This article presents research on emerging global techno-libertarian networks for the establishment of venture-capital, crypto, and Web3-based jurisdictions and the new territorial and state projects they produce, including free private cities, charter cities, seasteads, and network states. Rooted in a self-professed anarcho-capitalist ideology, many of these projects paradoxically claim to eliminate “the state” in favor of decentralized and self-organized societies, while simultaneously proposing or producing different forms of centralized power. The article provides a critical analysis of techno-libertarian statecraft by examining the visual and discursive representations used to convey and obscure ideas of state, governance, and power. To do so, I look primarily at the use of metaphor (Semino 2008) and spectacle (Tsing, 2005) in techno-libertarian representations of territory. Finally, the article uses the Próspera Zone for Economic Development and Employment (ZEDE) located on the Honduran island of Roatán and in the Satuyé Port, La Ceiba as a case study in private statecraft. In addition to analyzing the structures created by Honduras Próspera Inc to govern the highly autonomous jurisdiction and the longevity biotech “network state” that it hosts, the article explores the visual representations that accompany actual structures of governance and state power.
In times of political effervescence, the number of pamphlets and newspapers editions tends to increase. Accordingly, the different instances in the life of a political movement can be traced through the type of intervention proposed by its publications. The rise of the anarchist movement publishing activity in Buenos Aires preceded its relevance within trade union during the first years of the 20th century. Until that moment the few "popular editions" published in the country consisted in literary works. In that context, Anarchism generated a novel circuit of texts through which an unprecedented relationship between printers, politics, authors, publishers and readers was established. Therefore, the decentralized financing and dissemination practices of the anarchist publishing movement revealed a broad thematic range of political concerns, that would finally shape, over the decades, the editorial interests of
It feels like the country, and the world, is in ferment, from Occupy Wall Street actions around the United States, to pitched battles in Europe over austerity measures that would mandate impoverishment, to unbelievably brave uprisings for an expansion of democracy in the Arab world. In New York these days our classroom examples have noticeably changed: We discuss the moral agency of New York Police Department officers over the use of tear gas and pepper spray, we talk of the transvaluation of values in Zucotti Park, and we explain the feminist process of horizontalism behind the General Assemblies. Some express concern about the term occupation, but it connotes an old trope used by Latin Americans to enact Montezuma's Revenge, which is not just a reference to the diarrhea inflicted on tourists in Mexico City but, rather, the overrunning of conquered territories by mestizo and indigenous peoples, to reoccupy their own lands. This is our land, as someone once said.Philosophical ideas are all over the movement. Libertarianism is a constant nuisance—the Ayn Rand crowd refuses to go away—but assorted worthwhile ideas are discussed in small groups. One of the most important of these is the idea of horizontalism, or horizontalidad, a concept often credited to the protest movements of Argentina from 2001 in which workers and the unemployed resisted impoverishment policies with bodies, cooking pots, and factory occupations (Sitrin 2006). The exact origin of the concept of horizontalism is disputed, but it has clear connections to autonomous Marxism, anarchism, and the feminist critiques from the 1960s of hierarchical structures. Several months in, there are still no named leaders of Occupy Wall Street, no Mario Savio, or Abbie Hoffman, or Stokely Carmichael. Mayor Bloomberg has been struggling to set up sidebar negotiations with a “leadership” committee that exists only in his own mind. Horizontalism is an attempt to operate in an organized fashion, so that plans can be made and publicized, and statements can be agreed upon and issued to the press, but without a head that can be cut off, or bought off, or scared off. Thus horizontalism works through affinity groups and with rotating facilitators rather than sustained leaders, working groups rather than standing committees, and with spokes-councils organized as fishbowls for maximum transparency. Activists repudiate delegate assemblies, representational governance, and any decision-making structure that blocks direct democracy and limits participation. Whoever shows up to the General Assemblies takes part. The corporate media and the older generation of politicians and political theorists shake their heads, scoff, and criticize. Meanwhile the younger generation, using this supposedly ineffective decentralized methodology, has already changed the public domain of discourse, giving us all permission, as Jennifer Uleman wrote in an essay on the Feminist Wire, “to want things that it might otherwise seem childish or absurd to want (you know: fairness, justice, truth, beauty, love, music, sky, rest—that kind of thing).”1Horizontalism is an interesting concept through which to reflect on feminism—its practice as well as its theory—then and now. Then, feminists were the ones, of course, who insistently raised issues of process, developed consciousness-raising in the form of epistemic working groups to generate new knowledge without experts or leaders or trained therapists, articulated the problems with identity-based authority (or lack of authority), and invented the form of the “affinity group” for direct action and civil disobedience as a way to intensify mutual support through emotional engagement. There was a lively debate, of course, and there were a number of feminists who also developed trenchant critiques of these new methods, pointing to the potential “tyranny of structurelessness,” as Jo Freeman called it, arguing that open systems opened doors to charismatic leaders who could escape accountability. (As one young activist says to me today—in reality horizontalism always has hills and valleys, stronger and weaker players, in-groups and out-groups). Yet the demand that we pay attention to process, to the subtle and unstructured ways in which power operates to organize authority, and the demand that we consider the distribution of epistemic authority as a central political problematic, has remained (or survived) to influence contemporary movements despite these internal critiques. There is no question that feminism profoundly influenced the processes and organizing styles used in movements against corporate globalization and the occupations of today.In terms of theory, the notion of horizontalism resonates with Con-tinental feminist philosophy in multiple ways. Recall Teresa de Lauretis's early 1990s exploration of the Milan Women's Bookstore Collective as the site of a new form of egalitarian practice that came directly from these feminist debates over process. The collective attempted to formulate a democratic process that acknowledged power differences rather than pretending they didn't exist (de Lauretis 1990). Toward this end they made use of the concept of affidamento, or entrustment, to signal an idea they associated with maternal power, in which differences of age, experience, knowledge, and authority could be recognized and honored without debilitating political effect. It struck me the and still as an idea with in indigenous and systems that operate with a of political that takes of the and in the The Milan collective was a interesting attempt to formulate without or a of as the of political participation. Yet the of this form of political with the and the of a struck in feminist theorists for a as well as in all to and so so that the was not up This is The of and a of these as well as democratic to the of process and the of public to all rather than that we of the epistemic that differences can philosophy in of the kind of to issues of that feminists can as the of and This is to the of than than and with the of as as with the of epistemic It me that the attention feminist as to issues of in to and to issues of epistemic is an important in feminist but it only The of power in to knowledge in this is still in terms of and are as the our There is attention to the and that operate in of all feminist to want to the of this essay on of feminist from which we can and the on This of might us as to horizontalism in interesting we a of the on in feminist over the generation, and we can an interesting was an important of the early in feminist theory, as feminists to as a and political rather than an to and and to the for in the as well as like the United is of an important of contemporary in feminist This is not a to be a of for this from is always a the from the of be a that has for us feminist and as to of its and and to it as a a of the was as despite its as to was and by that the of in the of the United to be with and in the of in the of we are to the or to movements of as developed the that could not be with a systems by as the in which the a media to a new demand for that to the and of we no or they seem to has for feminist theory, new for feminist for the that came to be as would and in to the without Yet feminist as and have up the of as we our way to a new and to the and of and a the attempt by theorists as and to explain by reference to and the or to these also of and of a direct and and new by feminist most of on the of the and way that can be by their and the to in a of the of The feminist debates over were with the of and the of on and all that feminists could with and feminism that in the a attempt to a of a and also to of and for was an practice the of which the that it the of a Yet the critiques of feminism to the of feminist in important in for from the of and most might from this that the of who have attempted to have new and The to to the attention of theorists has to the of theory, and new on power, and are all important and this has not the of in the of and in this has all but are in and the from our own This is not a but an we and the of feminist to on this the of was it is on the but to a of We are in a of about the and and reference of debates over the against of to debates over the of against the the feminist not to We who are are not from these internal debates In the of as well as support one the of the of of the that of has over the by the as well as the in which it the in about as well as the of and an of the set of in as on or on might in terms of about or this operate as a and to the of as or the of these in the the the and the of and the for and is the with we not to that the without We that and and in or that there is a of the of the theorists and and over the The is of the of it of it of ideas of they can and of they have just The can also a in the and of to to a way to in of the of and the of We to with the of of all of this is to up a of and potential this is not just a potential consider to an of in which as the of or the but of that that are The to on has so a set of This is a of the about the and of the to this in is to on is us to is has is to the of the We might a they are of the we to in to discourse, we to consider the ways in which the for to is the of the the issues and the of experience, as well as the that and The of is and in ways. we still to in as we are a the in or we are a the question in this in the to but we can use of for our own we and we can a in which can not but of knowledge, theorists with its of and its to the idea that of political can be by new might be as the practice of epistemic democracy and the to epistemic are to a new of in the and not be with epistemic discourse, by to debate, and of and these not only from corporate media but from who can than new of in of or or of not use our to the of and the a of who is to be a a me end by to the of the of feminist a domain also in of new epistemic of the and philosophy is that philosophy is and philosophy is The of this way of the is to me to problems as in an The of in philosophy to a set of feminist philosophy as well to a set It has been for over a generation on of feminism and in to our philosophy as as his to was was a to about have been in this as of have with feminist debates over and and these feminist of the one to a in styles of the question of and and to was an from the of with the opened up for by the is in and is in through a like to the in the as well as its The feminist of our is us feminist to new is from to these in of feminist there is a set of about these for feminist the of the is made for the to a one have been to the of a of from the in to a that to for the discussed in are in to or have This feminist and the to and we feminist it to is to its the of which and for as a kind of on our from which to new ideas about and has the in of a autonomous of course, one not our the new we form are to the but a of the is This might about a new feminism of the that its own of horizontalism, the authority of the in of an of our essay is and It is about the for and about and about about the of philosophy that me to it, about a with and about a that in was not It is not so an as a of in in to in and through the and of the in a practice that these and in giving an of this a and feminism in the and feminist as central to its it not its to the that this is a In to that it is head of the Women's in the Department of and to a on the of The from to was in the The also the of In the with an that as a against its in as it was and feminism not this is It for the of the feminist 1960s to a feminist movement. The of feminism is as the to Jo it a media for feminism to an on the the for the the not seem to have made an on the in but that like feminist It is not that a on the of de organized by The of The of and The in the to to be as to a that as a for and In the and the for its The of this committee was to philosophy recognized the not to and This would be to the on the of in and by It that from by the critiques of feminist of the 1960s and in the and feminism to on and feminism were was to a There was a for and a for and were to be a and In the to on the of and was in with the Women's were the Women's were as would be of to be to that was in with the that its and of it is that most were as often as to feminist and to the of it is also that feminist was the and the in the early and was not only behind the of the it also behind the of and the about the are the of the for me is as an or in feminist to central as and and political theory, for or consider feminist an of philosophy that with interesting issues but not with issues that are to the of philosophy in or and in the of philosophy the for in and the feminist theorists are me in this the there are in philosophy than philosophy are in feminist are these reference to the of the be as a the of feminists in and feminist on the been and feminist from the to the of and the It us not to the of the for and It us that by not only in the of and but also in all associated with as and the is by a that This not for the of the and for it that feminism be associated with that are associated with and it is to to and It to that the of and as they are to the of the experience, and and of feminism as associated with but, rather, of feminism as an that as the to question the of the question of the would on the this question and the it would not go In the us as it in it to its as it feminism its this is it that of its to the as it, the of a philosophy to as it the of that feminist not just as of a of that it but as to its and of the be in but there are that be to operate as of this and these be to have the of and the to question authority to and is in the of but it is the of the of that In us to our we are not to from the but to in it in ways. We are not to our but to its the ways that it is a for and an for the ways that its it in the of the the ways that its and and In this it is is for We are to we in and in this way to the of the world. We are to to the ways that the is an a in and a The the things has a that are not from and of the that us the things of and to the of our in and in the early days of they remained from the they to be it came to the of and There was an that was always to the on its own in the was as or de could not be that we there are one of to the was not The of was not The of the or was not a way this might be to be The of to experience, to it, was not an end in It was a to the end of the that made it an on to these it on we for rather than of the of in be as an and the and the as it in the of the in the without of the of the It is a philosophy in attention to the in with the of the as on the the of and the it also is to that this of is a of but it is to it as a of but of with a in to the of the are as of in a world, is that the idea of a who is not always and already in the of but of the as is the that the from which we the are not only a of rather than there but also and a of we are and as or there in the differences of our and for the idea of an or The of these is that the is a essay a by is recognized as a of The is no by The of the the things always just a The things are always from our and the The of feminism us as as it is to escape all it to of the of of all we can our attention to the and the ways that and the have been that they we in on to not seem to be that we are no than us of the limits of our We can to from with feminism is that we that the of and We that in or philosophy in has a or that it is to the the and the This own was but philosophy the of and to as the that the was to the was that would be the of who the of the not to these and they are by they are not by its would like to by not to to this but that one way to way that as a for to a to the or to an the attention to and the to that these is as central to the concept of the as that that us in the and us the as the is in the practice of the the of this us to in this our to the that we for that have and question the of this There and who are working to a we are all from our our are which that as we also have to to from of the of came upon that me up and have to that these are for the feminist of the of and for the of the and of The are as and and political and In to be they us to of feminist and to these as an of a feminist practice to the practice of to the to the to and to the that its and support the of the of the that the to the attention was to these by a in the of by was by the of their of by by of the to these and by to the The me to of The to these me to the of and Some of the to the me that the is and well and that feminist are from is no as or It is and not that it has been from a practice as a of it to be used the The of it a against have to be in and that is a is still a we that the of be and we have to to and the of that their not their these their in public as they their their in to this and the to their to the of The of this is from that of the it was a of epistemic authority, of a to and the of was a of as by to not as on his it is a of the power of to a the a a without this power the feminist that operates by as the of that is from It that it is that the and that his is from It to a of is not but a as to with as well as to with that that one a by or as of the power to or from a to be a is not but a to that who and their on were not was that in their on were in the to the of the of still who to who were The of and that there is no a and it that it is not his that but, rather, that as a on on than from by a who refuses to be the his as a The of power and on that is not a and an that and on not to be can be can to that the not be an of his for a but, rather, an of a to the it that not a as for the the a was the of for and as was the of the this through the of shows us be to the of they are not to with the of can be and without or of idea that is a was in the of of In from and the changed its of from the knowledge of a against to the no of the or with any or or by a of without the of the the not consider or with an or of one by The and the it made it can can be the in of it to these the who their of in terms of The these is from the by the and the are but not in the is of but not of is of his as well as of his is no a a would not have been This is the his with the of and and the of the in the of The from to The the of shows that is in of the that only that it is only as a The Feminist the of so that by the of it would for and was also on the of It to and its was Women's In the that are most to it the that are also by this of that its in to it this and the in to the of that groups and that for for the feminist of the by the of and of the to that these are not of the for the reality of the it takes on the their and their and the that this of as of the of and Some the as of the feminist against the of the of their one the are not for have to the that can only be were to the notion that or in could be of it from the notion that are the of the moral to that have always been the of with the always and were and and the there been for and be a in to the by to attention to of in all media and public and and of own contemporary not that we can this and the number of that were for not the of that it is than the we our of this to our we our feminist We to to the who as were for of that is to be by to a it is to to that is we have no for these and to not only it also by a that with our to as and In the about about and their who have been the they are for these One an in the are things just not can to a that his was would no as a their can be who is In an no is to be these that their of are as of from and of in this as for the that without to or as in and in be are not to they be of the to to be not all of not that but not are not that are to that with and this concept the power to and the power to in the of are raised to that is a of not as this is in a The power of this is in the that the are only in public they that they be for not the power of this and the ways that it is by their these to be not only in and ways but in ways that is are no a for as a is so as it is by the of and a it is to be to be a as it is to the and against and in the ways that these to be have this as a of The of the in ways that are for and to also that the of to be It to be in terms of the ways it and It to be in terms of the ways it and the of our and by it in ways and by the of it these on in a to the and feminism in the that in terms of a practice that in the of our and in us of our us to in the that us as The of that its feminists have been in this be as that it is with the question that us to that from the of It that its to the be it the feminist practice of the of the as central to its