4 ms·

I have to say there is something slightly uncanny about a tweet chain that starts with a criticism of 'chokepoint capitalism' in the first person seamlessly tra

I have to say there is something slightly uncanny about a tweet chain that starts with a criticism of 'chokepoint capitalism' in the first person seamlessly transitioning into an ad for the book itself, stickers and pins with a broken link and weird marketing language that's clearly not coming from Doctorow, it's like that Metal Gear 2 ending when the Colonel starts to speak in gibberish I remember Baudrillard being angry about his books being featured in the Matrix, because he thought the Matrix was the exact kind of movie that the Matrix itself would make. This is the kind of energy that Doctorow, Naomi Klein (No Logo) etc. have

cato_the_elder 4y ago
The guy has turned into a composer of polemics. [1] [1]: e.g. https://mobile.twitter.com/doctorow/status/1466457072871124992 https://mobile.twitter.com/doctorow/status/14664570728711249...
- krageon 4y ago
  This is completely unrelated to what is under discussion and an extreme-right dogwhistle besides. Surely you can do better?
  - cato_the_elder 4y ago
    I'm suggesting his new book is also probably full of polemics. I used to like him when I was younger, and have fond memories of reading one of his novels (Little Brother [1]) as a teenager. [1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Brother_(Doctorow_novel) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Brother_(Doctorow_nov...
    - krageon 4y ago
      The (bias) issues with crime statistics are well-documented and well-understood (even within actual police and secret service agencies). This is not polemic - what is polemic is how to fix that (and whether or not we should, given that the police is generally of the opinion that "it works acceptably so we should not fix it further"), which this chain doesn't really touch upon.
      - cato_the_elder 4y ago
        The polemic part is that he's says driving as a non-white person is a de facto crime in the US, which is of course utterly untrue. As a non-white person, I'm sure I would've known if that was the case. (Also, I had linked to the wrong tweet in the thread. I've corrected it now.)
        Kbelicius 4y ago
        I don't see anything controversial with that statement. I think that you are mixing de jure and de facto.
        cato_the_elder 4y ago
        No, I'm not. It's clearly not a de facto crime. How many non-white Americans get sentenced merely because of driving?
        simonh 4y ago
        De Facto describes situations that exist in reality (in fact), even if they are not legally recognised. Sundown towns exist in reality regardless of the law, and non-whites driving through them can face harassment and even arrest or prosecution for no other reason than being non-white while driving. The reason given for the arrest or prosecution will be a book crime, but that's not the actual factual (de facto) reason for it happening.
        joemazerino 4y ago
        > driving through them can face As De Facto as getting hit by lightning. Let's leave the polemics out.
        Kbelicius 4y ago
        > How many non-white Americans get sentenced merely because of driving? Arresting non-white Americans merely for driving isn't de jure but your question presuppose that it is or that someone her is claiming that it is(nobody is). Can't get any more obvious that you are mixing de jure and de facto.
  - azangru 4y ago
    > and an extreme-right dogwhistle besides What do you mean? Why extreme right, and what, exactly, is a dogwhistle (i.e. the code word/phrase) in the parent comment?
- lproven 4y ago
  You say that like it's a bad thing.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
krageon 4y ago
The tweet chain clearly explains what the book is about, and it is not a criticism of capitalism as a whole (as valid as that may be). It is a criticism of large publishers exploiting people who actually make things.
- Barrin92 4y ago
  >It is a criticism of large publishers exploiting people who actually make things. if that is what it was you wouldn't be able to order the thing on Amazon. So potent is his criticism of Audible, Amazon is actually willing to deliver it straight to your door. No, what it really is is more perverse, resistance repackaged as consumption itself, keeping up the illusion that you're doing something meaningful by buying that book. This is of course the dominant mode now in the #resistance genre (of all political or ideological colors)
  - klez 4y ago
    He clearly explains the difference between Amazon-the-internet-book-shop and Audible, i.e. the first doesn't force DRM on its ebooks, the second does.
  - erellsworth 4y ago
    This is called recuperation, and it's fairly common. Rather than censoring ideas, capitalism just turns them into another commodity and dilutes their potency. The Black Mirror episode Fifteen Million Merits shows exactly how it works. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recuperation_(politics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recuperation_(politics)
    - TheCoelacanth 4y ago
      Subscribe to Netflix to find out more about it. You really can't get away from it.
      - erellsworth 4y ago
        I mean, you can always sail the seven seas, amirite?

cato_the_elder 4y ago

The guy has turned into a composer of polemics. [1] [1]: e.g. https://mobile.twitter.com/doctorow/status/1466457072871124992 https://mobile.twitter.com/doctorow/status/14664570728711249...

krageon 4y ago
This is completely unrelated to what is under discussion and an extreme-right dogwhistle besides. Surely you can do better?
- cato_the_elder 4y ago
  I'm suggesting his new book is also probably full of polemics. I used to like him when I was younger, and have fond memories of reading one of his novels (Little Brother [1]) as a teenager. [1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Brother_(Doctorow_novel) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Brother_(Doctorow_nov...
  - krageon 4y ago
    The (bias) issues with crime statistics are well-documented and well-understood (even within actual police and secret service agencies). This is not polemic - what is polemic is how to fix that (and whether or not we should, given that the police is generally of the opinion that "it works acceptably so we should not fix it further"), which this chain doesn't really touch upon.
    - cato_the_elder 4y ago
      The polemic part is that he's says driving as a non-white person is a de facto crime in the US, which is of course utterly untrue. As a non-white person, I'm sure I would've known if that was the case. (Also, I had linked to the wrong tweet in the thread. I've corrected it now.)
      - Kbelicius 4y ago
        I don't see anything controversial with that statement. I think that you are mixing de jure and de facto.
        cato_the_elder 4y ago
        No, I'm not. It's clearly not a de facto crime. How many non-white Americans get sentenced merely because of driving?
        simonh 4y ago
        De Facto describes situations that exist in reality (in fact), even if they are not legally recognised. Sundown towns exist in reality regardless of the law, and non-whites driving through them can face harassment and even arrest or prosecution for no other reason than being non-white while driving. The reason given for the arrest or prosecution will be a book crime, but that's not the actual factual (de facto) reason for it happening.
        joemazerino 4y ago
        > driving through them can face As De Facto as getting hit by lightning. Let's leave the polemics out.
        Kbelicius 4y ago
        > How many non-white Americans get sentenced merely because of driving? Arresting non-white Americans merely for driving isn't de jure but your question presuppose that it is or that someone her is claiming that it is(nobody is). Can't get any more obvious that you are mixing de jure and de facto.
- azangru 4y ago
  > and an extreme-right dogwhistle besides What do you mean? Why extreme right, and what, exactly, is a dogwhistle (i.e. the code word/phrase) in the parent comment?
lproven 4y ago
You say that like it's a bad thing.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

krageon 4y ago

The tweet chain clearly explains what the book is about, and it is not a criticism of capitalism as a whole (as valid as that may be). It is a criticism of large publishers exploiting people who actually make things.

Barrin92 4y ago
>It is a criticism of large publishers exploiting people who actually make things. if that is what it was you wouldn't be able to order the thing on Amazon. So potent is his criticism of Audible, Amazon is actually willing to deliver it straight to your door. No, what it really is is more perverse, resistance repackaged as consumption itself, keeping up the illusion that you're doing something meaningful by buying that book. This is of course the dominant mode now in the #resistance genre (of all political or ideological colors)
- klez 4y ago
  He clearly explains the difference between Amazon-the-internet-book-shop and Audible, i.e. the first doesn't force DRM on its ebooks, the second does.
- erellsworth 4y ago
  This is called recuperation, and it's fairly common. Rather than censoring ideas, capitalism just turns them into another commodity and dilutes their potency. The Black Mirror episode Fifteen Million Merits shows exactly how it works. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recuperation_(politics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recuperation_(politics)
  - TheCoelacanth 4y ago
    Subscribe to Netflix to find out more about it. You really can't get away from it.
    - erellsworth 4y ago
      I mean, you can always sail the seven seas, amirite?