www.nettime.org
Nettime mailing list archives

<nettime> RE: form
Hengdorn_Maedford_Sumatra-Bang on Sun, 9 Feb 2003 20:26:46 +0100 (CET)


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

<nettime> RE: form


Dear Jeffrey,

Wow. At this point, I must say, I am quite fiercely struck--as I think it
would be impossible for any feeling soul (or thinking brain) not to
be--(a) by your enthusiasm and steadfastness, and (b) by the new name of
the company for which you worked.

I think it is important to stumble upon this latter item (b) just for a
moment, especially in view of your interest in the "emerging markets"  
domain.

Let us look at things closely. The doctrine of market freedom is of course
at its root intended to give license to the profitable activities of the
most wealthy--especially within "emerging markets," i.e. among the
domestic and remote poor, whether these be the peasants of 18th-century
England or the teeming masses of today's Bangladesh.

For of course wealth-deriving activity has had to be justified in one way
or another, especially to the "emerging markets" at whose expense it is
often conducted. There is no point in announcing to the poor and to others
that the wealthy need to be more wealthy than they currently are "just
because"! You can see this! Always, there must be reasons, especially so
far as convincing the "emerging markets" goes.

Until roughly the mid-19th century, these reasons and justifications were
founded in the empyrean realm. Wealth, during this period, was a mark of
divine favor, and the pursuit of wealth was therefore pleasing to the
godhead in question. This of course mirrors the respect that folks in
those olden times had for the godhead, whether they were scholars,
politicians, military folk, or most importantly the "emerging markets"  
themselves.

In the second period--after Darwin, roughly--the wealthification of the
already wealthy was promoted as the only "natural" possibility, building
on the "survival of the fittest" refrain that had by then lodged itself
deep in the psyches of scholars, politicians, etc., as a likely bed for
justification of anything whatsoever (including, of course, as it turned
out, some of the 20th century's most gruesome excesses).

Finally, at the start of the 21st century, this model of natural justice
in the human landscape has begun to reveal its age. It is now standard
college fare that life in the natural world is based more on cooperation
than on competition. It is also terribly clear that those modern economies
most hewing to "Darwinian" neoliberalism have what can only be described
as planned economies, with the "fittest" lording it over the rest in regal
splendor and with the "least fit" puttering about the backwaters with no
hope of ever attaining dry ground. In these settings there is neither
competition nor cooperation, but only hierarchy, classification, and
stasis.

Nature has never been like this, Jeffrey--neither for Darwin nor his
successors. And so the "Darwinian" model no longer provides a useful
ossature for championing the supremacy of wealth-deriving activities.
 
Ironically enough, it is becoming quite clear to many that the only such
fundament possible may be precisely those empyrean realms forsworn by the
wealth-apologists just after Darwin! For to judge from the detailed
eyewitness accounts of August Swedenborg--the 18th-century predicter of
the great Lisbon earthquake and founder of Swedenborgianism, which still
has adepts in Pennsylvania--heaven is a series of perpetual hierarchies,
flexible only in so far as is necessary, with each supernal ring admitting
only those elements of inferior rings that further the plans of the Most
High.

The ranks upon ranks of Swedenborg's angels are intended somehow to serve
all humankind, rather than just the wealth of a small elite. But the basic
layout of this heaven--a kind of rotisserie grill, or series of
same--resembles today's corporate order far more than does the natural
world.

Do you know if the flamboyant and eccentric CEO of "divine" is perhaps a
Swedenborgian? Is he from Pennsylvania? These things are interesting, in a
human-interest sort of way.

In any case, to sum up, I think this conjuncture--the presence on your
resume of this item ("divine"), with your interest in how we interface
with the "emerging markets" that are always, always in question--augurs a
most productive relationship between us, in which much could be brought
from one to the next, from next to the one, ad infinitum.

I say, let us begin. How would you like to do so? What is the first thing
to do?

With every best hope, 
Hengy

On Thu, 6 Feb 2003, Wolf, Jeffrey wrote:

> Dear Hengdorn:
> 
> In response to your queries, "divine interVentures" (now just "divine") was
> of course a play on "divine interventions" and emphasized that (at the time,
> at least) the company dispensed a fair amount of venture capital. There
> is/was no "godhead," although the CEO is flamboyant and eccentric, to say
> the least. 
> 
> "Moot" Court simply means that students compete against each other in
> advocacy competitions. The competition, then, is what is "moot;" the outcome
> affects neither fictional plaintiff nor defendant (more properly, appellant
> or appellee). As for "Green," that is simply the person from whom the
> competition took its name.
> 
> I have a specific interest in emerging markets/developing countries, so any
> opportunities you know of within GATT/WTO for this summer would be most
> appreciated. If you could forward the attached resume, or let me know of the
> appropriate contact person, I would be most appreciative. Even should you
> not know of someone within (or outside of) GATT/WTO who works on emerging
> market issues, I would be rather excited to engage in its overall work, be
> it with developed countries, etc.
> 
> Thanks for taking the time to look over my resume,
> Jeff
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hengdorn Mford Sumatra-Bang
> To: Wolf, Jeffrey
> Cc: Population Center
> Sent: 2/5/2003 12:36 PM
> Subject: RE: form
> 
> Dear Jeffrey,
> 
> I enjoyed your resume very much. Is there really an enterprise that
> describes itself as "a divine interVentures company"? That is quite funny!
> Imagine that as a common descriptor. "I work for a divine interVentures
> company. Do you?" "I go to a divine interVentures school."  "I am a divine
> interVentures type of person, really." "Have you met my divine
> interVentures wife?"
> 
> Is there some sort of godhead involved in "divine interVentures"? Not?
> 
> I also like the fact that there is such a thing as a "Green Moot Court
> Competition." What on earth is a "Green Moot Court"? What for that matter
> is "moot" in this context? Perhaps we could imagine some potential
> scenarios!
> 
> In any case, it is clear from your resume that you have substantial
> talents and knowledge. Probably greater than my own! This is certain to my
> mind. It is also clear that in today's world, there is a very great need
> for your kind of talents and knowledge. Most of the world's poorest
> countries are trampled upon by wealthier countries every day in the WTO
> because they lack your kind of expertise. This leads to exacerbation of
> those poor countries' situation in today's difficult world. Did you know
> that? It is quite very well documented. Moreover, unfortunately, your kind
> of expertise permits the wealthier countries and companies to trample upon
> these poorest countries and populations as they desire. Well, that is the
> world today!
> 
> We can call this situation post-colonial, or, for simplicity, colonial.
> 
> Perhaps we could arrange to reverse this? Your sort of talents could help.
> But how specifically could we do so (reverse), according to you? Perhaps
> you, Mr. Ixtabal-Mono and myself could arrange an entente regarding this
> matter?
> 
> With the very best wishes,
> Hengy
> 
> On Wed, 5 Feb 2003, Wolf, Jeffrey wrote:
> 
> > Dear Hengdorn:
> > 
> > I have attached a copy of my resume in lieu of the form which I could not
> > seem to download. Please let me know if there are any suitable job openings
> > for this summer for which I might be qualified.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Jeff
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Hengdorn Mford Sumatra-Bang [mailto:hengy {AT} gatt.org] 
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 6:05 PM
> > To: Wolf, Jeffrey
> > Subject: RE: form
> > 
> > 
> > p.s. Oh!! I can see I have made another error. It was not you who referred 
> > to "vacant positions," nor even "open positions"--it was another!! I have, 
> > byzantinely, mixed up the two inboxes. Please forgive my confusion. Here 
> > is the original question from the other interlocutor, so that you might 
> > have insight into the answer and an understanding on how best to proceed:
> > 
> > > Dear Sir/ Madam,
> > > 
> > > could you possibly inform me about any vacant possitions within GATT
> 
> > > and WTO. Thank you in advance
> > 
> > On Tue, 4 Feb 2003, Hengdorn Mford Sumatra-Bang wrote:
> > 
> > > Dear Jeff,
> > > 
> > > Oh!! I am afraid there has been one of the most grotesque 
> > > misunderstandings of all time and all history!
> > > 
> > > You are now speaking about *open positions*--whereas before you were 
> > > speaking about *vacant positions.* It is clear from your phrasing that 
> > > in your mind, these are the same thing: to wit, jobs that are free to 
> > > be occupied (e.g. by you).  Whereas in *my* little mind, the former 
> > > (*vacant positions*) referred to those stances taken by the WTO which 
> > > are vacant of all substance and value! Now we can clearly see how "not 
> > > on the same page" we were in this matter! Ha!
> > > 
> > > Clarifying the situation, then, I must reiterate that the two 
> > > categories I listed were intended to represent vacant (or empty) 
> > > positions (or stances) of the WTO, which are not to lead to any 
> > > more fuss and widgeting about on the part of anyone whosoever, 
> > > least of all you. Jeff, there are surely useful things to be done 
> > > in this world, but not under the rubrics I mentioned! You had best 
> > > commit yourself to better methods of using a personal life!
> > > 
> > > I hope that this interests you!
> > > 
> > > Best wishes,
> > > Hengy
> > > 
> > > On Tue, 4 Feb 2003, Wolf, Jeffrey wrote:
> > > 
> > > > The former area interest me more than the latter (i.e., the 
> > > > abolition of government determination of economies). In particular, 
> > > > I am interested in emerging or developing countries, rather than 
> > > > developed or industrialized countries, although I am interested in
> > > > both. I would be happy to work in any legal, financial or 
> > > > administrative capacity related to any such endeavors. Thus I would 
> > > > be appreciative if you could inform me of any open positions in 
> > > > these fields.
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Jeff
> > > > 
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Hengdorn Mford Sumatra-Bang [mailto:hengy {AT} gatt.org]
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 9:50 AM
> > > > To: Wolf, Jeffrey
> > > > Cc: Population Center
> > > > Subject: RE: form
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Dear Jeffrey Wolf,
> > > > 
> > > > Thank you for your excellent question, and excuses for the great good
> > > > lateness of my response. Your question arrived via the byzantine
> > > > excesses of our internal routing contraptions, and I have only now 
> > > > been able to phrase its response appropriately.
> > > > 
> > > > The WTO and the GATT, in that order, do, as you mightily suggest, 
> > > > have a number of vacant positions. If you would like details of the 
> > > > relative vacancy of the two above things, then know henceforward 
> > > > that the WTO has a good number more vacant positions than the GATT, 
> > > > although the GATT does not lack in these either.
> > > > 
> > > > I would like to suggest that the vacant positions of the WTO can 
> > > > potentially be headed by the following two items, although truly any 
> > > > other items might likewise suffice:
> > > > 
> > > > * The abolition of government determination over the portions of a
> > > > nation's economy subject to market forces will benefit in the long
> > > > term all countries thus abolished, determinationwise. As you can 
> > > > perhaps guess from this phrasing, the position here stated has never 
> > > > been verified, and there is even contrary evidence--all of which 
> > > > relegates it to the dustbin of vagueness at best.
> > > > 
> > > > * A higher degree of permissivity with regards to behavior in all 
> > > > matters economic, including those causing substantial pollution, 
> > > > will benefit the environment, as such permissivity will free greater 
> > > > capital towards the improvement of same (the environment, not the 
> > > > capital). As this grammatical uncertainty intimates, this notion is 
> > > > also quite vacant of substance and substantiability.
> > > > 
> > > > I would like to suggest that there is a great deal more information 
> > > > to be conveyed in the cirumstances, and would welcome inquiries
> > > > regarding the aspect or aspects of our operations that interest you 
> > > > most.
> > > > 
> > > > With very best wishes,
> > > > 
> > > > Hengdorn Mford Sumatra-Bang
> > > > 
> > > > On Mon, 20 Jan 2003, Wolf, Jeffrey wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > Actually I was e-mailing regarding the Internship Application Form 
> > > > > -
> > > > > could you please send that?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Jeff
> > > > > 
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Population Center [mailto:humanresources {AT} gatt.org]
> > > > > Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 3:27 PM
> > > > > To: Wolf, Jeffrey
> > > > > Subject: Re: form
> > > > > 
> > > > > Dear Jeff,
> > > > > 
> > > > > Best apologies for a clear mess. I hope you are speaking regarding 
> > > > > the current attached form, which is to communicate information 
> > > > > regarding the organization.
> > > > > 
> > > > > If not please after perusing inform with more information.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Best,
> > > > > Haarkkonen Ixtabal-Mono
> > > > > 
> > > > > On Mon, 20 Jan 2003, Wolf, Jeffrey wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > Dear Sir/Madam:
> > > > > >  
> > > > > > I apologize, but I seem to be having trouble downloading the MS 
> > > > > > Word version of the form. Could you please e-mail me a copy?
> > > > > >  
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Jeff
> > > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > 
> 

#  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: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net