Dark Alien Ecologies, Craig Hickman embarks on a multi-part recapitulation of Accelerationism. His decision to frame it as ‘Promethean’ generates plenty of material for discussion, even before leaving the title. With the first installment poised on the brink of the Williams & Srnicek Manifesto for an Accelerationist Politics, it is set to provide the most comprehensive overview of the current to date. (See Hickman’s contribution to his own comment thread for a sense of the overall structure.)
One emerging theme — from Hickman’s text and its nimbus — is the irreducible significance of Accelerationism as a symptom, which is to say: as a register of capitalist stimulus. Questions concerning its potential for cultural endurance twist, almost immediately, into estimations of techonomic provocation. The archetypal critique of accelerationism takes the form: Capital has no right to excite us. There is a slippage into highly-charged ethico-aesthetic controversy (as Hickman notes). It should not be enthralling.
“… capitalism is anything but exciting. It is mundane, boring” says Edmund Berger, in the comments. However inane such a statement might sound, it conveys a complex thesis, of remarkable pertinence, insistence, and significance, and of far greater practical importance than any merely technical objection could be. It will be necessary to say much more about it, at some future point. For now, the most pressing response is a superficially trivial one: How much geo-historical sadness finds itself reflected in such a stance?
Accelerationism: Ray Brassier as Promethean Philosopher
no boredom – Arran James on Mark Fisher and Accelerationism beyond Boredom
Accelerationism, Boredom and the Trauma of Futurity
Nick Land and Teleoplexy – The Schizoanalysis of Acceleration
Science Fiction, Technology, and Accelerationist Politics: Final Thoughts on an Williams and Srnicek’s Manifesto