Карсон, Кевин Амос цитаты

Кевин Амос Карсон — американский политолог, публицист, мютюэлист, индивидуалистический анархист и анархо-синдикалист . Является участником Альянса либертарных левых и Движения добровольной кооперации. Основными его работами являются «Исследования мютюэлистской политической экономии», «Организационная теория: Либертарная перспектива» и «Железный кулак за Невидимой рукой». Карсон также является автором в многих интернет-журналах и блогах, включая Just Things, The Art of the Possible, P2P Фонд и его собственный блог Mutualist. Некоторые из его статей публикуются в бумажном журнале The Freeman: Ideas on Liberty. Его сочинения на тему политической экономии цитируются в популярном справочнике «Часто задаваемые вопросы анархизма» и были предметом обсуждения в Journal of Libertarian Studies . Карсон также занимает должность научного сотрудника в Центре безгосударственного общества. Проживает в городе Файетвилль, штат Арканзас.

Карсон описывает свою политику как существующую «на границе либертарианства свободного рынка и социализма». Он рассматривает работы Бенджамина Такера, Ральфа Борсоди, Льюиса Мамфорда и Ивана Иллича в качестве источников вдохновения своей философии. Wikipedia  

✵ 1963
Карсон, Кевин Амос: 16   цитат 0   Нравится

Карсон, Кевин Амос: Цитаты на английском языке

“Most of the constantly rising burden of paperwork exists to give an illusion of transparency and control to a bureaucracy that is out of touch with the actual production process. Every new layer of paperwork is added to address the perceived problem that stuff still isn’t getting done the way management wants, despite the proliferation of paperwork saying everything has being done exactly according to orders. In a hierarchy, managers are forced to regulate a process which is necessarily opaque to them because they are not directly engaged in it. They’re forced to carry out the impossible task of developing accurate metrics to evaluate the behavior of subordinates, based on the self-reporting of people with whom they have a fundamental conflict of interest. The paperwork burden that management imposes on workers reflects an attempt to render legible a set of social relationships that by its nature must be opaque and closed to them, because they are outside of it. Each new form is intended to remedy the heretofore imperfect self-reporting of subordinates. The need for new paperwork is predicated on the assumption that compliance must be verified because those being monitored have a fundamental conflict of interest with those making the policy, and hence cannot be trusted; but at the same time, the paperwork itself relies on their self-reporting as the main source of information. Every time new evidence is presented that this or that task isn’t being performed to management’s satisfaction, or this or that policy isn’t being followed, despite the existing reams of paperwork, management’s response is to design yet another—and equally useless—form.”

The Desktop Regulatory State (2016), Chapter 2
The Desktop Regulatory State (2016)

“. The central theme of contemporary autonomist Marxism is a shift from giant organizations and insurrectional seizure to gradualism and Exodus. The rapid transformation of the working class, the blurring of the lines between work and the rest of life, and the shift in meeting a growing share of our needs into the informal and social economy, mean that the Old Left’s workerism (and like Harry Cleaver, I include syndicalism and council communism in the Old Left), its focus on the production process as the center of society, and its treatment of the industrial proletariat as the subject of history, have become obsolete. In this regard, read Toni Negri’s contrast of the Multitude to previous Old Left ideas of the proletariat. Mostly, I call it a heroic fantasy because any model that envisions a post-capitalist transition based on the universal adoption of any monolithic, schematized social model is as ridiculous as Socrates and Glaucon discussing what musical instruments and poetic metres will be permitted in the perfect state. The real world version of the post-capitalist transition — just as with the transition to capitalism five centuries earlier — isn’t a matter of any single cohesive social class, as the subject of history, systematically remaking the world guided by some single, comprehensive ideology, and organized around a uniform institutional model. It’s a matter of a wide variety of prefigurative institutions and technological building blocks that already exist in the present society, continuing to grow and coalesce together until they reach sufficient critical mass for a phase transition — a phase transition whose outlines can only be guessed at in the most general terms. This is the model advocated by Michel Bauwens, by Paul Mason, by John Holloway, by Peter Frase, and by a lot of other people who can hardly be fitted into any American individualist ghetto.”

'In Which the Anarcho-Syndicalists Discover C4SS' (2016)
Other Writing

“War crimes are only committed by defeated powers.”

But as the Nazis learned in 1945, unemployed war criminals can usually find work with the new hegemonic power.
"The Iron Fist Behind the Invisible Hand: Capitalism As a State-Guaranteed System of Privilege" (2011)

“The manufacture of foreign crisis and war hysteria has been used since the beginning of history to suppress threats to class rule.”

"The Iron Fist Behind the Invisible Hand: Capitalism As a State-Guaranteed System of Privilege" (2011)

“Ideological hegemony is the process by which the exploited come to view the world through a conceptual framework provided to them by their exploiters. It acts first of all to conceal class conflict and exploitation behind a smokescreen of "national unity" or "general welfare."”

Those who point to the role of the state as guarantor of class privilege are denounced, in theatrical tones of moral outrage, for "class warfare."
"The Iron Fist Behind the Invisible Hand: Capitalism As a State-Guaranteed System of Privilege" (2011)