I'd really like to invite Kim finally, as you will reply to these kind of presentations or kind of discuss with our panelists here and we'll get three more chairs, hopefully. Kim Carrington is an adult educator and anti-racism activist, active in self-organized contexts, and that's namely two,, the collective, and the. The focus of Kim's work is on critical work with migrants and refugee women. Kim teaches on modules such as English, Globality, Transculturality, Health and Social Affairs. I will then try to pick up some questions from the audience with the microphone while I invite Kim to first have a discussion and reply to. Hopefully that's fine with you. Okay. Thank you for the invitation. I think it's so packed. And I think, I thought I would like to start with how Ruth Wilson Gilmore ended in the film with the word consciousness and I think it comes across all the presentations that we heard today and it also addresses a universality, it addresses listening, who has the possibility to speak and who is listened to? We see that today is maybe a third, quarter less people than we heard yesterday. I think that's, I'll just leave it at that. I think it's an interesting comment. To the people who have a possibility to express themselves, but who is actually listening. What are we listening to, and what do we actually want to hear? What do we erase? What do we ignore? And when I mean we, I mean the global north, perhaps. I mean people in situations, social identities of power, of privilege. Yeah. So I'll start off with that, and I would like to maybe ask each of you, in terms of the word consciousness, what that means for you, and what that means in terms of all your individual work. Okay. Thank you for this. I think this is the best question ever to start with, and it's also related to the question of extraction you posed yesterday. One of the things that were running through our minds when we started to work on this video was also a question of how to make this video political. And I think this is a question of consciousness to video je bilo tudi vprašanje, kako je to video moralno. In mislim, da je to vprašanje o čutnosti, v tem, kako je vprašanje materialnega producenja video. Kako je vprašanje, kako je vprašanje, kako je vprašanje o producenji, ki ni samo resnična retorika, kot je predvsem rekel Marina, kaj je teži ime, to je ena stvar. In kako je vprašanje o tem kontst in tisti historični perspektiv. Zato je zelo pomembno, da se ukvarja, kako je izvršeno kapitalizem. je vprašanje, kako je to vprašanje, ne samo metafora, ampak, da ga pokazujemo kot materijalno in obvršeno logiko kolonializma, ki se je v prezentskih stvari. Ljudje so bila vprašana od občinov, v prvih mestoh, v prvih mestoh, da je slavna delo, v tem, da je zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo zelo logic of extraction, which is embodied in prison regime system, in terms of migrant routes at all the camps on the Balkan way, and also make visible the logic of extraction je vizibilna logika ekstraku, v tem temi, kako se počutijo poslušalci, v tem temi, kako se počutijo človeški občutek in tako daleko. Mislim, da je čistost, da smo zgodni, da vse te dobro življenje, ta biopolitika, je izbira nekropolitike. To je druga del tudi težave. Tako da, možda tudi. necropolitics. This is the other half of the same coin. So, maybe two. Yeah. Yeah, thanks for the question. It's really good to be put on the spot and think about these things. I think from the perspective of the work that I do within UltraVed, I can't speak for the whole collective in a sense, but certainly in my context, it has a lot to do with this notion that came up in the film about time as a non-renewable resource. And working in the context that I'm in, which is a very small rural community, it's not an awful lot of kind of base support to begin from so a lot of it involves actually making that so the processes that that we engage in that we use are inherently long long long there is an awful lot of legwork field work goes into even establishing sort of a basic relationship amongst people where Perhaps there isn't the kind of privilege of a shared language So in a sense we will do an awful lot of work in actually building a shared sense of who we are Through processes of what we call conjunctural analysis, but it's kind of naming the moment process, sort of very sort of simple set of steps that those communities can pretty much configure and offer for themselves. There's no given that there's something important to learn that needs to be kind of defined around what are the immediate needs of that community. And in that way, we will often have to negotiate sy'n cael ei ddiffynu o ran beth yw'r angenion cyfnodol o'r gymuned hwnnw. Ac yn y ffordd honno, byddwn yn aml yn rhaid i ni negosi'r math o gwestiynau o'r lefelau awrthentig o'r peidio, bod llawer o'r gwaith sydd angen i ni ei brechgu yn gyntaf am fy mhobl, sydd dim ond yn ddwyach yn eich cwrs, ac mae'r math o ddifrif, kind of you know misery if you like which essentially is trying to bring people into a collective if you like this kind of authoring of a collective protagonist takes a long long time and I think for me those the sort of key building blocks of a consciousness regardless of what that you know the framing conditions might be is in fact sort of winning back and fighting that war o'r fframing y gallai fod, mae'n ymwneud â chyflawni'r llaw a chyflawni'r war yn erioed gyda'r ffwrdd o amser. Ac yn sicr, o fewn system ymweld â'r Llywodraeth yng Nghymru, mae amser yn popeth, fel y dywedodd yma, ond mae amser yn popeth. Mae'n wir, mae'n rhy ddwy o'r peth. Mae amser yn fawr iawn, mae amser hir iawn o bwysigrwydd lle mae amser yn cael ei ddynnu o leiaf gan bobl There's long, long periods of boredom where time is literally being stolen from people in the sense that they are just enforced in activity, sort of separated off from any kind of links into a community. Their systems are sort of designed around that as well, where everything is provided for as a kind of benevolent gift. You can live in a hotel. You can have three meals a day. You can have eight pounds a week, but all of those things are designed, in fact, to break down any kind of connection or putting down roots into a local community. So a lot of that is trying to find porous ways between those kind of very strange kind of hotel environments, negotiating the kind of liberal impulse to deliver, we've really had it, chamber music, amgylcheddau hotel, a'r hyn o ddibyniadau llybrau i ddarparu cerddoriaeth. Mae cwrtetau cerddoriaeth wedi dod i'r hotel a'u gwneud i fyny ar gyfer myfyrwyr o ran syniad bod hynny'n ei angen. Nid ydym yn gwybod, y gilydd efallai fod yn llawn o cerddoriaethwyr virtuos, nid yw unrhyw un wedi gofyn iddyn nhw, maen nhw wedi gwneud y penderfyniad yw bod hyn yn rhywbeth sy'n eithaf ddefnyddiol. Felly mae'r ffordd yma'n rhywbeth o'r math o ffyrdd, o geisio gweithio tuag at y syniad o bwrdd cyd-destunol drwy set o angenau a dymuniaethau drwy beth all weithiau ddim fod yn cymryd mis, os na flynyddoedd. Felly eto, dyma lle byddwn yn gwneud y gwahaniaeth rhwng gweithgaredd a chyfrifoldeb, bod y pethau hyn yn ddewis amser hir. Ac, chi'n gwybod, gallwch chi ddisgwyl gwneud llawer o gwrando a llawer o gwrando ar bethau sy'n ddim yn ddewis yn y dechrau, mewn creu cysylltiadau o ddysgu, o weithio i bwynt lle mae pobl yn teimlo fel in creating relationships of trust, of working to a point where people feel like you this is a place I'm listening to, I can have a conversation in this place about what my needs and desires are. Yeah okay it's a really difficult question, I don't know if I can answer it. difficult question. I don't know if I can answer it. Consciousness, consciencia I think. For me it's related to presence, to experience and in this sense it's related to feelings that we will not erase somehow. And it's related with relations with community as you were saying. In our case in Pluriversidad Nomada we are trying to work in the communities between different people and other non-human entities because all these entities are part of our relational system. We are also trying to dehumanize ourselves because our way, the way in which we are, we have learned to be human is based in this colonial modern way of existence. Maybe some other specific thing that is present in our project is that, in terms of consciousness, is that as we are from other places, we have always this feeling that Gloria Anzaldúa explained so well when she said that ella está entre dos aguas, que es un cruce de caminos, she's between two waters and she's like in a cross, in the cross, in the crossroads. And I think this is very, it's a very complex feeling. It makes you, maybe it helps to be more conscious, in terms of complexity. And also, Ruth Gilmore was talking about complexity, because it's not simple. So when you are in two places at the same time, or with two experiences at the same time, it's very strange. It's very complex to deal with this. And I think it produced a kind of consciousness, maybe. I don't know. Oh yeah, I was thinking just the same as Lucia, because we are collective, so we think alike. But I was thinking about when the question about consciousness arised, I thought about my own consciousness and how sometimes it's so painful, especially related to the migrant context, like when you migrate and you deal with this time frame that you have to wait and you have to, you are in this strange condition and this strange way that you get your time stolen because you have to wait for your application. You don't know. I have this image of my card like dissolving in air. I always think about it. Like what happens is something like breaks in my purse, and it's a chemical that dissolves my ID card. I will be lost, something like that. And that's what I thought about consciousness. That's my first thought about it. And I think it's related to that, to the pain. But sometimes it can be joyful also, but consciousness is also painful, and it's also, like, the moment when you're, like, aware, and it's also like the moment when you're like aware and it's like you have to embrace it sometimes even if you don't want it like if you want to be like consequential and sometimes you want to forget your consciousness to get like comfortable and that's one of my thoughts about the question I also add I think kako mislim o vprašanju. Če bi se povedala, kako sem to razumel, to je razum, ki je vzpomeno s racialnim kapitalizmom. In resnično je to razum, ki je tukaj, nekaj nekaj nekaj, ki je nekaj, ki je nekaj, not without the processes of racialization, especially if I talk as a white, that I am. I think always I'm very conscious that I learn from communities in Austria, in Vienna specifically, that you have always to think about your privilege. It's key, doesn't matter of your history, from socialism and so on, this is passe, the privilege is now. And it's an important point that even because of this racial capitalism, we can also think about paradoxically about racial unconsciousness. So this, that we are racist. As you said, I think, yesterday, we are racist already when we entered the space in the European context. It's a nation state, it's a war state, as we see, and in between, I say, the whole former, or the former Eastern Europe and the Europe today, it's actually just a compilation of racial states. Racism, it's on every level, V Evropi je včasih samo kompilacija rasičnih držav. Racizem je na vsakem stranu, tako da se mi vseeno pomeni o raziščenju rasičnega državnosti. Ko je rečena, da se mislimo, mislimo, ampak razmišljamo iz svojega postopka. In ta postopek je že strukturalen, je implementirana v veliko strukturah, od katerih se odločimo na svojo individualnost. already structural, implemented in many structures from where we then utter our individuality, that is absolutely not so some of these things. Thanks. And I think what she was referring to in this complexity was also what we've heard as intersectionality and not intersectionality as we've heard it mentioned on the side but intersectionality as viewing different levels as we also heard in the film different levels of or sorry not levels different forms of oppression different forms of, and how these different forms are so entangled, and that complexity, and this entangled form of an analysis, or an analysis of this entangled form of multiple oppressions, is a complex situation. And it's not about a hierarchy, that's why I corrected myself, no levels of different forms of oppression but this entanglement. And I think she's referring to the tradition of intersectionality. And when we approach, when we approach many things with this intersectional lens, we see how interconnected these different forms of oppression are. And that's what she's also referring to, to this unboundness. intersectional lens on, we also see, or we try to analyze, I think, from a very complex level on how these different forms are connected to one another, whether we talk about racial capitalism, where actually due to racial capitalism was the black radical tradition, where that springs from. Yeah, I mean, I'll let, maybe somebody else wants to comment on that. But I think it's important to keep this complexity in mind, and also, you spoke about emotion, and I think that should also be an element here. We're not talking about facts here, we're not talking about a checklist of different forms of oppression, missing often is when the discussion is there, this element of rage, this element of emotion, but this has to be transformed. And that's where popular education comes into play. Comments? Maybe just to add to that because there was a question of how to enter the space actually as white, how to action these topics of questions of racial capitalism, decolonial theories and so on. This was also one of the main questions regarding the film and also a question of how we work with images, how we work with images of different positions that are coming from different spaces of oppression and so on. And it's also about the question, what you do, how you work with text, how you work with different knowledges that are put there on the table in the interviews, let's say. And I think one of the main things which was also expressed in the movies is acknowledging from where this knowledge comes from and also constructing genealogies of this knowledge. Gilmour talks about historical geographies of the future. So how do we go back to these potential histories? Yesterday, there were mentioned potential histories by Riera Azulay. And also, I think it's important to say that images are deeply connected with colonial gaze, the concept of colonial gaze. So this is the gaze that defines what is human, what is non-human, who will be regarded as someone who has access to images, to produce images and so on, and produce texts as well. So this structural racism is actually in the gaze itself. So this is actually what imperial shutter means. So one of the genealogists we also wish to express with regards to our film is that the film would not be possible without one film before, which was made v 2012. Se je znamenalo Relacija, ki je o slovenskem LGBT-povembu, a ne samo o Sloveniji, ampak o vsej ex-jugoslavski regioni. Morda bi Marina lahko o tem lahko povedala. Ja, samo, da bi razložila naše delo, ki je tudi v povezanju connection with Tiasa Kanzler and coming back to this, making a reference to a proper space, it's connected with politically engaging, constructing histories. Because one of the points of this also former Eastern European space, zgodov, ker ena od stvari, ki je tudi v tem prejšnjem evropskih svetih, ne izgleda. In je povezana s veliko razvijanjem zgodov, življenja. Kako je to funkcionirano, kot je fantastično razloženo, to antimuslimno rasizmo je zelo toksivno v Avstriji, je zelo preden v Nizoviji, in posebej v Avstriji. In kako je to vse pravzaprav funkcioniralo s tem ekstraktivizmem početkom razlomka. Tako da je formi ekstraktivizma, ki jih ste razložili, tudi različnih sposobov in metod. explaining it also has different ways and methods. So a ratio can also be a system of extractivism. It's transposed. But why is this important? Because just to have these histories that we don't come from the Mars, but we worked already on the space of ex-Jugoslavije. To je bilo zelo jasno, da v trenutku, ko se vsega vzpomaga globalni kapitalizem, in posebej z tvojo romantiko o prejšnji Evropi, je to velika romantika, ampak to, kar imamo tukaj in to, kar predstavljamo v Sloveniji, je tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi tudi we are worse than the West. So this must be very clear. It's just different histories. If you talk about turbo nationalism on that case and fascism specifically, that people are completely freaking out how you can take fascism while this is a historical. No, we say we can because it's actually two types of fascism that we envisioned. And it's very good what you explain also about Ampak pravimo, da lahko. Zato, da smo razumeli dve stvari fascizma. In je zelo dobro, kar ste razmišljali, ko ste razpomenili vprašanje o družini. Ker je ena stvar, ki je jasna v evropski kontekstu, to je pripoved postmodernih fascizmov. To je veliko individualnosti. Nikoli ne morejo misliti o družinah. In družine so resno zelo, resno prezentne. Imajo veliko moč. Vsega vidim tudi v Vieniji. Družine z nekako črne poslovanja, družine z muslimski poslovanja, imajo naše stvari, kako se deliti, kako se povezati in kako se povezati. Če se povezamo s človekmi, smo vseeno postmoderni fasšisti monaci. Tukaj se ne vidiš, ne imaš vsega, ne imaš politike. Če smo se v 2012 to do the LGBT community, because it was the most important community next to Yugoslavia. It happened to be everywhere, and it was the most suppressed, violated, and so on, but on the other part was actually the line that opened many ways of rethinking, and most paradoxically was that because of our Marxist tradition, it was no connections between different struggles. It was really crazy. It was not possible to understand the leftist thinking that we represent to the LGBT thinking. They said, why? What? They are something else. ki jih predstavljamo, na LGBT-srednje misljenje. Želeli so, kaj, kaj, to je nekaj drugače. Zdaj pa vidimo tudi to v veliko velikšem kontekstu v Evropi. Ko govorimo, zdaj je fantastično, to je drugače v tem panelu, da govorimo in praktično algoritem je samo o režimu nekaj. Practically, the algorithm is only about the regime of whiteness. Only some people or some regimes can talk about the future, about what technology will bring, so all the others are excluded because they are never asked some of these connections. I think the idea of community is important, because consciousness alone doesn't really move anything. And I think it's been mentioned several times, consciousness or practice emerging from consciousness, which is also, and then action, practice action, which we saw and we've seen in maybe an emergence in the Black Lives Matter movements and different rebellious movements or insurgent movements, as you would say, and not towards the fascist regime, what we talk about in the United States. But this action has always been in community. It's never been as a single act of consciousness and then on an individual level. What I'm also interested in is how technology, we've talked about pedagogy, how technology strives to individualize education and to remove this community. If we talk about blended learning or learning online, there's no community of learning, so there's no community of thought, no community of consciousness, and how that dissolves as a strategy of the techno state. Well, this is a good question to talk about our project because we decide to not do any workshop through internet. And this, it's related to the discourse of the consume of energy. But on the other side, we decide to privilege the presence, like the real interchange between bodies and people. interchange between bodies and people. And it's not easy to decide this because as we are in the kingdom of Spain, if we decide to do the things presentially, we are like giving the opportunity to join the space to people who live in Spain. So it's not easy to take this decision. We were thinking a lot about how to document our workshops without using the streaming, for example. That's why we in the second part of the book, we asked two, three people who were assistants to the workshops to write something, to write something from or departing from their own experience, assisting to the workshop. Yes, some reflections or some ideas. But the thing is that for us was in a moment important to avoid or to evade internet as a space or to evade internet as a space because we were looking for this presence. And it's very nice because in some of these four workshops, these four experiences were long workshops, like two or three days all the day. The people are really connected now, the people who were going to these workshops. So in these terms, we were not working with the computer technology, but we are working with technologies. When we were working with a stone, for example, one of the workshops were about one stone, magnetita, and we were working with technology. Like, magnetita, this was a workshop given by Luna Tau Acosta. Magnetita is a mineral that we have in our brain, but just animals are using it to have a better orientation. Then it's a kind of technology, but it's not the computer technology. So we are using technology that don't individualize us. It's more a tool to reconnect with some loose, lucid relations. Yeah, I mean I'll echo that the the technologies that we engage and use in our work is literally these two things that we have on the side of our heads doesn't go much you know more complicated than that at some point this kind of very sense of an embodied listening of putting ourselves in a space where the space you know literally resonates mechanically with the body the bodies with each other in the room, is again, we all forget a technology within itself. And again, as I've mentioned, I think that it goes a long way to create a common experience, which I think is, I find very hard to replicate anything that effective with Zoom, with language barriers, with distance,ith, gyda gwahanol, gyda t-zones. Mae'n ddigon effeithiol i roi pobl mewn ystafell gyda'i gilydd a gofyn iddyn nhw ymgysylltu â rhywbeth mor syml. Yr amser sy'n ymgysylltu â'r coed, y syniadau, y syniadau, y cyfnodion diwylliannol o'r hyn sy'n ei olygu. cultural interpretations of what that means are very simple but a very effective, affective and effective technology which are easily overlooked and I think some of the ways that we work with silence and time goes a long way to as much as we can break down hierarchies we work from the use of protocols so we get a lot of resistance with these kind of technologies about who should speak when things are timed to the minute quite theatrical quite provocative but they're designed to elicit a kind of reaction actually I mean, it's something that can be negotiated within a workshop, rebelled against, whatever, it's there to do that. But in some ways we do our best to facilitate a process where the impulse to the voice, to curb the voice, to sort of give your silence to something, is something which again is something I think which cuts through all of the newfangled methodologies that we have and when I begun doing this work 20, 25 years ago it was about batteries and great big recorders and the kind of presence of the microphone in front of people which changes the dynamic and now we all have one of those in our pocket. Yes, it's a technological device, but it's something which is inherently available to most people and can engage a participation which yeah, we try to make as inclusive as possible in that respect. So yeah, here's to old-fashioned technology anyway. yn ogystal â phosibl yn ymwneud â hynny. Felly, dyma ni i ddechrau â thechnoleg ddyfodol. Efallai y byddaf yn cyrraedd y cyfle oherwydd ein bod yn siarad yma yn Lynth, a'r MAIS, that is an NGO constituted by migrants for migrants as sex workers, and the other is Das Kollektiv. And I would like to ask Letizia, that is with us, Carniero, here, to maybe precisely expose shortly this question of knowledge that is produced in maize, because it's actually a work that is done, and also what is the reality, because we were discussing that we talk about resistance, but what are the conditions of this resistance while in Linz, but in Austria in general, it's a harsh cut of funds to NGOs that are seen as troublesome. That means they are connected, that are NGOs that work precisely on this colonial ratio divide. They try to actually make another way of communities. So maybe, yeah, if you could join us, it will be super, Letizia. Thank you, Marina. Thank you. Because I'm taking our time. I won't take long. Because the whole time I was listening to the talk and the film and everything you said, I was thrilled and I thought, I wish there were so many people there to listen to what you were talking about. And I will just try to connect everything I heard with Maiz and Collective, because Kim is here, we work together. I work at Maiz, Kim worked at Maiz and Colectiv. And I was thinking about this complexity. So many topics that we deal every day in our work, like complexity and necropolitics, anti-racism, queer feminism, decolonial feminism, all these topics are there and I was like, wow, how can we speak about this in like one hour? But what is connected to Maí's work and this collective is, I was thinking in knowledge is that when we talk about knowledge, for example, we always question where does this knowledge come from? Who is able to speak? Who can speak? And about listening, who is listening? Who can listen to and understand? And I think there are so many perspectives but which what hooked me in this conversation was sometimes we say complexity and complexity for itself is a word that sometimes can repel us because we think oh this is too complex I'm not gonna deal with that and I think this comes from this Eurocentric way of thinking that we just want to, we learn to separate things. We learn to make hierarchies. We learn to classify. And then we just want to say this or that. And it's never been like that. This is a lie. And then I thought about Ailton Krenak because I'm from Brazil and Krenak is now for me at least a reference for collective, also for Maís, and indigenous ways of thinking. And I was thinking, complexity should be like a common word, let's say, a common word, not something that we fear, okay, this is complex, so we cannot talk about it, or we don't have time, and then time, I was thinking about time, because time is a commodity, and it's the most precious, I would say, now with capitalism, with necropolitics, and in this case of necropolitics, and what Marina said, I was thinking about the movie, and in the beginning, there was someone saying, we are humans. And I was like, okay. And I thought about the first May, when we were at the street, we took the streets and we were yelling, I don't know, screaming out loud. We want to live. We not only survive. And this is what we are, for me it was like, well, this is the motto now. This is how we people, everyone on the planet should be talking about. We don't want to survive. We want to live. And what happens to Maiz and his collective, for example, this year, but it's happening for a long time, is that we are struggling to survive. to survive with our work, with our anti-racist work in a place in Europe, which is quite white the whole time we are fighting against it, with our positions, we are struggling also. And this year, for example, as Marina said, we had a cut of fundings, both of our organizations, both of our organizations, 30% of the fundings to what they call integration, which maybe is something we can discuss what this means. But I think this also, I don't know if I'm saying something nonsense, but the whole time I saw the connections here. Yeah, so we talked about listening but we didn't talk about silencing and that's exactly what these budget cuts are, they're silencing. They're silencing critical voices, they're silencing political voices, they're silencing... I don't want to use the word marginalized because we're here. We're not going away. So there hasn't been any success in, while at the same time receiving government funding, we do, yeah, on different levels of government. And we haven't ever hesitated to bite the hand that feeds us. And we will continue, because political work is not paid work, I think. But that's the reality. The reality is that there are these budget cuts and there are different ways of strategies of silencing. Perhaps this is one way, I think. But it will continue. It'll only get worse becauseJahr, and it's only going more right, more right on the local level, the municipal level, on the provincial level, on the state level, and on the European level. And this is all within the context of protectionism, of putting up borders in the U.S. It's the ICE in Europe, it's Frontex, and the technologies that are also used not on European soil, European soil, or not on settler soil in North America, or not on Australian settler soil, but they are outsourcing. So borders are also becoming globalized in terms of how we saw that the world map with all the arrows, you can use it for t-shirts, you can use the same map with t-shirts, how t-shirts are globalized, how clothing is globalized, how clothing is globalized, and how technology is globalized, but also how frontiers and how protectionist regimes are also globalized, exported. There is no border in Tunisia, but there is a border in Tunisia. There is no border in Serbia, but there is a border in Serbia and Hungary and so on, and in Mexico. And they're trying to silence such voices, to silent insurgent voices, insurgent movements. And there is a connection. I think there is a connection, because all of this is with also the use of technology. It's all... And it does sound conspiratorial, but it isn't. We can look at history and also see where we're going in the future. I also... There was something else. Sorry, it was a little long, but I wanted to, forget it. Yeah, yeah. I don't know, perhaps somebody in the audience would like to contribute, if we have questions. Unless somebody here wants to answer, perhaps, I I think with questions from the audience let's open it up also to the audience I think yesterday there was a nice moment where we actually woke up everybody we should try it again I think can we switch on the light so that we also see from here who's actually sitting who's awake and who's sleeping let's see if there's any questions from the audience I was just while the audience maybe gets their brain up and going, booting up and thinking is there anything you would like to ask our panelists here, I was just thinking a little bit also about where does the art, we were talking here about art meets radical openness in this political or in this interaction come in. And maybe, that's just quickly a question from my side, and then we'll see if there's any questions from the audience. Do you see, are there any tipping points, so to say, where we could actually, let's say, address this kind of insurrection mode? Is there anything as artists we could do, so to say, rather than now thinking about having to fight big corporations, et cetera, but seeing are there any tipping points where these systems could change? Let's say it like that as a question. And then let's see if there's any other questions. Thanks. Thanks much. I was wondering, so yesterday it was at one point last night there was the call to dissolve boundaries and it was in the concept of gender, but in general. And the whole evening last night I was wondering about the good and the evil there was like another poll and it was put on the on the history of tech industries and their understanding of the good and the evil and like this positioning of the good tech and the bad tech, and somehow it's unuseful, and at the same time it's also useful, because it's necessary to work with it. And I was wondering if one or two want to respond how to deal with the good and the evil without using the good and the evil without using the good and the evil. Yes, it's very easy to demonize. It's very easy to demonize Bezos, Amazon, Google. It's very easy. And that's what I was talking about yesterday. What about grassroots? What about on an individual basis here? What is the approach that we all take? What is the responsibility that we all take in upholding. Tell me nobody here has ordered from Amazon. Tell me nobody here has an iPhone or a phone or a smartphone. Nobody here has benefited and as long as we're benefiting from somebody there's somebody somewhere else who is who is not benefiting you know and I don't know if just to say good and evil is enough, that's polarizing. It's, I don't know if it's very constructive because it distracts, and it distracts from our own self-reflection of what is our position in this world. Maybe I also just briefly say that I think regarding technology is not about good or bad, it's about how you use it. And in many contexts, you can actually reinvent technology. Also historical technology can be used. V mnogih kontekstih lahko tehnologijo razvijate, tudi historična tehnologija lahko se uspe. Pomembno sem se znam, ko je začel vojna v Eksjugoslaviji, in posebej, ko je bilo to v 90-ih, nekaj, kar se je nekaj neizgledalo v evropski kontekst, ker je bilo to, da se nekaj drugače ne bo zgodilo, da se bo zgodil genocida. Genocida je bilo v Srebrenici v 1995. V nekoliko dni so se je zgodilo 8.325 ljudi, muslimi ljudi in mladih. boys, Muslim boys and men. But what was important was that the biggest influence was not by CNN. CNN was practically a curse because they were reporting from US what's going on and nobody wanted to tackle because it was raping of Muslim women and so on. But what was interesting was that the BBS, so the bulletinards, the radio, that was engaging into getting the most actual information. And we were listening, I remember the television, the prime time news in which you were actually listening to the voices of people using the radio communication and telling what's going on. So my point is that technology is absolutely not innocent. Never was, never will be. We know that it's connected definitely all, even photography, all with the war, war industry and the needs. And then as capitalism function, they give us also some cramps. But then we use these cramps and actually we fight back. in potrebne in tudi kapitalizem, naši kromički, ki jih vse vprašamo. Vse to vprašamo in se počutimo zelo, ker ne lahko vse vzpomagamo. Na drugi strani, vse tehnologije lahko uspejo, če imamo politiko. Politika je največji vprašanje. Če imate izračunalno idejo o družbenih, političnih, razmišljate, od katerih govorite in začnete razumeti o tem, o tem drugom, ker nikoli ni drugačen, in ustvarjate vseeno, mislim, da je tudi ta stik zelo zanimiv. Super je, da se skupaj počutimo, razmišljamo, delamo in pokazujemo te stike in razumemo posilnosti božja. In vse tehnologije v različni način vsega. y pethau a deall y bosibiliadau ymfwyso. Ac rydyn ni'n defnyddio technolegau mewn ffordd wahanol. Felly bydd hyn yn... Ie. Yn y bwynt o'r binariad o'r ddau gwedd a'r ddau anodd, rwy'n credu mai un o'r cwestiynau a ddod i ffwrdd â nhw ystod gydag ystod diwethaf yn gwrando ar ysgolion parisol with yesterday, listening to Paris's kind of brief solutions that he listed at the end of his talk on this, is that, you know, we imagine, you know, when we see images of Elon Musk, of Jeff Bezos, you know, we're imagining all these high-tech interlinked systems. But for me, it's like what protagonists can emerge in those sort of oppositional forces. And one of his solutions was union labor organizing, which is a kind of low tech. It's just these human processes around how do we situate ourselves in these kind of opposing forces and how do we wrest control of them? I mean, it's their age old technologies. Yes, they can be aided by this kind of high tech world, but ultimately those conversations of base community organizing. y gallant gael eu cymorth gan y byd hyn o ddechrau, ond yn y pen draw, y sgwrsion hynny o sefydliad cymunedol o'i gilydd, yr un arall oedd ei fod yn golygu cymorth dynol. Wel, sut ydyn ni'n cymryd cymorth o'r dyn? Mae'r rhain yn brosesau llawer mwy o lefel gwyddonol o'r cyfan yn hyn na meddwl y mae'r holl hyn yn ei angen i ddigwydd trwy optics ffibre neu llwythoedd neu beth bynnag. Felly, mae'n gofio, ar y bas o'r holl hyn, than just thinking about this all needs to happen through fiber optics or clouds or whatever. So it's just remembering at the base of all this, there are folks in factories that can exert some force within this and begin to build a sort of protagonist role in that fight. Yes, I agree a lot with what Marina was saying about the importance of the use of technology more than if it's good or bad, that is a little bit empty. I know many cases in which people are using these evil technologies to somehow make justice. I am thinking on the abortion networks, for example, or these kind of things that are organizing themselves through WhatsApp or through even Facebook sometimes. So I think we were talking a lot about complexity and this relation between good and bad. It's more complex. Maybe to add something related with technology, I am starting to think a lot about ancestral technology as other kinds of technology that are mainly good in a sense that are not toxic or are not destroying the environment and these kinds of technologies are mainly related to some heritage that we have. related to some heritage that we have. We have learned it through sometimes our parents, mothers, aunts, grandmothers. So it's also important for me to start to talk about other kinds of technologies, not just Facebook and this big tech browse productions. Okay, maybe just to add, actually all technology is more or less based on extraction. It's bloody and it's dirty, and as it was was said it's a question of what you do with it so I think one of the logics that also guide us here and also as far as I've heard is this idea of low-key using low-key production but to instead invest into creating spaces so for example my ease is creating spaces and it's producing knowledge that is usable, that is practical, and it's creating vocabularies that are usable for people that are termed as other and so on. So I think this is the idea of making actually physical spaces like this coming together, thinking about all these processes and creating also a space of thought. Which is actually, this physical space is really compressed. It's almost non-existent today. But it actually is the basis for bringing people together to meet, to embody these thoughts in relations, if these relations are possible at all today. So shall we check if there's any other questions? There we go. Thank you. Hello, thank you for your talk. When you were talking about the need or this provocation on dehumanization, I found that quite interesting and that also reminded me of Aimé Césaire's notion of thingification and how throughout history there were always humans who always had to fight for the very definition of being human. And I was just kind of bringing this into especially now this hype for artificial intelligence for example and like this myths of full automation or just like kind of Seeing or giving human notions to machines or just like having like those artificial intelligence or like even like this idea of like Being God in a sense of creating those, while also denying humanness to actual humans, and how that also exacerbates a lot of those colonial, imperialist thoughts that you're talking about in the specific context of artificial intelligence research and desires by Big Tech. in življenja in življenja začetkov BIC-TEC? Mislim, da je to zelo dober vprašanje, kar ste povedali. Vseh tri težave so mi prišli v mesto od razmišljanja, ki jih sem prejšla. Mislim, da je globalni kap that global capitalism and necropolitics and all the hype of technology, that I really like artificial intelligence and chat to GPT because with chat to GPT, you can have a translation for free. And if you are not English-speaking, like we are, I'm not, so you save money because you don't have money to do this. So as I said, for me, it's a question of strategy. But my point is that all this advancement in the West is connected with a huge dehumanization all over. They are working together. And one thing is very paradoxical about humanity in a certain way. Because if you think about artificial intelligence and other cases, that all our knowledge is a whole system of machine training. And practically, they go like children. They consume time. They consume actually knowledge. Of course, they speed up after. But to come to this, we nurture them. You have children who cannot go to school. Look what's going on. Generations that will be lost. And there it's such a nurturing. And so it's also going on, I think, with a certain paradoxical perverse way how capitalism function, really how capitalism. So before, all the others, like these others, not really the others, were actually seen not enough human. This was the history of capitalism, no? You were there, but you were not enough human. That means you didn't know to behave in the civilizational way as capitalism, as the white system of whiteness were functioning. The paradox is that when the refugees, I remember the waves of refugees came and finally our goodwill of Europeans found a big topic to talk, it was 2015, 2016, and so on, then in a certain, in that moment, the agenda of humanity was not any more relevant. Practically everybody talked about post-humanity, and the point was that at that point, those who were trying to be human were seeing too much human. And in this way, your question is very important that I see because it's showing that the process of dehumanization is also key to the whole idea of how we think about the way of technology and also to see the nurturing of the artificial intelligence. It's not really a person, a subject, it's without the brain. It's not something that you can ask for, but how the system of capitalism actually play and definitely functions all the time on the processes of dehumanization. But when we look at them, they change radically. Because today, the person says, I am human, no? In the film. Ah, we are humans. And they say, who cares? Because we don't want to. It's too much humanity. Let's go to other species. Let's go to other species. Let's go to other stories and so on. And in this way, this artificial intelligence is then proclaimed about moral or ethical things. But it's not possible because artificial intelligence has no brain. So why to ask? We have to be asked, no? Going back to this consciousness, we have to be asked what is actually that we want Zato je treba se počutiti, da se počutimo, kaj želimo in kje postavimo. To so počutnije, ki bi se počutili. Zato bi se počutila tudi na to, da je to bolj človeška, kot člove than human agenda. I think referring to Membe, he speaks about two sides of the same processes with regards to artificial intelligence, and one is manufacturing objects as subjects, which is visible if we think about humanoid robot Sophia in 2017 that was granted a citizenship in Saudi Arabia. And then in the same year, we actually had Front Pepper, also one humanoid robot that was registered in this birth register the same year. So how do we think of this granting life and citizenship to technology granting life and citizenship to technology while we have refugees, while we have millions of disposable people here and now. And the other side of this is as well manufacturing subjects as objects. So this is like becoming virtual subjectivity through all these different platforms and so on. But also identification, so how you enter these data are you entering these data as a migrant that has fingerprint incorporated it and so and so on so I think these these two levels are really connected with the question of artificial intelligence and life so yeah I also wanted to follow up with the dehumanization that implies AI and also how they are built and how they they reproduce colonial colonial relations especially in the content moderation. If you research, you look around, you can see that there are some companies in Kenya that moderate the content, that moderate all the awful content that they can show in ChatGPT. So in a way, you're like seeing content that's avoided in the chat window, because you can talk about some things in these applications. In the large language models have to be filtered by a human. And usually are humans in other countries, in countries that have cheap labor and are exploited. And I was just thinking about it and there's in Kenya, there's a moderation center. There are a lot that they have they have to get some they get depressed or they get like they have that much in their mind how do you say the psychological damage of reading some stuff mental health issues yeah mental health issues but of reading that stuff there's a there's a center of not it's not a large language model but it's a large that among all the large data moderation stuff. It's made by migrant people or underprivileged people. In Barcelona, you have a Facebook moderation company that tracks all that stuff. In Kenya, it's a GPT. And all this globalization stuff is reproduced and presented. And after, when you get to the product, the OpenIA product, you get to see this clean pristine, pseudo-conscious answer. But it's really important to be aware that this is an illusion or it's not consciousness, it's a moderation, it's an effort of a of people, and it's also an effort made in a really unethical and capitalistic context, as most of all tech, large data models and tech models are built. Not all, but most of them. Great, thank you very much. We have about five minutes left on the clock, so I think if there is just quickly any burning questions, otherwise we'll take it also to dinner, dinner will be at six o'clock I don't know where the dinner will be but you can check it out at the evening location and I think also two o'clock in about an hour we'll put all of that into practice with Elliot by actually going onto a listening walk and with that I'd like to return to Kim to kind of wrap it up. And I think we close it more or less there. Okay, I think we could go on for another two hours, but I think we would have to close now. Thank you very much. We heard about consciousness. We heard about dehumanization. There are very many common denominators, listening, silencing, complexity, different forms of technology, not in one-dimensional form, but technologies of knowledge, technologies of culture, technologies of education. We heard about the abuse of certain terms, the abuse of the word intersectionality, the abuse of extractivism. And I hope that we leave you with your head full of questions, of perhaps a spark of consciousness. And what else can I say? Thank you. Thank you. It's been very interesting. Thank you. And this is not here by accident. I know. But it's very symbolic. Thank you very much. I think we all know what it means. And I think when we talk about the black radical tradition, and we talk about the black radical tradition and its complicity in a struggle everywhere. And when I talked about different oppressions, It's complicity in a struggle everywhere. And when I talked about different oppressions, I mean also the oppression of the people of Palestine. Thank you. Thank you.