beiser
Well-known member
doesn't seem to be a thread on them, am sure there are some good takes here
my conclusion after substantial rumination is that Lotringer and Kraus cannot be understood other than as landlords, and semiotext(e) is terribly straightforward ploy to translate a stream of revenue derived from rent into leftist cultural capital. they are, therefore, capitalists, even though semiotext(e) is surely not an especially profitable venture (or is it? How many copies of "The Coming Insurrection" have been sold?)
The "Invisible Committee" shtick is particularly telling—the Committee promises an eschatology that is explicitly decelerationist, and therefore quasi-feudal. Destroy all the infrastructure you like—you still own the land, you still get paid the rent…
my conclusion after substantial rumination is that Lotringer and Kraus cannot be understood other than as landlords, and semiotext(e) is terribly straightforward ploy to translate a stream of revenue derived from rent into leftist cultural capital. they are, therefore, capitalists, even though semiotext(e) is surely not an especially profitable venture (or is it? How many copies of "The Coming Insurrection" have been sold?)
The "Invisible Committee" shtick is particularly telling—the Committee promises an eschatology that is explicitly decelerationist, and therefore quasi-feudal. Destroy all the infrastructure you like—you still own the land, you still get paid the rent…