The Principle of Accelerationism = extreme de-territorialization:
Capitalism is in fact born of the encounter of two sorts of flows: the decoded flow of production in the form of money-capital, and the decoded flow of labor in the form of the ‘free worker’. Hence, unlike previous social machines, the capitalist machine is incapable of providing a code that will apply to the whole of the social field. By substituting money for the very notion of a code, it has created an axiomatic of abstract quantities that keeps moving further and further in the direction of the deterritorialization of the socius.
(Deleuze and Guattari Anti-Oedipus: 33)
Unlike the social morphologies of antiquity and feudalism, capitalism strives to absorb, overcode and subsume every population and loyalty on earth. Now ‘we can depict an enormous, so-called stateless, monetary mass that circulates through foreign exchange and across borders, eluding control by the States, forming a multinational ecumenical organization, constituting a de facto supranational power untouched by governmental decisions’ (Deleuze and Guattari 1987: 453).
Instead of asking like Kevin Kelley does: What does technology want? We should be asking: What does Capital want? For it is the intelligence of capital that has escaped our human systems of command and control, and is even now reformatting the very systems of human and geo-resources toward an algorithmic governmentality beyond the human; or, the becoming non-human of capital.
Khana Parag, author of Connectography’s new book Technocracy in America: Rise of the Info-State supplies us with the emergence of – to take the title of a recent novel, Infomacracy, or the combination of algorithmic compliance and governmentality by experts:
Technocratic government is built around expert analysis and long-term planning rather than narrow-minded and short-term populist whims. Technocrats are not to be confused with the complacent establishment elites that were just stunned by Trump. Real technocracy has the virtues of being both utilitarian (inclusively seeking the broadest societal benefit) and meritocratic (with the most qualified and non-corrupt leaders). Instead of ad hoc and reactive politics, technocracies are where political science starts to look like something worthy of the term: A rigorous approach to policy.1
The notion of technocracy is not new but that people are actually contemplating this form of governance in our moment when both the Left and Right are in the extreme modes of embitterment, and the common man is fed up with both, and the populist revolt that sparked Trump and brought both the Left and Right into an end game for Democracy is. Are we staging a new Technocracy in our time? With the looming sense of catastrophe, climacteric collapse, Sixth Extinction events, and the immersion of most of the world in drought, famine, and austerity the mobilization of a technological fix is being hyped in all quarters. Where do we go from here?
Since the time of Plato and Aristotle the ‘question about the sense of being’ has ‘fallen into oblivion’ (BT, 1f.). ‘Oblivion’ is Vergessenheit , ‘forgottenness’, from vergessen , ‘to forget’.
—Martin Heidegger: The Question of Being
Many know my involvement in the study of ancient and modern forms of gnosis and Gnosticisms, but few realize that there is a dark and revolutionary impetus to this world view which harbors at its heart a violence against the human. For the Gnostics the enemy was the natural order the Greeks termed heimermene. The Stoic philosopher Chrysippus considered that “the cosmos is permeated and given life by the Pneuma, the same…makes a man a living, organic whole.” They considered *Pneuma* (Spirit) as an all-pervasive intelligent force that mixes with “shapeless and passive matter” and “imbues it with all its qualities.”1 The Stoics also referred to *heimarmene*, an orderly succession of cause and effect. To quote: “Heimarmene is the natural order of the Whole by which from eternity one thing follows another…[and] embodied in the definition of heimarmene follows its meaning as *Logos* (Eternal Reason), as the divine order and law, by which the cosmos is administered.” [Ibid, p. 58.]
Against this natural order the Gnostics would judge it as absolute evil. Most scholars of Gnosticism have identified the rebellion against the idea of cosmic order (Heimarmene) as its essential characteristic. The Gnostics do not deny to the world the attribute of order, but they interpret it as an abomination rather than a good. They do not say that the cosmos is disordered, but that it is governed by a rigid and hostile order, by a tyrannical and cruel law. Their God is not just outside and beyond the world, but against the world, and this is where they break away from Christianity. Moral rebellion reflects a metaphysical rebellion. Therefore, the Gnostic position leads to the obliteration of ethics, as refusal to respect being and to be faithful to objective norms. This refusal was the common root of two opposite attitudes, libertinism as desecration of reality and asceticism as its radical rejection.