France: Nocturnal protests 'to change the world' gather force
Published: 11 Apr 2016 07:53 GMT+02:00
Riot police moved in on Monday to clear out Place de la Republique in
Paris, which has become home to nocturnal protests as hundreds have
gathered to air their many grievances as well as sing and drink beer.
But how will it end ?
It wasn't immediately clear if Monday morning's evacuation of the famous
square in Paris meant protesters would be forbidden from returning as
they have done each evening for the last 11 nights.
What is clear though is that the "Nuit Debout" (which roughly translates
as "Rise Up at Night") movement appears to be growing in strength rather
than dying out and the authorities in Paris are unlikely to risk barring
them from their headquarters just yet.
Following the evacuation, which removed the wooden fences and structures
built by protesters, the organizers of Nuit Debout immedia
a free letter to cultural institutions digitizing the public domain
please do not enclose the public domain when you digitize the material
that is already in public domain.
give the peers the freedom that you make use of when building on the
public domain and encourage them to build on what you have built.
license the digitized public domain material with a free/libre cultural
dedicate it to the public domain;
or use a free/libre cultural license that requires attribution, if you
rightfully want to achieve the recognition and the appreciation you
deserve for your valuable work;
or use a copyleft free cultural license if you also want to prevent
commercial exploitation of your work. copyleft attitude is more than
enough to do so, and even encourages another economics, which is not
based on accumulation of capital. just count on libre donations and
libre labour of your peers.
avoid "non-commercial", "no-derivatives", "open access" etc vocabulary,
which are exploitations of free/libre
Berger makes those points, but they're drowned out by all his cranky
noise -- like the opening words:
What did you learn from the Panama Papers? That African,
Russian, Ukrainian and Asian 'elites' are corrupt? Well,
this should have been known a for long time...
I'm deeply skeptical about 'data journalism,' but Berger's dismissal --
in his second paragraph -- is just silly:
the ICIJ...seems to mix up investigative journalism with
data journalism. The latter, a new form of journalism,
takes some database and looks, with filters and search
terms, for info snippets that lend themselves to headlines.
And so on. Yes, many other people have made the same points -- and done
a much better job of it.
Funding sources do indeed exert subtle and not-so-subtle pressure on
journalists -- I've experienced this firsthand and returned half of a
substantial 'journalism' grant when the funder tried to tell me what I
couldn't say. So, yes, the US-centrism of the funders is a serious
I think what the "responsible" journalists don't get is that this isn't
about criminal wrong-doing (well some of it is).
The problem at its base isn't about whether folks did or did not break the
law but rather that the law itself is wrong (most certainly the result of
effective lobbying by the 1% and others) allowing for folks to get out of
paying what they should be paying in tax. (The folks demonstrating in
Iceland seem to have got this right.)
So the objective here is not to save the innocent, in this circumstance
there may be relatively few or even no innocents, rather it is how to
contribute to a global campaign to put laws on the books to ensure that
everyone is paying their fair share. So as you most effectively argue, the
more information the better, and the journo's involved need a lot wider
input into the filters that they are using for saving us from ourselves.
And we all should be remembering that the biggest and most egregious tax
dodgers aren't the Messi's and Cameron's
So far Panama Papers have been infinitesimal, ldespite the humongous
bloviation: 184 files, 651 pages, about .0015% of the unsubstantiated
mad-dog frothing 11.5 Million.
Papers hosts claim all froth will not be released, to not madden the public,
not like an unspeakable gutter cur WL, but have not yelped how many
will be frothcoming nor when the residue will be disappeared by computer
error handover to government bounty rewarders (at 30% of the taxes
recovered - whistleblowing is top route to top and confidential).
400 shit and shinola Panama Paper withholderss could become Silicon
Alley millionaires by complying with an IRS-NGO secrecy agreement
like Greenwald, Taibbi and Cie by diverting attention from Omidyar-Bezos-Slim
bribing press hallelujah of wealth for fearless journalism and offshore Tor's
faux anonymity Panamanian sting.
Enlarged narrative confections of the itty-bitty evidence, lately jumped
on board by the New York Times by hyperbolized quoting the hosts in lieu
of demanding extensive proof a
Here's a mail I just sent to a list devoted to discussion of
- - - - - - - 8< SNIP! 8< - - - - - - -
Hi, all --
I appreciate that a forum devoted to responsible data is what it says on
the tin, but I want to question the reflexive assumption that
journalists' gatekeeping role is the most responsible course of action
in the case of the Panama Papers. It may be the most *defensible* and it
may be the most *professional*, but a lot of other freight can be
smuggled in under labels like that. That's basically what Mossack
Fonseca did: use anodyne language to mask activities that -- to put it
charitably -- benefited the few at the expense of the many. And while it
would be grossly unfair to lump the investigative journalists working on
the papers together with MF's staff, it is a *fact* that, for the
purposes of public access to the vast majority of the documents, the
actions of both groups will have the same outcome. And that's a material
fact, because it is how man
To assure official and congenial approval and financial support for
disclosure it is essential to choral "not like WikiLeaks" then scream
big numbers and Titanic significance, yes dear passengers, the ship is
Why even the Snowden Unsinkable Molly Brown distances itself from the
And why not, impermeable WikiLeaks assures its sailors that really,
really big, super important, government-shaking, "Leaks" (capitalized
as in capital) have established the benchmark for pleasant voyages
through turbulent seas of mega-tera bytes of digital flotsam and
Never mind that disclosures upsetting to Queegs are as old as Queens,
the customary way of succeeding the flag officers with new, terrifically
bloated and blared ways to get off asses and mass steal from the
Where in the Panama (nee Pentagon) Papers are the riches of Cuba,
Nicaragua, North Korea, Sudan, all the rogues so irritating to Wall
Street-ICBM itchy fingers ready to annex ever more Truman Doctrin
This picture that Alex paints of the allegiance that most people feel
for nations expressed through the nation state as: -an ominous
landscape- has like all caricatures some truth. But still it is a
caricature and reflects a wider problem for the left.
Benedict Anderson described the problem in 1983 in his classic -Imagined
Communities- where he defined the nation as -an imagined political
community- imagined as both inherently limited and sovereign-. It is
IMAGINED - he continues- because members of even the smallest nation
will never know most of of their fellow members, meet them or even hear
from them, yet in the mind of each lives the image of their communion..
It is partly Benedict?s background as a thinker with strong Marxist
background that drives his desire to come to terms with the fact that
-nationalism has proved an uncomfortable anomaly for Marxist theory and
precisely for that reason has been elided rather than confronted?. At
the time he was writing -every successful revolution since WW
Berger is by far not the only one with this opinion. After I posted
his article here, WikiLeaks retweeted the link to Nettime's archive
and Berger's piece. Before, Wikileaks tweeted the following (so we can
consider it WikiLeaks' official position on the matter:
"In total, Guardian has released, 2 #PanamaPapers documents.
The below has been adapted from the original blogpost (with very extensive
As some of you will know I recently published a blogpost which presents a
detailed critique of the A4AI (the Alliance for an Affordable Internet)
"Best Practices" document; and a second blogpost which presents a detailed
alternative set of "Best Practices". These have generated quite a lengthy
and sometimes heated discussion on some broader e-lists of interest to the
Internet policy community (specifically governance-UtHtnd/jhlLpgJrhxKc9hB2eb7JE58TQ< at >public.gmane.org, the
e-list for civil society in Internet Governance; and
internetpolicy-/SL4NtFI+qL9DtjTS/Z7tA< at >public.gmane.org , the policy e-list for the Internet Society
(ISOC). Overall the discussion has generated some 200 or so individual posts
with some continuing to be posted.
I'm biased of course, but as the discussion progressed and as it forced me
to go deeper into the backgro
But Florian, don't you think we're at antipodes from the Cold War? And
how much suspicion is really needed to understand those agendas?
The elites behind the ICIJ - Ford Foundation, W.K. Kellogg Foundation,
Rockefeller Family Fund, Stanley Foundation and McArthur Fund - are all
affiliates of the Democratic party and primarily concerned with social
reproduction. Their agenda is obvious. The capacity of the Democratic
party to govern is threatened in at least three ways: By lack of funds,
by the overweening power of the billionaire class, and by populist
revolts due to the collapse of life prospects for the majority of the
population. Since 2008 the federal government has consistently decried
its inability to collect taxes (from Apple, etc) and yesterday, Obama's
off-the-cuff remarks about the Panama Papers were to the effect that the
problem is, most of these tax havens are legal. There's a reason for
that. For forty years the US capitalist class has promoted the idea that
government should be
For now, maybe, but that won't last long. On the contrary, I think
they'll quickly become *precisely* questionable, plagued with questions
about agendas within agendas, the provenance and 'curation' of
documents, and so on. It may sound strange to use language associated
with connoisseurship in this context, but it isn't; on the contrary,
this increasingly leaky world will be defined more and more deeply in
aesthetic ways -- because leaks involve *media*.
I'll start with one example, an argument I first heard Florian Schneider
make, although aspects of it connect to a wider range of work -- for
example, Eyal Weizman's forensis initiative and Rabih Mroue's
meditations on visuality of confrontation. The basic idea involves a
drastic change in the aesthetics of 'authority.' High resolution,
precision, stability, and controlled framing used to be the dominant
meta qualities of visual 'truths,' but they've given way to a
counter-aesthetic: pixelated, chaotic, fragmentary, indeterminate. The
Could you make your suspicions a bit more explicit? What would the
explicit agenda of ICIJ be? Do you have more reasons to be suspicious? I
think their work in the past has been really quite solid.
> > Some crucial questions remain unanswered: Why is there no notable US
> > American citizen among the "accused"?
> But not for this reason. Much more important, as Brian pointed out,
> is at the US themselves have become the largest tax haven, globally.
Exactly. But then we have to ask about the possible political agenda
behind the Panama Papers, particularly if you consider the funders of
The Center for Public Integrity that's behind 'The International
Consortium of Investigative Journalists' (ICIJ). They not only include
Soros, but also the Ford Foundation, W.K. Kellogg Foundation,
Rockefeller Family Fund, Stanley Foundation and McArthur Fund, to name
only a few
On 2016-04-05 20:42, Florian Cramer wrote:
But not for this reason. Much more important, as Brian pointed out,
is at the US themselves have become the largest tax haven, globally.
Why run to Panama (which could get invaded or strong-armed at any
point anyway) when you can go to Delware, Nevada or South Dakota? Well
before the Panama Papers, even Bloomberg already run headline like
"The World’s Favorite New Tax Haven Is the United States" .
In the short term, yes, but I think what we are seeing here -- and in
a myriad of other cases -- is the continuation of the slow but deep
de-legitimization of an entire socio-political regime, basically,
neoliberalism. This has already gotten so bad, that the only remaining
selling-point is fear. And change in the status quo is fought against
not with a promise (as was the case up from about 1975 to 2005) but
with a threat. Most dramatically
On 2016-04-05 23:01, Geert Lovink wrote:
This is interesting, even crucial, because now other tax authorities may
obtain the data from the Australian Taxation Office, and if these
requests emanate from 'rule of law', 'democratic' states (as opposed to
dictatorships, bent on destroying their political opponents), there is
no reason for the Australian government not to oblige.
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime< at >kein.org
# < at >nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
Maybe I'm missing something, but the mere notion that something that
3-400 people have access to (more likely thousands, with associates,
managers, etc.) is a tight secret is ... mind boggling. And then when
the logistics of distributing all these terabytes to hundreds of
recipients, months ago, without a single accident, is considered, this
becomes a virtually impossible proposition.
On top of this, it appears that each entity got a custom subset - a
major editing task.
And none of these thousands - not a single one - sent a copy to
Wikileaks? Give me a break.
What we have here is a totally unrealistic interpretation of the
reality. But then it was only a matter of time when the 'anonymous
leaks' strategy will get weaponized and incorporated into media business