Velocidades malignas

by Benjamin Noys

El libro de Noys es un modelo de crítica dialéctica y un sofisticado relato sobre las posibilidades históricas del aceleracionismo. Esta obra consigue ser fiel al mandato materialista de no engañarse a uno mismo y teje un relato apasionante sobre el forcejeo del pensamiento teórico con los límites y las compulsiones del capitalismo.

Genres: Philosophy, Politics, Nonfiction, Theory, Sociology, Economics, Cultural Studies

168 pages, Paperback

First published October 31, 2014

Reviews

[philosovamp · Rating 1 out of 5]

I suspect most academic books, maybe books in general, are just a list of excuses for personal prejudices. You believe what you want and then wave your hands until you have some mildly convincing reasons why you believe what you want to believe. That's particularly easy in continental philosophy. Some academic books forcefully and shamelessly delve into polemics, and the reader is along for the ride. Other academic books are clear and precise enough that you forget you're reading some asshole with a PhD's preferences. Other books aren't out-and-out polemics, but are also shoddily reasoned, so the reader is left scratching their head, writing "????" in the margins, and wondering why they bothered. Here's where Malign Velocities comes in.

Malign Velocities is a critique of accelerationism. What's accelerationism? It is a complex, heterogenous group of thinkers, who generally emphasize speed, technological progress, and anti-humanism. Accelerationism is now hip with the youngins because of: Living Meme Nick Land, vaporwave thinkpieces, and of course the encroaching sense of doom and futility in contemporary life. Apparently Noys coined the term. He describes influences and predecessors: Italian Futurists, Soviet poets, French theorists, etc. He also describes different trends in accelerationism: apocalypticism, terminality, so on. His critique amounts to the following: accelerationists are apologists to capitalism even when they think they're piercing through it; they indulge in a "fantasy" of the "Real" (note the capital R); and they forget, or try to dismiss, living labor in the productive process.

Noys does not furnish a single reason why you should believe any of the preceding. Partly because he avoids naming his targets; partly because when he does name his target, he is simplifying and misunderstanding them beyond recognition; and partly because there's no clear sense of argumentation or consistency in the chapters. The first problem is simple enough; considering accelerationism is not infrequently broken up into "left" and "right," its dangerous to try and criticize accelerationism as a unified intellectual and political program. When Noys is criticizing accelerationism, he doesn't often say "Land says x and here's why that's problematic" for example. The second problem does not even depend on one's familiarity with the figures he's discussing. Let's take the 1970s French theorists, who Noys criticizes at a theoretical level most considerably (other people, like Land, get no noteworthy appraisal; others, like the Futurists, are dismissed off hand - after all, if they were Fascists or misogynists, they can't be taken seriously for one moment, right?). I have some knowledge of Deleuze and Guattari, a passing knowledge of Baudrillard, and no familiarity at all with Lyotard. The sections on D&G are based on a very simplistic reading of them, and do not levy any worthwhile criticism; furthermore, a more considerate reading of Anti-Oedipus (especially the passages on desiring machines working by "breaking down") could have informed what Noys believes is a preferable alternative to accelerationism (chapter 7). Not knowing anything about Lyotard, though, I can still spot the sleights of hand Noys makes. In the Introduction, he does not present what Lyotard says of accelerationism in a satisfyingly clear way; he then talks about Lyotard views using the term "sublime," without any uncontroversial evidence; he then says an "embrace of the sublime" is a conservative trope. Connect the dots, Lyotard is a conservative...apparently. This leads into the third problem; most chapters in this book go the following way: summarize a writer; summarize a book; summarize a movie; this writer sucks because x. There is no flow or consistency between any of the sections, or any of the chapters, that gives any credence to Noys' critique. For example, in chapter 3, "Machine-Being," Noys says he is going to show why D&G actually believe in a fantasy when they think they're talking about real production. Okay, fine. Noys summarizes a book by Victor Tausk, which D&G refer to in Anti-Oedipus. Noys reminds us again what he wants to argue about D&G. Noys then summarizes Gravity's Rainbow and hints at two readings: a psychoanalytic one (Noys is a card-carrying psychoanalyst by the way, so let's not pretend D&G ever had a chance of a fair interpretation), and an accelerationist one. Noys does not explore either in detail. Finally, there's a few paragraphs basically saying desire is repetitive and hollow. Oh okay. So why are D&G fantasizing? Noys just says they do, he does not argue for this position at all. Towards that end, Noys uses the very handy tactic of deploying economic buzzwords accepted by postmoden social sciences and humanities academics. Neoliberalism and its twin horses of doom, Thatcher and Reagan; dotcom bubble; financialization; housing crisis; stagflation; and of course the big one, which is so huge and useful that it makes it into the title: "capitalism." Pepper them in anywhere! Ever notice that the CCRU started changing around the time of the dotcom bubble? Weird, huh? Silly Nick Land, he never had a chance of knowing his career would be historically situated, and thus defeated, by the economic machinations of stockbrokers across the Atlantic.

Here's some positives, because on the internet you're supposed to try to make friends and respect your elders. Noys gives a solid history and background for accelerationism. You can learn a bit about where accelerationist ideas came from by reading this book, and come up with a nice reading list. Also, Noys is careful enough to not take the most belligerent and wrong-headed polemical critique of accelerationism. Imagine this book written by someone much less intelligent, or...even worse....a critical theorist! And on that note, I applaud Noys for trying to criticize accelerationism. It is an absolutely worthwhile project to try and dispel the illusions and hype surrounding accelerationism.

Unfortunately, this book is just too short and underdeveloped to be worth reading. Noys just presents some unsubstantiated things he thinks about accelerationism as a middle-of-the-road Socialist, and summarizes a series of books you can just read for yourself. Skip it, or read it and defend your favorite theorist's honor if you feel so inclined.

[Aung Sett Kyaw Min · Rating 2 out of 5]

i don't think it is entirely unfair to say that Noys' critique only comes together in the final chapter. The part on Bataille and anal economy was a tough nut to crack as I clearly didn't have the pre requisite background knowledge, though honestly I don't see how it ties into the rest of the book. You will emerge from the other side having a better understanding of the intellectual predecessors of contemporary accelerationism (Italian fascismo-futurism), but not with a clear grasp of why it is not a project worth investing in. Actually even the term 'contemporary accelerationism' is a misnomer since accelerationism is by no means a monolithic movement. Noys does mention in passing Nick and William's Inventing the Future, but he does not properly distinguish it from Nick Land type hyperstitional Shoggoth accelerationism, which I believe is the intended target of his critique of "going all the way", of the celebration of the merging of living labor with dead labor. i might have to revisit this text again.

[Rob Adey · Rating 2 out of 5]

Wilfully obscure, sloppily thought-out tract on how you probably shouldn't meld with your fridge.

[Josh Carswell · Rating 4 out of 5]

As one of the few (perhaps the only book-length) critiques of accelerationism, Malign Velocities provides a powerful and necessary alternative approach to the idea that the only valuable strategy the political left can adopt in the second decade of the twenty-first century is not to resist, rather to speed up capitalist modes of production in order to assist them in reaching their own breaking-point. Noys navigates through historical examples of accelerationism, identifying common themes shared by the Italian Futurists, defiant "communist accelerationists" such as Aleksei Gastev, the post-'68 machinic utopianists such as Deleuze-Guattari and Pynchon, and the "cyberpunk phuturists" of the 90s, Nick Land and the Ccru. Of course this means that Noys' definition of accelerationism is quite generic, and his individual critiques tend not to travel far beyond their own chapters. Regardless many of his criticisms tend to stick in the memory and seem fair and measured (as opposed to unfair and scathing): accelerationism as "utopian excess", experienced as jouissance (ecstasy that collapses into masochistic pain); an ironically nostalgic attempt to recreate the future of the past; and a "postgraduate disorder" (suggesting the postgraduate's confrontation of the world of labour of which they are about to be integrated as "one of future horror - endless and trivial"). Particular attention is given to accelerationism's "machinic impulses": Noys suggests the ongoing theme of the integration of man and machine (note the gender) is symptomatic of the desires "to produce the Real as the Real of production and circulation [italics in original]" and "to integrate the repetitive and deadening circuit of the sexual drive into the deadening circuit of labour." Using Walter Benjamin's reading of "The Railway Disaster at the Firth of Tay" as a springboard, Noys begins to plot out an alternative to accelerationism that doesn't simply regress back into traditional (failing) proletarian narratives. Two key measures would be to "tap and resist the incitement of desire that capitalism produces" and "a restoration of the sense of friction that interrupts and disrupts the fundamental accelerationist fantasy of smooth integration."

[James Hogg · Rating 5 out of 5]

Accelerationism emerged when capital began decelerating. The perpetual atrophy of the last 40 years of Neoliberalism has been marked by decline - in profit, living standards, and the environment. In this sense, Accelerationist philosophy only functions at an aesthetic or libidinal level, in the jouissance supposedly experienced by an increasingly brutalised working class.

Accelerationism therefore embodies Marx's appreciation for the 'creative destruction' of capital, and seeks to maximise the libidinal flows instantiated by such a process - ultimately forgetting the Marxist injunction that class conflict can and will result in total annihilation for both classes. With this realisation, accelerationism becomes (or is unmasked as?) rabid nihilism and techno-fetishism. Pushing beyond is not an option, lest we resign ourselves to 'getting it over with' as quickly as (in)humanly possible.

[Dan · Rating 4 out of 5]

An appropriately speedy, at times even breathlessly paced intervention that critiques the revolutionary powers so often ascribed to accelerationalism. I'd say it's a bit heavy on theory and light on examples, but each chapter is so densely packed and forcefully argued that there's little to complain about – apart from the fact that, like most Zero books (including my own), this one also would have benefited from some diligent copy-editing.

[Mayo · Rating 4 out of 5]

aunque la conclusión tiene algún punto no me ha molado mucho aun así es solo la parte final la mayor parte del libro hace una buena introducción desde una perspectiva crítica a diversos discursos aceleracionistas y futuristas bastante chula me ha servido para conocer libros y autores que suenan muy interesantes a lo mejor si ya controlas medianamente el tema este libro no añade mucho pero bueno no es mi caso asi que ha estado guay

[Kit · Rating 4 out of 5]

Parts of this book were decidedly a bit beyond my comprehension and took awhile for me to dig around the vocabulary I am not that familiar with, but beyond that, I am surprised by the well-roundedness of Noys's exploration of the topic. As such, some quotes showing his words are better than my attempt to sum them up:

"What we can trace between anti-accelerationists and accelerationists is a strange
convergence on nostalgia – nostalgia for a vanishing possibility of socialist slow-down, itself a
terminal slide away from socialism, versus a capitalist ostalgie that can only fill in our absent
future with past dreams of acceleration. This is a painful irony for accelerationism, in
particular, which stakes so much on its futurism. The nostalgia is a nostalgia for forces – a
desire for something, anything, to generate enough energy and momentum to break the
horizon of the present. It is important that this is a metaphysics of forces, and not force in the
singular, to account for the dispersion and linking of different possible sites into a plane of
immanence. Accelerationism is constructive, but the construct replicates the past in the guise
of a possible future."

"If accelerationism points to the problem of labor as the ‘moving contradiction’ of capital –
both source of value, and squeezed out by the machine – then it tries to solve this
contradiction by alchemising labor with the machine. I want to suggest that this is not a
solution. We can’t speed through to some future labor delegated to the machine, nor can we
return to the ‘good old days’ of labor as ‘honest day’s work’. In fact, accelerationism indicates
the impossibility of labor within the form of capitalism. This obviously doesn’t mean labor
does not take place, but it means labor can’t and doesn’t perform the function of political,
social, and economic validation capitalism implies. The readiness of capitalism to abandon
any particular form of labor at the drop of a hat, or at the drop of the markets, suggests that
labor cannot carry the ideological weight it is supposed to.

In his study of workers in post-Apartheid South Africa Franco Barchiesi has detailed how,
on the one hand, work is the condition of neoliberal citizenship, and how, on the other hand,
it can’t allow for true self-reproduction. The privatization of healthcare, insurance,
transportation costs, home ownership, etc., leaves those ‘lucky’ enough to be in work unable
to survive. While labor is essential for citizenship – if we think of the demonization of
‘welfare scroungers’, ‘benefit cheats’, and so on (and on) – it also never performs that
function...What is also crucial about Barchiesi’s argument is that he notes that the revelation of this precariousness or impossibility of labor does not simply lead to left-wing political activation but, in the current ideological context, is as likely to lead to anti-immigrant and anti-welfare sentiments. Those struggling to survive as precarious workers are as likely to turn on others as they are to start new forms of support and struggle that recognize the impossibility of work. This is, I think, one of the crucial conundrums of the present moment. Accelerationism tries to resolve it in machinic integration and extinction, which bypasses the problem of consciousness, awareness, and struggle in a logic of immersion. We are torn by the moving contradiction of capital into two broken halves that can’t be put back together.

A working solution, to be deliberately ironic, is to struggle for decommodification of our
lives. Campaigns against privatization and for the return of privatized services to public
control try to reduce our dependence on work by attacking the way work is supposed to
account for all of our self-reproduction. These struggles are in parallel for struggles to defend
public services, protect benefits, and sustain social and collective forms of support. While
they may be unglamorous, especially compared to space travel, these struggles can negate the
conditions of the impossibility of work by trying to detach ‘work’ from its ideological and
material role as the validation of citizenship and existence. "

[Anna · Rating 3 out of 5]

Malign Velocities: Accelerationism and Capitalism was on my to-read list for seven years before I tracked down a copy and was first published five years before that. Accelerationism in 2013 had nothing on 2025's AI messianism and tech broligarchy, so the topic is undoubtedly still relevant. I wonder how comforting it is for a theorist to be proved right about the importance of such a destructive tendency. The ambivalence of being Cassandra in the coalmine, as it were. Noys writes in an intermittently lighthearted style, drawing upon a wide range of theoretical and literary references. I enjoyed the discussion of Pynchon's Gravity’s Rainbow, an incomprehensible compost heap of a novel. I assume critical theorists love it because it combines commentary on technology's destructive social impacts with a checklist of hardcore fetishes. Making it ideal to apply psychoanalytic theory to, I imagine.

Cyberpunk is naturally a repeated theme. Noys incorrectly names Molly Millions as Molly Numbers, though, which undermined my confidence in his (and his editor's) familiarity with the work of William Gibson. I didn't find the commentary on cyberpunk particularly original, probably because it has been gone over many times by other commentators. Gibson and Sterling's fiction is generally over-discussed, while I remain convinced that Melissa Scott's 2000 novel The Jazz is an underrated work of speculative cyberpunk. (The protagonist's job is to post lies on the internet.)

Reflecting upon on Malign Velocities: Accelerationism and Capitalism, it may have glided through my eyes and past my brain without leaving much behind. This can be the way with some theory. The writing style and density of references gives the reader (me) a sense of challenge and simulates the feeling of learning. Then at the end when I contemplate what the book's thesis was, I cannot necessarily articulate it. That can reflect upon how much attention I was paying while reading, but also on the book itself. I think the thesis here is essentially descriptive; Noys explains the existence and characteristics of accelerationism as a key part of twenty-first century capitalism. Or maybe he is too subtle a writer for his thesis to be summarised in a sentence or two. Then again, the need to even explain accelerationism feels quaint in 2025, when outputs from large language models are being shoved in our faces during every waking moment. If you recall, this book was published before smart phones became ubiquitous. I can't argue with this bit:

Things are shit. Terminal accelerationism, however, sees this shit as what Alain Badiou calls 'nourishing decomposition', as the chance to break through the sterility of a failed capitalism and leap into a new future. [...] Rather than the relentless positivity of thinkers like Deleuze and Guattari, or Negri, here the path of acceleration lies in the negativity and nihilism of capitalism.

For details of how technological accelerationism is taking us beyond capitalism into something worse, I recommend the more recent book Technofeudalism: What Killed Capitalism by Yanis Varoufakis. Perhaps the most memorable point Noys makes is to link accelerationism with nostalgia, which I found original:

What we can trace between anti-accelerationists and accelerationists is a strange convergence on nostalgia - nostalgia for a vanishing possibility of socialist slow-down, itself a terminal slide away from socialism, versus a capitalist ostalgie that can only fill in our absent future with past dreams of acceleration. This is a painful irony for accelerationism, in particular, which stakes so much on its futurism. The nostalgia is a nostalgia for forces - a desire for something, anything, to generate enough energy and momentum to break the horizon of the present.

[...]

If accelerationism points to the problem of labour as the 'moving contradiction' of capital - both source of value, and squeezed out by the machine - then it tries to resolve this contradiction by alchemising labour with the machine. I want to suggest that this is not a solution. [...] This is, I think, one of the crucial conundrums of the present moment. Accelerationism tries to resolve it in machinic integration and extinction, which bypasses the problem of consciousness, awareness, and struggle in a logic of immersion. We are torn by the moving contradiction of capital into two broken halves that can't be put back together - neither able to go forward into the 'streamlined' future, nor to return to the 'stability' of the Fordist past. There is no simple solution to this contradiction. What I want to suggest is that replication along the lines of nostalgia for images of capitalist 'productivity' is no way into the future. In fact the struggles over the state and condition of labour, even as impossible labour, have to fought now.

This is very much still a conundrum today, I'd say. Although I work in the non-for-profit sector, still senior management have fallen under the spell of LLM-based tool propaganda and are enthusing about how these will make us all more productive. What do they mean by productivity? This has not been explained. Even in an organisation that is ostensibly not seeking profit and has no shareholders to please, the infection of accelerationism has firmly taken root. In short, Malign Velocities: Accelerationism and Capitalism is a downer, not merely due to its actual contents but also because things have unequivocally got faster and worse since it was published. Noys is offering a tentative diagnosis rather than any potential cure and in the meantime the disease has become endemic.

[Shulamith Farhi · Rating 5 out of 5]

Noys assembles genealogical materials that successfully strip away (some of) the appeal of accelerationism. The spirit is argumentative, but Noys is sensitive to the intricacies of the arguments he addresses, reconstructing them often with more clarity than is achieved by the disciples of the cult of non-personality. The readings of the accelerationist canon and the careful analysis of its excremental vision are highlights.

[Tara Brabazon · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a fascinating book that manages the balance between high theory and a social diagnosis of contemporary life. It features a deep undergirding of left politics, which enables the diagnosis of accelerationism as "a political and cultural strategy."

At its most basic, this book enters the 'problem' of speed. It explores the contradictory hope and devastation of new technologies, exploring the Futurists, Detroit techno, the cyberpunks and the dot.com bubble.

Perhaps most significantly, Noys helps us to understand what is happening to the workplace and labour. Can labour - and work - become any faster? What will be the social cost of that accelerationism? This books provides a trajectory to that answer.

[Kersplebedeb · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fun short overview of accelerationism, and the romance of the machine, so to speak. Well-written, in the sense that even when i encountered bits that i knew nothing about (i.e. Lacan), and did not really understand what was being said, it still didn't become boring or make me zone out.

[Alex · Rating 4 out of 5]

Gives a nice, fairly concise-yet-comprehensive history of the CCRU brand of accelerationism and its forerunners. A couple of the latter chapters of critique didn't land as hard for me, but most of this was quite solid I thought.

[Alice Nilsson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Not convinced on Noys argument agains accelerationism—which seems to only come in in the last small chapter. Is a good chronology of accelerationism in its different forms.

[Lazaros Karavasilis · Rating 5 out of 5]

Ο καπιταλισμός αποτελεί ένα πολύπλευρο φαινόμενο, μερικές φορές αφαιρετικό, μερικές φορές αόριστο, ένα ίσως διαρκές κενό σημαίνον που ο καθένας νοηματοδοτεί κατά το δοκούν. Υπάρχει όμως μια κοινή συνιστώσα που αποτελεί σημείο αναφοράς για όλους και δεν είναι άλλη απο την έννοια της ταχύτητας και της άρρκητης σύνδεσης της με το καπιταλιστικό μοντέλο παραγωγής. Πράγματι, και ειδικά τις τελευταίες δεκαετίες, νιώθουμε πως διαρκώς επιταχύνουμε προς κάτι χωρίς να γνωρίζουμε τι ακριβώς είναι αυτό: θέλουμε γρηγορότερες μεταφορές, ταχύτερες παραδόσεις γραμμάτων και δεμάτων, ακόμη πιο γρήγορο ίντερνετ και υπηρεσίες, και φυσικά μεγαλύτερη παραγωγή των πάντων, όσο πιο άμεσα γίνεται. Θα μπορούσ�� να πει κανείς πως υποσυνείδητα νιώθουμε ότι αυτή η διαρκής επιτάχυνση θα μας εκτροχιάσει ανα πάσα στιγμή.

Όταν πριν μερικούς μήνες ένας φίλος μου συνέστησε το βιβλίο του Benjamin Noys ένιωσα πως βρήκα ένα βιβλίο που μιλάει για αυτό ακριβώς το πράγμα, την ατέρμονη επιταχυντική δυναμική του καπιταλισμού και το πως επιδρά στις ζώες μας. Αντ’ αυτού βρήκα πολλά παραπάνω, καθώς ο Noys αποφασίζει να δώσει έμφαση σε όσα ρεύματα και ιστορικά παραδείγματα δεν είδαν τον λεγόμενο “επιταχυντισμό” (accelerationism) ως μια απειλή που ενυπάρχει μέσα στον ίδιο τον καπιταλισμό, αλλά ως ευκαιρία για να φέρουμε τον καπιταλισμό στα όρια του και κατ’επέκταση να φέρουμε τη πτώση του. Με απλά λόγια, να δημιουργήσουμε ένα burnout του ίδιου του καπιταλισμού.

Η ανάλυση του Noys αναπτύσσεται ��άνω στην προβληματική που έχουν όλα τα παραδείγματα που παραθέτει και δεν είναι άλλη απο την ανάγκη του επιταχυντισμού να ξεπεράσει το πρόβλημα της εργασίας και των εργατών στον καπιταλισμό με την έννοια της μηχανής και της διαρκής μηχανοποίησης του μοντέλου παραγωγής. Φυσικά μιλάμε για ένα φάσμα προσεγγίσεων. Οι Ιταλοί φουτουριστές του Μεσοπολέμου, βλέπουν στη ταχύτητα του αυτοκινήτου, ένα νέο είδος ανθρώπου που θα ξεπεράσει τις σχέσεις του με τη φύση και θα δοθεί σε μια νέα σχέση με τη μηχανή. Ο σοβιετικός επιταχυντισμός αποδέχεται την αντίστοιχη λογική του καπιταλισμού για την ανοικοδόμηση της χώρας μετά τον Α’ Παγκόσμιο Πόλεμο, ως μια προσπάθεια επαναπροσδιορισμού αυτής της λογικής στην υπηρεσία του υπαρκτού σοσιαλισμού. Ο επιταχυντισμός του Cyberpunk Phuturism των 90s προσπαθεί να φανταστεί ένα νέο αισθητικό μοντέλο για μια ουτοπία (;) πέρα απο τον καπιταλισμό, ενώ οι εκφάνσεις του αποκαλυπτικού επιταχυντισμού προοιωνίζουν τη χειρότερη δυνατή έκβαση των αλλεπάλληλων κρίσεων του σύγχρονου καπιταλισμού.

Όπως μπορεί να φανταστεί κανείς, η θεματική του βιβλίου είναι αρκετά απαιτητική, καθώς ο Noys αντλεί ένα εκτενές οπλοστάσιο απο την πολιτική θεωρία, την πολιτική φιλοσοφία και την ψυχανάλυση για να κινηθεί ανάμεσα στις επιμέρους λογικές που βρίσκονται πίσω απο κάθε παράδειγμα επιταχυντισμού. Όπως τονίζει και ο ίδιος στόχος του δεν είναι να προχωρήσει σε μια ιδεολογική/αξιακή κριτική του επιταχυντισμού (αν και το κάνει ακούσια), αλλά να ακολουθήσει τις διάφορες αφηγήσεις που επιζητούν τη λογική της επιτάχυνσης προκειμένου να δημιουργήσουν μια βαθιά και οριστική ρήξη με τον καπιταλισμό. Παραδέχεται όμως πως οποιαδήποτε τέτοια λογική δεν μπορεί να προσφέρει είτε να είναι υπέρ του χώρου της εργασίας, ούτε λύνει τα προβλήματα της.

Κατα αυτό το τρόπο, υπάρχει ένα υπόγειο ερώτημα που αναδύεται μερικές φορές στο βιβλίο και προσπαθεί εμμέσως να απαντήσει ο Noys: υπάρχει καπιταλισμός χωρίς ανθρώπινη εργασία; Η απάντηση δεν είναι πάντα προφανής και τα παραδείγματα που παρατίθενται φαίνεται να επιζητούν μια τέτοια ανύπαρκτη λύση, μέσω της πρόσδεσης τους προς την επιταχυντική λογική του καπιταλισμού.

Αν βγάλουμε όμως τον ανθρώπινο παράγοντα τότε τι απομένει; Και το κυριότερο θα είναι χειρότερο απο αυτό που ζούμε ή όχι;

[Baglan · Rating 2 out of 5]

Leaves much to be desired, especially a thorough discussion of Nick Land's positions on accelerationism. But I guess the book was planned to be a handy short book for people who are interested in accelerationism but not necessarily immersed (pun intended) in the contemporary discussions about it. The best part is on Russian and Italian futurisms.

[Valdimar · Rating 1 out of 5]

thanks for the summaries, would have preferred actual ideas

[Artur Coelho · Rating 4 out of 5]

Uma ideia intrigante: e se em vez de combater os excessos do capitalismo a estratégia fosse de aprofundamento e estímulo aos excessos, provocando a sua derrocada através da aceleração a extremos? Curiosa teoria. Pessoalmente tenho alguma dificuldade em imaginar células de bilionários revolucionários, nadando em riquezas incomensuráveis, empenhados em deixar exsangues os sistemas económicos, sonhando com o dia em que as turbas ululantes se revoltarão e espetem as suas cabeças em paus como vingança pela desigualdade devastadora, sociedade esquizofrénica e catástrofes ambientais legadas pelo capitalismo terminal.

Desta premissa Noys parte para uma análise de movimentos artísticos e teorias filosóficas influentes ao longo do século XX e princípios do XXI. Começa com o sempre interessante futurismo, com a sua estética deslumbrada pela então novidade da massificação mecânica, da velocidade e da guerra. Recorda-nos como os entusiastas da velocidade mecanicista e do belicismo desenfreado se estamparam sob as balas na frente da I Guerra, fim apropriadamente catastrófico para os entusiasmos mais destravados. Daí mergulha nos campos mais rarefeitos das teorias do real da escola francesa, terreno pantanoso mais intrigante. Toca, como não poderia deixar de ser, no cyberpunk como tomada de pulso da colisão entre utopias e distopias tecnicistas propiciadas pelo mundo digital. Termina com um toque escatológico, afirmando a merdice do capitalismo desenfreado quer como característica que lhe é inerente quer como o estado em que deixa aqueles que são descartados pelo sistema.

Com uma boa análise sobre ideias da contemporaneidade sobre velocidade, não perde de vista um catastrofismo deslumbrado, entusiasta da derrocada total sem olhar às consequências. Mas não deixa de tocar num ponto óbvio e doloroso para aqueles com incapacidades bilionárias: o capitalismo desregulado de índole neo-liberal está a ter consequências devastadoras no tecido social. Este conceito de aceleração em direcção ao colapso é uma perspectiva algo absurdista que nos ajuda a sentir a extensão dos problemas causados por ganância sistematizada em estado puro.

[Rein · Rating 3 out of 5]

Noys, as the author of the concept of "accelerationism", is certainly the right author to have delivered us an overview of its background and future. However, given the current state of the debate, I don't really feel the promise was entirely fulfilled. Some sections of the book were just quick summaries of someone's views or what a film/book was about - not long enough to provide an argumented analysis, but not brief enough to be mere examples or asides - and did not integrate into the whole as they might have been, the result being a less coherent narrative than I had expected. Others, such as the work of Srnicek and Williams, were only addressed in passing, even though they would have merited much more excessive treatment. And the same obviously goes for Nick Land, whose section was probably the least satisfying of the whole book. I understand and applaud that Noys wanted to be concise and to the point, but not all the choices made to that effect were justified. All that said, the book contained many valuable and original insights, and the last pages presented a well-argued, coherent and substantial critique of where accelerationism has gone off track.

[ger · Rating 2 out of 5]

The odd interesting point is obscured by the very way it is written. The usual theorist speak nonsense fails to engage with the problem any Futurist has with prediction of any sense. Pity, because it could have been a good pamphlet on why 'Accelerationism' fails to be anything more than a postgraduate masturbation fantasy.

[Tim Bates · Rating 4 out of 5]

Seems to give a fair (straightforward) gaze toward "the current moment", calling for a strange blending of acceptance of capitalistic regimes while yet resisting as a "flux" in "certain moments" which remain not particularly elucidated...

[Samuel York · Rating 4 out of 5]

chill book i found especially stimulating the historical references to russian cosmism etc

[Jacob · Rating 4 out of 5]

Noys critique of Accelerationism, in general, is on point. I do, however, find his criticism of more contemporary movements (notably Srnicek and Williams) to be lacking.

[King Ludd · Rating 4 out of 5]

brief, insightful and thought-provoking. bonus points for not besmirching or misrepresenting Baudrillard.

[Subliminal · Rating 4 out of 5]

Brief overview on the most important accelerationist movements. If you're new to the matter this will help you to gain a critical view on the fourth or fifth approach to revive accelerationism ...

[Alf Bojórquez · Rating 3 out of 5]

Un libro oscuro para gente oscura. Yo me lo encontré en la librería, en la mesa de novedades y me tentó. No es barato, pero quise leer una actualización de los debates que los marxistas han tenido sobre el aceleracionismo desde los 70 hacia aquí. Es un buen estado de la cuestión al respecto. En el sentido de la filosofía y teoría del norte global: habla de películas, música, literatura... siempre dentro del canon oscuro: Lovecraft, el techno de Detroit y un largo etcétera. En cuando a lo teórico discute seriamente con Deleuze, Guatarri, Virilo y toda la herencia que se ha encargado de pensar los ritmos del capital y sus síntomas en productos culturales como la ciencia ficción.

La edición de Materia Oscura es descuidada, la traducción es pobre. La sintaxis es torpe, hay conceptos que pudieron traducirse y no se hizo, en fin. No es una pérdida de tiempo, pero tampoco vale lo que cuesta la edición en español.

[Angel Shoylev · Rating 3 out of 5]

Though at times confusing and arguably naive in its conclusions, Noys' Malign Velocities offers an intriguing analysis of accelerationism and the rhetoric surrounding it. Rendering accelerationism as a postgraduate disorder and thus attaching it to a very narrow group, however, was a cheap move.

My main issue with the book was that it was too selective. While Noys' goal is to refute accelerationism by dissecting the Lyotard/Deleuze/Land rhetoric, it fails to take into account technology's hyperstitional feedback loops, which I believe form the more interesting and compelling arguments around it.

In any case, taken with a grain of salt regarding its commentary on accelerationism, the book offers a different and often original analysis of accelerationism through ideas that are not that popular in the debate. Unfortunately, most of the book reads as 'old man yells at cloud' and Noys' ideas, though intriguing, come last of not that well developed.

[James · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good primer on accelerationism (at least the theory up to the book’s publication). I don’t agree with his characterizations/takes but if you can get past those there’s no better short intro text.
IMO it relies too heavily on “speed” as a surface-level entrance ramp to different accelerationisms’ (post-)humanisms, metaphysics, cultural theories and so on. Speed is the flashiest understanding but it gives itself over to “all disorder in liberalism is good, therefore Acc = neo-redbrowns” (which sometimes is the case). I don’t blame Noys that much as Mark Fisher hadn’t yet drawn out a more robust L/Acc from the sources Noys cites.

[TSVW · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting if one is looking for a genealogy of accelerationism. Most of the psychoanalytic and French theory stuff went over my head, but the beginning of the book and the discussion about Futurism and communism were pretty insightful.

[Ietrio · Rating 1 out of 5]

the parasitic class strikes again: the only good thing is whatever is going to increase their pensions, benefits, and, of course, personal power. noys will not shy away from any fallacy he knows in this noble goal.