Note: I published this on TOP/DK

http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/11/9/1594327/-The-globe-of-globaliz...

The globe of globalization does not exist. Is there safe land we can return to?

The French thinker, Bruno Latour, takes us on a plane ride. The captain gives an announcement that the plane cannot go to the globe of globalization. There is no earth that supports the globe of globalization. It is impossible.

Later the pilot comes out with the message that we cannot return to the land. What with species extinction going on, seas rising, 400 ppm CO2, the land of the past can not be a place to land. This is also impossible. (It takes a little work to realize this. The Native Americans know about this along with the indigenous people of the world who are trying to project what is left of land.)

There is a third leg of the triangle, Gaia, and we now must chart a course there. A speech on the triangle in the following article.

Ona possible triangulation of some present political positionsOna possible triangulation of some present political positions

Here is what Bruno's AIME project tweeted about the election. (AIME — an inquiry into the modes of existence — modes include science, religion, politics, law, etc.)

AIME ‏@AIMEproject 6h6 hours ago
Brexit, 1; United States, 2; next one France? One after another nations engaged in globalisation are making a U-turn: back to the old land.

AIME ‏@AIMEproject 6h6 hours ago
2 delusional parties: one deny that people could vote for Trump the other that climate mutation & migration change everything. We feel lost.

AIME ‏@AIMEproject 6h6 hours ago
How could the intelligentsia been so wrong? We have lost contact with those who have lost contact with the climate crisis. 2 way to be blind

AIME ‏@AIMEproject 5h5 hours ago
If the arc of history is any indication the free for all should be England, United States, then France then Germany lots of ruins before end

AIME ‏@AIMEproject Aug 21
In the next months AIME will pursue Reset Modernity! in other countries & work on the triangle Land GLobe Earth to respecify politics' goals

Brino in a presentation on Oct 25, 2016 at Cornell

.

.. we seem to lack a shared definition of the territory inside which we are supposed to exert our political rights. By territory I don’t mean only the legal framework within which state and private owners exert their sovereignty, but the very shape, composition, nature and even, to put it simply, the very place where it is supposed to lay. Where are we supposed to live is no longer clear cut. To say that we live on Earth, or in nature, does not seem to clarify the situation that much.

My hunch is that the disorientation everybody feels about the dislocation of politics — even more evident at this time of the presidential election — is the direct consequence of this other disorientation regarding the territory. If politics appears so vacuous, it might be because it has not a solid and shared ground on which to raise issues of substance. How can you expect to have substantial policy debates if there is no territory to map, no cosmos to share, no soil to inhabit? How could we maintain a minimum of decent common institutions if we have no land in common, literally no common ground?

That’s enough for now. Link to the Cornell paper

Is Geo-logy the new umbrella for all the sciences? Hints for a neo-Humboldtian university

Final thought. Thomas Frank’s book “Listen Liberal” that for the Clinton’s in the 1990’s globalization occupied the place that most people put their God. Immediately I realized the political liability of assuming that the status quo could be continued. People voted against the establishment but as noted in the Cornell paper, it is much deeper since earthbounds (Latour’s word for the formerly humans) no longer have a common sense of space or time.