of the human race, and what underlines this is how far this departure has already taken place. Ten years ago Marvin Minsky described the brain as a three-pound computer made of meat, an outlook echoed since by other Al theorists, such as the Churchills. The com- puter is constantly serving as a metaphor for the human ‘mind or brain, so much so that we tend to see ourselves as thinking machines. Note how many mechanical terms have 1 the common vocabulary of human cognition. of mass production, with carism and homogenization, that carries forward toward the ‘The computational metaphor that sees mind as an infor- mation-processing or symbol-manipulating machine has pro- duced a psychology which looks to machines for central con- cepts. Cognitive psychology grounds itself in the mathemati- cal orientation of information theory and computer science.{swreo4p pue afes Jo sopsod e yons uewp 559 Suyyutue Aq saayt sno Ajnsnf am ueD “YJoM pajje> tim pue oheU!Rew Jo aanjies rey pur siainduiod ‘S390 2 uo Zupuep ae sue 2e42 2x pue ssaupiIM Jo aveuquID e494 pue axeuossed ‘jeaeaydn |nyko! Jo uolsas1p aus ‘ul uina 40 uonannsap pue uonespsawop Jann 02 peos a1 Wo anunuo> Ajaayssed Jaya ue amy ,"UOR909 pue somod 02 sueaut auf Jo worssassod urergo 02 Moy) poorsiapun 1p2 S,UOREZIIAD Jo Uo) © weup ssaj ou se saZiauIa ApSRuayane Jo eIsiA ay, “epo3 puayiduioa Ajaieq ued am sey aimeu o> pur 9se9 ‘aoes3 Jo areis e uy parsyxa Aaquewiny ‘spiom 48430 Uy “samynoqi8e 03 Jou “sueaK Og ased ay Ut pasiaras “Aiurzewe uoreD! ay ‘paysal 5] UoneZIAD , oS -PIUUN pu ze fy seq auesosseu aun asnedog "ng "UoR #809 jeuaumuols aRotpI ‘stouRSUL Jo wont-pUNos 2fq—10} aus anoyaym vonezitA‘> ou 51 a1aya aey; mes pnaig “aaiasaud ayesedas e se ssausapyim 4 Sarous ueya soyaes asaypudinna pln ain 390802 one ‘ou3 ang juossoiddns uno sia #4998 osre ein afoul Ie =1ak0 a Jo ued e fous) sue} 307 on ssase) euoneL 40 Buquana ayp aeys areroaidde si «/SsauBord je> oy 324s 51 ors 8 wi 2-9DU3}O1A yans yrIm Ur auBne> 108 sey 41 :asipeeg wow Sut 1028 € ang “PayseWIS U9Dq Sey rey ajoym ‘peap 242 uaxeme + Feue 2yz 399) sty Jo awoyy w 4 syny pe aBeypoum Uodn afeyoa1m Suid sda9y yoium aydosseve> 218us 9u0 saas 2y ‘sivaAd Jo UIet e aniao10d om. 222qM “sed ayn premor pauum 51 238) sip -Kioaty 49 [aBue ayp saumpid auo soy si siqy -peaids oar sfuyw syy ‘wad s1 yinow siy “Buers axe sok si “Fupe|duarues Apary s1 ay Suypiowos wos feme ax0w 03 ange st ay Ysnoya se SUrY0o| jaBue ue SMoys SnAON snipsuy, pauew SunuIed dary y, rou 4949 Suswod9q s} ABojouypar Jo 3 Ssaifoud aup Jo aouayennba auy,“afexs leu sit se a pozt> -tuypaa pero) e uy eur jm auowidojaaap 5,9 46 248] souuy ay ‘a>uerssa4 soreai8 Jo aouasqe up uy ‘unoUr 01 BuluUraq s1 uoN!soddo YBnoya ‘saosay jeans 39 58 poqwoy ave Asnejs pazyaindwion s Kepor jo ssousisap UL “sozseuifed asyenide> sayy anq auosiaxs anoge asnf fa5 Division of Labor circum Di-vi-sion of la-bor n. 1. the breakdown into spec scribed tasks for maximum efficiency of output which constitutes manufacture; cardinal aspect of production. 2. the fragmenting or reduction of human activity into separated toll that isthe prat- on which makes civ cal root of alienation; that basie speci lization appear and develop. ative wholeness of pre-civilized life was first and I foremost an absence of the narrowing, confining sepa- nn of people into differentiated roles and func- tions, The foundation of our shrinkage of experience and powerlessness in the face of the reign of expertise, felt so acutely today, is the division of labor. Itis hardly accidental that key ideologues of tion have striven mightily to Plato's Republic, or example, we are instructed of that the origin of the state lies in that “natural” humanity that is embodied in the division of labs Durkheim celebrated a fractionated, unequal world by divit ing that the touchstone of “human solidar moral value is—you guessed it. Before him, Franz Borkenau, it was a great increase in division of labor ‘occurring around 1600 that introduced the abstract category of work, which may be said to underlie, in tum, the whole ‘modern, Cartesian notion that our bodily existence is merely __ Its promise began to realize itself, in many ways, from history's very beginning. With the emergence of agriculture ‘and civilization commenced, for instance, the progressive destruction of nature; large regions of the Near East, Afica and Greece were rather quickly rendered desert wastelands. tence, the transformation from a mainly herer-hunter mode to the violence ization was rapid. “Revenge, feuds, war- fare, and battle seem to emerge among, and to be typical of, domesticated peoples,” according to Peter Wilson. And vio- lence certainly has made progress along the way, needless to say, from state weapons of mega-death to the recent rise in outburst murders and serial he present vista of endemic ery—more progress. le of progress is today’s Information Age, ision of labor, from an instrument of the repr netic era where data i ‘meaning itself to flight. Science, the model of progress, has imprisoned a that’s really left. Progress has put present—a movement indeed wondrous. Two centuries ago the first inventors of industrial machinery were spat on by the English textile workers subjected to it and thought villainous.catem am op aud 242 pue sanjasino Jos ssau. JOU PMU MoH, “sBMsUE a4 ‘> am pinoys 4oge] Jo UOISIAIp Yan Mo} aouaisix9 auf ION ,Fuluonsanb spaau sisye!zads Jo apmnie ‘yous ay, U2 uay~gl-asoud ay JaYo s20p ang ,'sa129;90s land padojanap Aiysiy pue Ansnpuy padojaxap Ajysny um Aap0s & swieasp pue aussap rey: spuy oym ‘ystfesmanns.asod JesIpe1 snen9 J9pIstio “AalandeD sno Jo siovemiadiod a4 aue ajd;ound aso> sy 8uipu2sap ay uoneuWop asoddo WM asoUL, “sOge| Jo UOIStAIP Jo ayOK axp 03 aUOKIaK BURA 03 jepnup aze auauidojarap je>!Zofouy>9a Jo ,AniqentAaU, ue .Aarennnau, at jo syakw Bumnunuos aya “aqiymtieayy ‘uewny, 1p at yLIOM | ap s1ayaf uost uypd} 03 aUatLaAe/su9 dYp IIS St Sow WapOU! Jo tis}Ieq seq ayy ‘smesedde 24isap-o1-snojasadu! ‘snowouoane ‘AiBusea.our ue uw} 809 ajqeafueysioxuy ayp Jo s0qe} P2210} yp u9aq séenye sey soge| Jo woIsiNp Jo AOUApUDY SUL “ypeasq autes ay ‘us Uononpo1d pue uoresoql Jo eads 03 asuasuoN st 3 1842 ‘uononposd uy auasoyut st 31 3842 5) soqe| IP sai0us} ay 2eIp “AIsnoIAgo ‘uoseas ay, “UoRIND uawia8eueUyjas e s1afoad pue uonanpoid J Supua atp 01 pareoipap s} s09o7 pazouany pun roimpy Jo sasuanbesuey yonosoyaty s.aqqemuas, puiy ,’spuey “any Jo de otp ur sanunuos aySnoyg uepieyy ta9a1 Ing “wo|sso1da1 Kiesodutoauo> fexuourepuny a4 pod paziseydwa zneanoy “sous asaya 3uoly «/SAajasuiaup pue £19108 02 uoNe|as UI ssa}amod a10U Sujwooaq aue Aoyy s1meu 1940 49Mod 4942 {Le 40 Hanis -sed a1ow Surwodaq ase sjenpiaipuy Aaanse soup {Ie 40) ‘mip, ‘vonenygap aya dn wins Jowayy0H Pip ‘aunyeu Woy pue ss9y30 Wo4y I>9/qNs a4 Jo Bu}22n> .2819aIun pasojo,, e Jo a2ueL0UB} aya sasne> Joqet Jo uoIs “InP mou ,"Ysalj BuIAy] 94p rut 1OzeI & 941] passed sey YOR,6 Progress Progeress n.1.farchaie) offical journey, as of a ruler. 2. historical development, inthe sense of advance or improvement. 3. forward course of history or civilization, as in horror show or death trip. erhaps no single idea in Western ci /as important as the f progress is levels and spheres in this final part of ves, could more or ess harangue as marginal and insignificant those stead ofthe old respect fr product and production he pillars of prope tcendant ad Sarig pinto radical dang. We eve secon agg leopards tying to ehange ther pots the Indust Wo Of the World, embarrassed by the ft word af hr rane may yt move toward refusing the Second nots an oraizati many for so long is a vexing que: progress meant, after all? 6- jon. For what has {an object of our (abstract) consciousness. In the first sentence of The Wealth of ‘Adam Smith foresaw the essence of industrialism b ‘mining that division of labor represents a qualitative increase in productivity. Twenty years later Schiller recog nized that mn of labor was producing a society in ‘which its members were unable to develop their humanity. Marx could see both sides: “as a result of di labor,” the worker is “reduced to the condition of a machine.” But decisive was Marx’s worship of the fullness of production as essential to humar tration of humanity along the road of capi ment he saw as a necessary evil. toignore it, commodity form” in his attent in consciousness. E.P. Thompson realized that wit factory system, “the character-structure of the rebel pre-industrial labourer or artisan was violently recast that of the submissive individual worker.” But he devoted amazingly little attention to division of labor, the central ‘mechanism by which this transformation was achieved to conceptualize a civilization without repres- imply demonstrating the incompatibility of the swing to the “naturalness” inherent in division of labor, he judged that the “rations se of authority” and the “advancement of the wh few pages later (in Eros and labor becomes the mor of labor becomes. Ellul understood how “the sharp knife of specializa-