bio what??

as defined by Toni Negri and Micalet Hardt in ´Empire´, biopower is a ubiquitous structure of control, present in our lives, practically every time we sneeze, from whatever definition of 'the state'
to the most mundane detail of life.
So, when we say 'biopoliticalantagonism', we want to be very clear, that even when we snott,
we are practicing antagonism. Which brings us to the debate regarding whether or not this antagonistic snotting should be articulated in relation to other modes of production,
given from the perspective of a strategy that can take us from one failure to the next thus reaching the final snott. Some would claim, regarding "biopolitics" or, politics that fundamentally define different ways of living and sells them, that: Being that this politics exists in every aspect of mundane daily life, any daily act of light disobedience or peeing outside of the box could automatically be considered an act of political resistance...so we need to define this real well. Basically we´re not saying, like Foucault, that "law and order" have become a daily normalizing force (which, of course, is also true). What we are doing, is making public the point to which this order is reproduced in the proliferation of differences, their administration and their sale.
For example how the "alternative" camp is the key to up and coming market sectors, and we´re not just talking music here.
What´s clear is that not only capital but also the multitude that opposes it are playing in the field of these aforementioned ´ways of living´, or better yet, ways of doing. Because we are not dealing with complete systems of living, but with small fragmented systems of reasoning, value and prejudices by which communities, tribes, groups or market sectors, are established. A caricature of these very complex processes would look like this: The multitudes go about constructing little autonomous universes of meaning, value and taste (be it raves, hiphop or rhumba). Capital "discovers" them
and does what it knows best: tries to reproduce them with copyrights, sell them and (of course) disarm them politically of any threat they might pose to the very market.
Part of this game is present in the thinking behind projects such as Pret a Revolter and the New Kids on the Black Block. Lets stay for a moment with these little Ôways of livingÕ, be them sellable as goods, services or pockets of resistance. These units, these modes, are nothing new. What has come to be known as folklore or popular art, has always consisted in the reproduction of objects or behaviors placed inside pre-established repertories, with ever varying formal and relational possibilities. "Palos" in flamenco and "ragas" in Indian music are but two examples.
These "modes" offered a framework for collective or individual creation. It related "artistic" production to people´s lives via ´modes of relating´ which specific works updated and recreated. Most art produced in most cultures is "modal" in the sense that it works with ´modes of relating´. Using them it makes concrete the possibility of constructing situations and fitting them together.
The question is can the extremes meet. Can practices, learned from the avant-guard and derived from the exhaustion of modernism, function as modal practices. In other words, can they be used for the creation of tools for the perception and understanding of diverse realities and for the intervention in these realities.
To make things clear, we are not talking about the aesthetic experience leaving a sensation of jawdropping virtuosity, or some type of dry morality. We are talking about concrete keys for the development of ways of relating, and we are talking about doing it autonomously. Also, about understanding the political necessity of this virtual modality of art, especially today when capitalism has extended its empire into the territory of ways of life, the territory of the small, definable, sellable cultural differences. Are we able to produce works that are immediately appropriable? That produce modes of relating? Or that help understand to what extent a particular mode we´re being sold is already corrupted?...are we able to generate works as if they are different tools, different software, say ones that serve as browsers, antivirus, layout software...?