Networks, Movements and Technopolitics in Latin

America: Critical Analysis and Current

Challenges 1st Edition Francisco Sierra
Caballero pdf download

https://textbookfull.com/product/networks-movements-and-technopolitics-in-latin-america-critical-
analysis-and-current-challenges-1st-edition-francisco-sierra-caballero/

★★★★★ 4.7/5.0 (45 reviews) ✓ 204 downloads ■ TOP RATED

"Great resource, downloaded instantly. Thank you!" - Lisa K.

DOWNLOAD EBOOK
 Networks, Movements and Technopolitics in Latin America:
Critical Analysis and Current Challenges 1st Edition
Francisco Sierra Caballero pdf download

TEXTBOOK EBOOK TEXTBOOK FULL

Available Formats

■ PDF eBook Study Guide TextBook

EXCLUSIVE 2025 EDUCATIONAL COLLECTION - LIMITED TIME

INSTANT DOWNLOAD VIEW LIBRARY

Collection Highlights

Indigenous Women’s Movements in Latin America: Gender and

Ethnicity in Peru, Mexico, and Bolivia 1st Edition
Stéphanie Rousseau

News Media Coverage of Environmental Challenges in Latin

America and the Caribbean: Mediating Demand, Degradation
and Development Bruno Takahashi

Biota Grow 2C gather 2C cook Loucas

Women, Politics, and Democracy in Latin America 1st

Edition Tomáš Došek
The Manufacturing Sector in Argentina, Brazil, and Mexico:
Transformations and Challenges in the Industrial Core of
Latin America Juan Eduardo Santarcángelo

Street Art and Democracy in Latin America Olivier Dabène

Protecting Human Rights Defenders in Latin America: A

Legal and Socio-Political Analysis of Brazil 1st Edition
Ulisses Terto Neto (Auth.)

Critical Schooling: Transformative Theory and Practice

Francisco J. Villegas

Environmental Governance in Latin America 1st Edition

Fábio De Castro
Global Transformations in Media and Communication Research

Networks, Movements and

Technopolitics in Latin America
Critical Analysis and Current Challenges

Edited by Francisco Sierra Caballero

and Tommaso Gravante

A Palgrave/IAMCR Series

IAMCR
AIECS
AIE
E RI
 Global Transformations in Media
and Communication Research – A Palgrave
and IAMCR Series

Series Editors
Marjan de Bruin
HARP, Mona Campus
The University of the West Indies
Mona, Jamaica

Claudia Padovani
SPGI, University of Padova
Padova, Italy
The International Association for Media and Communications Research
(IAMCR) has been, for over 50 years, a focal point and unique plat-
form for academic debate and discussion on a variety of topics and
issues generated by its many thematic Sections and Working groups (see
http://iamcr.org/) This new series specifically links to the intellectual
capital of the IAMCR and offers more systematic and comprehensive
opportunities for the publication of key research and debates. It will pro-
vide a forum for collective knowledge production and exchange through
trans-disciplinary contributions. In the current phase of globalizing
processes and increasing interactions, the series will provide a space to
rethink those very categories of space and place, time and geography
through which communication studies has evolved, thus contributing to
identifying and refining concepts, theories and methods with which to
explore the diverse realities of communication in a changing world. Its
central aim is to provide a platform for knowledge exchange from dif-
ferent geo-cultural contexts. Books in the series will contribute diverse
and plural perspectives on communication developments including from
outside the Anglo-speaking world which is much needed in today’s glo-
balized world in order to make sense of the complexities and intercul-
tural challenges communication studies are facing.

More information about this series at

http://www.springer.com/series/15018
 Francisco Sierra Caballero
Tommaso Gravante
Editors

Networks, Movements
and Technopolitics
in Latin America
Critical Analysis and Current Challenges
Editors
Francisco Sierra Caballero Tommaso Gravante
University of Seville Universidad Nacional Autónoma de
Seville, Spain México
Mexico City, Mexico

Global Transformations in Media and Communication Research – A Palgrave

and IAMCR Series
ISBN 978-3-319-65559-8 ISBN 978-3-319-65560-4 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65560-4

Library of Congress Control Number: 2017950392

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2018

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the
Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights
of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction
on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and
retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are
exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and
information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication.
Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied,
with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have
been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published
maps and institutional affiliations.

Cover credit: KTSDESIGN/SCIENCE PHOTO LIBRARY

Printed on acid-free paper

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by Springer Nature

The registered company is Springer International Publishing AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
 Foreword—The Era of the Both

It is my pleasure and honor to welcome you, reader of Networks,

Movements & Technopolitics in Latin America to these first pages of
the book. I can only tempt you to continue reading this book, in any
way you deem fit, as I believe that it will be a pleasant and enriching
experience.
I believe this book raises a set of significant questions about our con-
temporary world, and stimulates an in-depth reflection about participa-
tion, activism, social movements and democracy. One issue, I believe,
merits our special attention. This is the paradox of the growing levels
of participation in a variety of societal fields and the decreasing levels of
control over the levers of societal power. Often, this paradox is mediated
and “solved” through a defense (or a critique) of either utopian or dys-
topian perspectives, where this dys/utopianism is sometimes related to
communication technologies, or in other cases to citizen or civil society
powers, or to state or company powers. I believe we need to heed this
paradox much more as a paradox, as a seemingly contradictory statement.
We need to take both components of the paradox serious, acknowledge
that there is a history of coexistence combined with a present-day inten-
sification, and scrutinize how they dynamically and contingently relate to
each other. In other words, we need to gain a better understanding of
how we now live in the era of the both.
If we apply a Longue Durée approach (Braudel 1969) to the establish-
ment and growth of democracy, we can hardly deny that we have come a
long way. Of course, the history of our diverse democratization processes

v
vi Foreword—The Era of the Both

is characterized by continuities and discontinuities, dead-ends, contra-

dictions, and horrible regressions. But what Mouffe (2000: 1–2) called
the “democratic revolution” “led to the disappearance of a power that
was embodied in the person of the prince and tied to a transcendental
authority. A new kind of institution of the social was hereby inaugurated
in which power became ‘an empty place’.” Even if we zoom in on the
twentieth and twenty-first century, it is hard not to see the differences
with the past. It is equally hard to ignore that the history of more than
200 years of democratic revolution has brought us more participation, in
a variety of ways and levels.
Of course, it makes sense to clarify what I mean with (more) partici-
pation, as this is a slippery notion—an empty signifier—given meaning
by two structurally different and competing approaches (see Carpentier
2016, for a more detailed discussion). What I have labeled the socio-
logical approach defines participation as taking part in particular social
processes, which is a very open and broad perspective, that tends to con-
flate interaction and participation. We find this approach, for instance,
in the field of cultural participation, where a museum visit is defined as a
form of participation. The second approach towards participation—the
political studies approach—uses a more restrictive perspective, defining
participation as a process of power-sharing in particular decision-making
processes. Interaction, however socially and politically relevant it is, then
becomes distinguishable from participation, allowing for a more fine-
grained analysis of participation. To return to my museum visit: In the
political studies approach, attending a museum is seen as a form of art
access, allowing for interaction with cultural artefacts and other texts, a
particular cultural institution, and other visitors. But, as the museum visit
does not allow a visitor to co-decide on the creation, or display, of these
cultural artefacts, or on the policies of that cultural institution, it is not a
form of participation. This second approach, which is also the one I pre-
fer, allows us to notice and validate practices that do allow for (arts) par-
ticipation, as they have been, for instance, developed by the community
arts movement (Binns 1991; De Bruyne and Gielen 2011). Somehow,
the work of Boal (1979) also comes to mind…
Even if we take the second approach as our guide, with its more
narrow definition of participation as power-sharing, we still have to
acknowledge that the democratic revolution has brought more par-
ticipation, even though a more qualified and careful analysis becomes
 Foreword—The Era of the Both vii

necessary. Here I want to refer to Jenkins’s words: “This is in part why

I see participation more and more in relational rather than absolute
terms—a matter of degree rather than of difference. So yes, all culture
is in some sense participatory, but the more hierarchical a culture is,
the less participatory it becomes. I am today more likely to talk about
a shift towards ‘a more participatory culture’.” (Jenkins in Jenkins, Ito
and boyd 2015: 22) If we look at the histories of media participation
(Ekström, et al. 2011; Carpentier and Dahlgren 2014), we can identify
several key moments where citizens’ communication rights have been
structurally strengthened, discursively (e.g., the development of the con-
cept of communication rights in the first place) and materially (by the
increased availability of communication technologies).
Of course, this evolution towards more participation has not remained
restricted to the media field. Also the relationships between citizens and
their political leaders, between employees and employers, and, more in
general, between ordinary people and the fluid assemblage of societal
elites, has changed over the past decades, sometimes in societal fields that
would not immediately come to mind. Take, for instance, the domain
of health, where patients have become more empowered in the past
decades, with the development of patient rights and other legal frame-
works (e.g., euthanasia laws) as a result. If we aggregate these participa-
tory practices across the many different societal fields in which they are
located, we can find support for the idea that power has become more
decentralized, and that this decentralization is sometimes accepted, and
even institutionalized, and in other cases can be wrestled from societal
elites by a combination of tactics, struggles, resistances, disobediences,
and activisms.
Of course, I do not want to imply that these changes have led to
societies that are characterized by omnipresent power balances and
equalities, where leadership, expertise and ownership have become fully
democratized, where difference is acknowledged and respected, with-
out it resulting in the capacity to dominate others. Full participation,
as Pateman (1970: 71) labeled it, or maximalist participation as I pre-
fer to call it, has not been achieved on a large scale, even though there
are some maximalist participatory Temporary Autonomous Zones (Bey
1985) throughout the world. I also do not want to imply that the pre-
sent state of democracy, with its minimalist levels of participation, has
not been paid dearly, with the pain, blood and tears of the generations
that came before us, and is still costing contemporary generations a lot in
viii Foreword—The Era of the Both

order to maintain the current participatory intensities. And finally, I also

do not want to claim that the democratic revolution is a merely linear
historical process, that will necessarily and unabatingly continue through-
out time, eventually bringing us at the gates of a participatory heaven.
Whatever has been gained, can still be lost. To use Enwezor et al.’s
(2002) words: Democracy is unrealized, it is an horizon that is never
reached, and that serves a crucial purpose as ideological reference point.
But there is also no guarantee that we will continue heading towards this
horizon, as we might have set out on a course towards a much darker
future.
This darker side merits our attention, also because it is not situated
in a distant future. Arguably, the (stronger) presence of minimalist par-
ticipation coexists—in the era of the both—with a series of undemo-
cratic forces, that centralize power. Here we should keep in mind that
war and violence are opposites of democracy. Some of the armed con-
flicts, and the structural violence they encompass, have caused intense
suffering, but also structural disruptions of democratic practices. Armed
conflicts, such as the war in Afghanistan, the civil wars in Iraq and Syria,
and the drug war in Mexico—to mention only the most bloody armed
conflicts of today—create large enclaves where democracy is suspended,
and where participation ceases to be a prime concern, as it is replaced by
mere survival. But these undemocratic forces do not remain contained to
the enclaves that I have just mentioned (and to the many other medium-
intensity conflicts, for instance, on the African continent). Not only are
many countries from the northern hemisphere military involved in these
armed conflicts, these conflicts are also imported and transported to
other parts of the world, where the involved states (in the northern hem-
isphere), their populations, and foreign fighters (often labeled terrorists)
become involved in a downward spiral of discrimination, oppression,
violence, destruction, and death. One component of this process is cap-
tured by Agamben’s (2003) argumentation that we are living in the state
of exception, where civil and human rights are curtailed in the name of
security. Another component is the rise and mainstreaming of antago-
nistic xenophobic, racist, and nationalist ideologies in democratic states,
combined with calls for strong leadership, that pave the way for populist
and authoritarian regimes, for the legitimation of corruption and other
forms of unethical behavior, and for the politics of fear (see, e.g., Wodak
2015).
 Foreword—The Era of the Both ix

This also has theoretical consequences for our thinking about par-
ticipation, because it raises questions about the instrumentalization
of participation and the hijacking of participatory techniques by non-
participatory forces. How to handle situations where authoritarian and
intrinsically undemocratic leaders use participatory tools to manufacture
consent—a concept I borrow from Herman and Chomsky (1988)—
or to mobilize populations for undemocratic purposes? What to think
about radical right-wing groups (Caiani and Parenti 2013) that use the
online to live out their nationalist and racist fantasies in ways that make
use of participatory techniques, at least accessible to the members of
these groups, and to those who are ideologically aligned with them? As
argued elsewhere (Carpentier 2017: 96), this brings us to the distinc-
tion between procedural and substantive participation, which is inspired
by the difference between procedural and substantive democracy, or
between “rule-centered and outcome-centered conceptions of democ-
racy” (Shapiro 1996: 123). In parallel with these concepts, we can
distinguish between procedural and substantive participation, where pro-
cedural participation refers to the mere use of participatory techniques,
while substantive participation refers to the necessary embedding of
these participatory techniques in the core values of democracy, especially
those of human rights and (respect for) societal diversity.
If we return to the role of communication technologies in the era of
the both, we have to acknowledge that they are an integrative part of the
two constitutive components of this era of the both. This book, with its
ambition to move beyond the online/offline divide and to avoid the trap
of digital utopianism, which artificially separates the “virtual” from the
“real,” allows us to reflect better about how communication technolo-
gies, more than before, span the both. Surveillance technologies coexist
with sousveillance technologies, black propaganda with dialogical com-
munication, media legitimations of war and violence with pacifist mes-
sages, celebrations of bigotry with respect for diversity, sealed-off media
empires with maximalist participatory media platforms, spirals of silence
with practices of voice, symbolic annihilations with the politics of pres-
ence, media-induced amnesia with deep-rooted historical awareness, the
defense of the status-quo with the loud propagation that another world
is possible.
This leaves us with two final questions: What is the role of the criti-
cal intellectual in the era of the both, and can we avoid the scale being
(further) tipped into (what I consider to be the) wrong direction? The
x Foreword—The Era of the Both

era of the both is characterized by increasing levels of diversity, but this

diversity also includes the uncanny combination of the democratic and
the undemocratic in one glocal assemblage. Which tactics should be
deployed by those actors who are committed to what Mouffe (1988:
42) has called the “deepen[ing of ] the democratic revolution” and what
Giddens (1994: 113) labeled the “democratisation of democracy?”
These are questions that merit more attention than what I accord them
here. But to give a fraction of an answer: I would like to argue that there is
a strong need for the deployment of a double tactic, or better, two sets of
tactics. One set of tactics consists out of the radically critical and radically
contextualized analyses of the current problematic state of representative
liberal democracy—one interesting example is Van Reybrouck’s (2016)
critique of elections, but many others exist, and many more are needed—
and the equally problematic state of the capitalist economies entangled
with our representative liberal democracies. The second set of tactics is
more difficult to put into practice, as it is a more generative approach,
grounded in the critiques that result from the first set of tactics. This sec-
ond set of tactics consists out of the further development of a participa-
tory-democratic ideology. This ideology needs to articulate a participatory
communicational ethics, a strong commitment to agonism—or in other
words, to the democratic taming of conflict without denying it—and clear
articulations of democratic leadership, democratic ownership, and demo-
cratic expertise (see Carpentier 2017), among many other elements.
In an intellectual landscape where critical intellectuals are dispersed
throughout many regions, institutions, academic disciplines, and other
frameworks of intelligibility, collaboration becomes a requirement. For that
reason, I would argue that this double tactic has to be grounded in a global
and multivoiced project that uses the strategy of modularity, where sub-net-
works of intellectuals collaborate within their disciplines and fields, in order
to build ideological modules grounded in their expertise, in combination
with interdisciplinary articulatory practices that connect and integrate these
different modules into one counter-hegemonic participatory-democratic
project (see Carpentier 2014 for a more developed argument). This book,
with its broad geographical span, with its commitment to intercontinental
dialogue and with its search for ways to deepen democracy and to intensify
contemporary participatory levels, is, in my very humble opinion, one of
the contributions towards the establishment of this new republic of letters.

Nico Carpentier
 Foreword—The Era of the Both xi

References
Agamben, Giorgio. (2003). State of Exception. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Bey, Hakim. (1985). T.A.Z.: The Temporary Autonomous Zone, Ontological
Anarchy, Poetic Terrorism. Brooklyn: Autonomedia.
Binns, Vivienne (Ed.). (1991). Community and the Arts. History, Theory,
Practice. Australian Perspectives. Leichhardt: Pluto Press Australia.
Boal, Augusto. (1979). The Theatre of the Oppressed. London: Pluto.
Braudel, Fernand. (1969). Écrits sur l’Histoire. Paris: Flammarion.
Caiani, Manuela, Parenti, Linda. (2013). European and American Extreme Right
Groups and the Internet. Farnham: Ashgate.
Carpentier, Nico. (2014). A call to arms. An essay on the role of the intellec-
tual and the need for producing new imaginaries, Javnost–The Public, 21(3),
77–92.
Carpentier, Nico. (2016). Beyond the ladder of participation: An analytical
toolkit for the critical analysis of participatory media processes, Javnost–The
Public, 23(1), 70–88.
Carpentier, Nico. (2017). The discursive-material knot: Cyprus in conflict and
community media participation. New York: Peter Lang.
Carpentier, Nico & Dahlgren, Peter (Eds.). (2014). Histories of media(ted) par-
ticipation, CM, Communication Management Quarterly, 30.
De Bruyne, Paul & Gielen, Pascal (Eds.). (2011). Community art: The politics of
trespassing. Amsterdam: Valiz.
Ekström, Anders, Jülich, Solveig, Lundgren, Frans, Wisselgren, Per (eds.) (2011)
History of participatory media. Politics and publics. New York: Routledge.
Enwezor, Okwui, Basualdo, Carlos, Bauer, Ute Meta, Ghez, Susanne, Maharaj,
Sarat, Nash, Mark, Zaya, Octavio (Eds.). (2002). Democracy unrealized:
Documenta 11_Platform 1. Ostfildern-Ruit: Hatje Cantz.
Giddens, Anthony (1994) Beyond left and right: The future of radical politics.
Cambridge: Polity Press.
Herman, Edward S., Chomsky, Noam. (1988). Manufacturing consent: The polit-
ical economy of the mass media. New York: Pantheon Books.
Jenkins, Henry, Ito, Mizuko, boyd, danah. (2015). Participatory culture in
a networked era: A conversation on youth, learning, commerce, and politics.
Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.
Mouffe, Chantal. (1988). Radical democracy: Modern or postmodern, Andrew
Ross (Ed.). Universal Abandon? The Politics of Postmodernism. Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press, pp. 31–45.
Mouffe, Chantal. (2000). The democratic paradox. London: Verso.
Pateman, Carole. (1970). Participation and democratic theory. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
xii Foreword—The Era of the Both

Shapiro, Ian. (1996). Democracy’s place. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Van Reybrouck, David. (2016). Against elections: The case for democracy.
London: The Bodley Head.
Wodak, Ruth. (2015). The politics of fear: What right-wing populist dis-
courses mean. London: Sage.

Nico Carpentier is Professor in Media and Communication Studies

at the Department of Informatics and Media of Uppsala University. In
addition, he holds two part-time positions, those of Associate Professor
at the Communication Studies Department of the Vrije Universiteit
Brussel (VUB—Free University of Brussels) and Docent at Charles
University in Prague. Moreover, he is a Research Fellow at the Cyprus
University of Technology and Loughborough University. His most
recent book is The Discursive-Material Knot: Cyprus in Conflict and
Community Media Participation, published by Peter Lang in 2017.
 Contents

1 Introduction 1
Francisco Sierra Caballero and Tommaso Gravante

Part I Technopolitics: A Theoretical Framework

2 Digital Media Practices and Social Movements.

A Theoretical Framework from Latin America 17
Francisco Sierra Caballero and Tommaso Gravante

3 Tracing the Roots of Technopolitics: Towards

a North-South Dialogue 43
Emiliano Treré and Alejandro Barranquero Carretero

4 E-Democracy. Ideal vs Real, Exclusion vs Inclusion 65

Andrea Ricci and Jan Servaes

5 Technopolitics in the Age of Big Data 95

Stefania Milan and Miren Gutierrez

xiii
xiv Contents

Part II Dissident Technopolitics Practices in Latin America:

Critical Analysis and Current Challenges

6 The Brazilian Protest Wave and Digital Media: Issues

and Consequences of the “Jornadas de Junho”
and Dilma Rousseff’s Impeachment Process 113
Nina Santos

7 Social Networks, Cyberdemocracy and Social Conflict

in Colombia 133
Elias Said-Hung and David Luquetta-Cediel

8 Communication in Movement and Techno-Political

Media Networks: the case of Mexico 147
César Augusto Rodríguez Cano

9 #CompartirNoEsDelito: Creating Counter-Hegemonic

Spaces Online for Alternative Production and
Dissemination of Scientific Knowledge 177
Jean-Marie Chenou and Rodulfo Armando
Castiblanco Carrasco

10 #OcupaEscola: Media Activism and the Movement

for Public Education in Brazil 199
Ana Lúcia Nunes de Sousa and Marcela Canavarro

Index 221
 Editors and Contributors

About the Editors

Francisco Sierra Caballero is Senior Researcher and Professor of

Communication Theory from the Department of Journalism at the
University of Seville, Spain. He is also Director of the Interdisciplinary
Research Group on Communication, Politics and Social Change
(www.compoliticas.org) and Editor of the Journal of Studies for Social
Development of Communication (REDES.COM) (www.revista-redes.
com). He is President of the Latin Union of Political Economy of
Information, Communication and Culture (www.ulepicc.org). He has
written over 20 books and more than 50 scientific articles in journals of
impact. Furthermore, he has been professor at prestigious universities
and research centers in Europe and Latin America.
Tommaso Gravante is Postdoctoral Fellow at the Center for
Interdisciplinary Research in the Sciences and Humanities (CEIICH),
National Autonomous University of Mexico. More generally, his work
explores the role of emotions in social movement and protest, and col-
lective action and social change. Tommaso is author of Cuando la gente
toma la palabra. Medios digitales y cambio social en la insurgencia de
Oaxaca (CIESPAL, 2016).

xv
xvi Editors and Contributors

Contributors

Alejandro Barranquero Carretero is Assistant professor at the

Department of Journalism and Audiovisual Communication in
Universidad Carlos III de Madrid where he teaches research method-
ologies, theory, and history of communication. His research lays at the
intersection of communication, citizenship and social change, includ-
ing insights to communication for social change, community and citi-
zen media, communication strategies by NGOs and social movements,
and critical perspectives on media literacy. He is the president of the
Research Association in Community, Alternative and Participatory
Communication-RICCAP (www.riccap.org) and permanent member
of the research group Dialectic Mediation of Social Communication
(MDCS) at Universidad Complutense de Madrid (www.ucm.es/mdcs).
Marcela Canavarro is Journalist, media-activist and Ph.D. candidate in
Digital Media (University of Porto). She has a Master in Communication
& Culture (UFRJ) with expertise in Technologies of Communication.
She researches information diffusion on social networks for politi-
cal mobilization, with focus on the so-called Journeys of June (Brazil,
2013). In this research, she crosses digital and traditional methods such
as network analysis, computational processing of Facebook data and
questionnaires. She is also part of the research group Communication
Networks & Social Change at the Internet Interdisciplinary Institute
(IN3) at Universitat Obierta de Catalunya (UOC) and collaborates with
Inesc-Tec (U.Porto).
César Augusto Rodríguez Cano is Professor at the Department of
Communication and Design, Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana uni-
dad Cuajimalpa in Mexico City, and holds a Ph.D. in Social and Political
Sciences from the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. He was
a Postdoctoral Researcher at Universidad Iberoamericana and a Visiting
Graduate Researcher at University of California Los Angeles. His
research has focussed mainly in studying political culture on social media,
cyberactivism, new media ecology, and digital methods with special inter-
est in Social Network Analysis.
Nico Carpentier is Professor in Media and Communication Studies
at the Department of Informatics and Media of Uppsala University. In
addition, he holds two part-time positions, those of Associate Professor
 Editors and Contributors xvii

at the Communication Studies Department of the Vrije Universiteit

Brussel (VUB—Free University of Brussels) and Docent at Charles
University in Prague. Moreover, he is a Research Fellow at the Cyprus
University of Technology and Loughborough University. His most
recent book is The Discursive-Material Knot: Cyprus in Conflict and
Community Media Participation, published by Peter Lang in 2017.
Dr. Rodulfo Armando Castiblanco Carrasco is an independ-
ent researcher and occasional professor at the Social Sciences at the
Universidad Distrital Francisco José de Caldas, Bogotá, Colombia. He
obtained his doctoral degree in social anthropology from University of
los Andes, Bogotá, Colombia. His research interests are in the fields of
digital anthropology, hacktivism, appropriation of technology in global
south, education, and pedagogy.
David Luquetta-Cediel, Ph.D. Anthropologist, Doctor of Social
Sciences. Principal investigator in several projects with regional and
national impact. He is currently a full-time teaching researcher in the
Social Communication—Journalism Programme of the Autonomous
University of the Caribbean and the leader of the communication and
regional research group in the same department.
Dr. Jean-Marie Chenou is an Assistant Professor at the Department of
Political Science at the University of los Andes, Bogotá Colombia and a
member of the Centre for International Studies. He obtained his Ph.D.
in Political Science from the University of Lausanne. He is specializing in
Internet governance and the regulation of digital markets.
Ana Lucia Nunes de Sousa is a Ph.D. student in communication and
journalism at the Autonomous University of Barcelona (Spain)/Federal
University of Rio de Janeiro (Brazil), and is a CAPES (Brazil) scholarship
student. She also has a degree in social communication, a postgraduate
degree in hypermedia and in creative documentary, as well as a Master’s in
communication and culture. Her research and professional experience focus
on community media, audio-visual, the Internet and social movements.
Miren Gutierrez (@gutierrezmiren) is a Professor of Communication
and Director of the postgraduate program “Data Analysis, Research
and Communication” at the University of Deusto, Spain. She is also a
Research Associate at the Overseas Development Institute of London,
where she develops data-based research projects around development
xviii Editors and Contributors

issues, and at DATACTIVE of Amsterdam. She is also a trainer at the

Thomson Reuters Foundation. Her work explores how people take
action, mobilize and organize via software and data. She holds a Ph.D. in
Communication Sciences of the University of Deusto.
Stefania Milan (stefaniamilan.net) is Associate Professor of New
Media at the University of Amsterdam, and Associate Professor (II) of
Media Innovation at the University of Oslo. She is also the Principal
Investigator of the DATACTIVE project (StG-2014_639379), explor-
ing the evolution of citizenship and participation vis-à-vis datafication
and massive data collection (data-activism.net). More generally, her work
explores the intersection of digital technology, governance and activ-
ism. She holds a Ph.D. in political and social sciences of the European
University Institute. Stefania is the author of Social Movements and
Their Technologies: Wiring Social Change (Palgrave Macmillan, 2013),
and coauthor of Media/Society (Sage, 2011).
Andrea Ricci holds a Master’s degrees in European Studies from the
College of Europe and a Ph.D. on Information and Communication
Sciences from ULB in Brussels. His professional and academic interests are
related to the role of communication and (open and secret source) intel-
ligence in fields like crisis management, conflict analysis, risk analysis, early
warning, scenario analysis, political mobilization, terrorism, and propaganda.
Elias Said-Hung, Ph.D. Researcher, consultant and Scrum Master
Consultant with over 10 years professional experience in social media,
digital media and ICT in education. Currently a Lecturer in the
Education Faculty of the International University and a consultant at
Con-Tacto Humano.
Nina Santos is a Ph.D. candidate in Communication at Université
Panthéon-Assas. She has a Master in Communication and Contemporary
Cultures, at Universidade Federal da Bahia (Brazil) and a Specialization
in Communication and Politics, at the same university. Also has been
working and researching in the field of political communication,
e-democracy, political campaigns, social media marketing, social media
monitoring since 2008.
Jan Servaes, Ph.D. is Editor-in-Chief of the Elsevier journal “Telematics
and Informatics: An Interdisciplinary Journal on the Social Impacts
of New Technologies” (http://www.elsevier.com/locate/tele), and
Editor of the Lexington Book Series “Communication, Globalization
 Editors and Contributors xix

and Cultural Identity” (https://rowman.com/Action/SERIES/LEX/

LEXCGC), and the Springer Book Series “Communication, Culture
and Change in Asia” (http://www.springer.com/series/13565). Servaes
has taught International Communication and Communication for
Social Change in Australia, Belgium, China, Hong Kong, the USA, The
Netherlands, and Thailand, in addition to several teaching stints at about
120 universities in 55 countries. Servaes has undertaken research, devel-
opment, and advisory work around the world and is the author of jour-
nal articles and books on such topics as international and development
communication; ICT and media policies; intercultural communication;
participation and social change; and human rights and conflict manage-
ment. He is known for his “multiplicity paradigm” in “Communication
for Development. One World, Multiple Cultures” (1999).
Emiliano Treré is Lecturer at Cardiff’s School of Journalism, Media
and Cultural Studies (UK), and Research Fellow at the Center of Social
Movements Studies of the Scuola Normale Superiore (Italy). He has
published extensively on the challenges and the myths of media tech-
nologies for social movements and political parties. He is coeditor of
“Social Media and Protest Identities” (Information, Communication &
Society, 2015), “Latin American Struggles & Digital Media Resistance”
(International Journal of Communication, 2015), and “From
Global Justice to Occupy and Podemos: Mapping Three Stages of
Contemporary Activism” (tripleC, 2017). His book is forthcoming with
the Routledge Studies in Radical History and Politics.
 List of Figures

Fig. 8.1 Occupy Wall St. Page Like Network, elaborated

by the author 156
Fig. 8.2 #YoSoy132 Page Like Network, elaborated
by the author 157
Fig. 8.3 Spanish Revolution Page Like Network, elaborated
by the author 158
Fig. 8.4 Mídia Ninja Page Like Network, elaborated by the author 159
Fig. 8.5 #YoSoy132 Sample Mega-Network, elaborated by author 161
Fig. 8.6 #YoSoy132 Mega-Network, elaborated by author 163
Fig. 8.7 Centro Prodh Mega-Network, elaborated by author 164
Fig. 8.8 #YoSoy132 Mega-Network by Category, elaborated
by the author 166
Fig. 8.9 Centro Prodh Mega-Network by Category, elaborated
by the author 167
Fig. 9.1 Media coverage of Diego’s case, created by the authors 178
Fig. 9.2 Comparison of sentencing for different crimes.
This example compares sentencing for smuggling with
the sharing of knowledge on the internet, created
by authors 185
Fig. 9.3 Comparison of sentencing for different crimes.
This example compares sentencing for smuggling with
the sharing of knowledge on the internet, created
by authors 185
Fig. 9.4 Snapshot of the Twitter hashtag #CompartirNoEsDelito
(August 2016) and identification of some key players,
created by authors 186

xxi
xxii List of Figures

Fig. 9.5 The important role of the Electronic Frontier Foundation

in the global campaign (Visualisation of English language
web pages mentioning Diego’s case that link to the EFF.),
created by authors 188
Fig. 9.6 Comparison between the EFF and FK campaigns, created
by authors 189
Fig. 10.1 1—WUNC display on Hub pages’ top-50 videos 211
Fig. 10.2 2—WUNC display on Satellite pages’ top-50 videos 211
Fig. 10.3 Hub pages show high indegree. This graph considers
the 112 nodes that constitute the giant component
of the 1-degree network. That means 68.7% of the total
network (nodes size = indegree; nodes colors
manually = hub pages in black and others pages in gray) 213
Fig. 10.4 Connectedness and Unity: hub pages play a relevant role
in linking nodes at the 2-degree network’s giant component,
which gathers 476 nodes (93.5% of the total network).
Graph: directed network; gephi layout = Force Atlas 2;
size nodes = indegree; nodes colors = strongly-connected
ID (black represents the most connected nodes while
lighter grey indicates the least connected nodes in the giant
component). Data collected in October, 21, 2016 214
Fig. 10.5 Giant component’s most cohesive core (2-degree network).
Network cohesiveness: some of the hub pages appear
amongst the 51 nodes (10% of the total network) left
in the giant component, when the highest k-core possible
before the network completely disappears is applied
(k-core = 9). Data collected in October, 21, 2016 216
Fig. 10.6 O Mal Educado’s 3-degree ego sub-network (103 nodes)
gathers 63.2% of the total 1-degree network (103 nodes)
and 87% of all links, showing its relevance for information
diffusion 217
 List of Tables

Table 8.1 #YoSoy132 Mega-Network pages, elaborated by author 162

Table 8.2 Centro Prodh Mega-Network’s communities and topics,
elaborated by the author 168
Table 10.1 Satellite pages’ and Hub pages’ videos on Facebook
(summary) 202
Table 10.2 Data sets attributes/Facebook public pages data retrieved
with Netvizz 203

xxiii
 CHAPTER 1

Introduction

Francisco Sierra Caballero and Tommaso Gravante

All knowledge is traversed by social construction and mediation.

Research agendas, together with the basic methods and epistemologies
that shape knowledge regarding society and nature, are as a rule condi-
tioned by the potential awareness and historical development of produc-
tive forces. Yet, in some cases, these conditioning factors are relative, as
can be observed for instance in communicology. Two illustrative exam-
ples of this logic are the Internet galaxy and technopolitics. Although
despite living in the era of intelligent multitudes, studies in this regard
are still rather thin on the ground.
Scientific project funding policies that sideline studies based on a critical
vision of the social appropriation and use of digital networks, from the point
of view of their impact on processes of social empowerment and change,

F. Sierra Caballero
Departament of Journalism I, Universidad de Sevilla, Office D7, Americo
Vespucio s/n Isla de la Cartuja, 41092 Seville, Andalusia, Spain
e-mail: [email protected]
T. Gravante (*)
Center for Interdisciplinary Research in the Sciences and Humanities
(CEIICH), National Autonomous University of Mexico, Torre II de
Humanidades, 6º piso, Circuito Interior, Ciudad Universitaria, Delegación
Coyoacan, 4510 Ciudad de México, Ciudad de México, Mexico
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s) 2018 1

F.S. Caballero and T. Gravante (eds.), Networks, Movements and Technopolitics in
Latin America, Global Transformations in Media and Communication Research -
A Palgrave and IAMCR Series, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65560-4_1
2 F. SIERRA CABALLERO AND T. GRAVANTE

set a research agenda that is paradoxically unproductive or, at the very least,
lacking in sociological imagination. This is especially the case when rethink-
ing the mediations that those using the digital ecosystem experience nowa-
days, at a moment when, as in the case of Latin America, many political
experiences and processes are taking place.
However, there is a memory of the practices and a theory and
research responsive to those experiences of cultural subversion and
resistance which, in due course, would fuel the paradigm of the phi-
losophy of liberation. To give just one example from a critical his-
torical approach, it is worth recalling the dialogue and innovation
that Latin America experienced throughout the 1960s and 1970s
with alternative communication, which recognizes the diversity of
voices and actors, gives voice to the normally voiceless and, thanks
to its praxeological vision, respects mediation as a constituted and
constituent process of popular cultures. The inspiration of new per-
spectives and productive knowhow on the leading edge of knowledge
regarding the appropriation and use of new technologies for local
development, fostered by the pioneers in Latin American communi-
cation research, articulated—in line with the demands of subaltern
collectives and ancestral wisdom in the development of communitar-
ian and democratic forms of inserting cultural representation systems
and devices—transformation processes that nowadays, of course, have
persisted in the contemporary forms of intervention and social revi-
talization of the so-called “technopolitics”. Although the aim of this
introduction is not to offer a history of participatory communication
that illustrates and gives meaning to modern-day cyberactivism, it is
nonetheless worth noting the importance that heterodox and creative
interpretations, which endeavored to follow other paths and courses
denied, by omission or will to power, by communication as domina-
tion, have had in Latin America.
From this viewpoint, community communication is the autonomous
field of production that articulates voices for an emancipatory purpose
as a counter-hegemonic opportunity for social change, in resistance to
the antagonistic critique based on group or collective organization, unity
and empowerment. By the same token, technopolitics should be under-
stood—in the logical framework of this book—as a transformative and
decentralizing mediation grounded in the democracy of the code as a
pooled construction of possible reality on the basis of digital culture and
collective co-creation.
 1 INTRODUCTION 3

Understanding Technopolitical Ecologies: Main

Perspectives and Key Lessons
The digital revolution has modified and redesigned conceptually the
conventional media system by shaping new forms of production and
organization of information mediation. The mutations that introduce the
“Internet galaxy” into the new social morphology are particularly visible
in the perturbations and interruptions of social activity which affect cul-
ture. These reticular and centrifugal transformations of the new cultural
ecology go a long way to enabling the political subject of post-modernity
to permeate reality itself, customize the world, appropriate possible and
real worlds of interaction with his or her imagination, and design new
rationales of local participation and development.
The basis of participatory democracy harnessing new information
technologies now recognizes the existence of a new information eco-
system that articulates what Oskar Negt calls the “oppositional pub-
lic space” (Negt 2007). In the new media culture, the communication
process has broken free from the time/space coordinates described by
Descartes at the dawn of modernity, with broadened forms of experi-
ence that transcend the local horizon of events. Furthermore, the spa-
tialization of time in the Web anticipates a new conceptualization of the
“local”. In this regard, Castells talks about a new spatial logic based on
information flows versus the logic of social organization rooted in the
history of immediate localities and territories. The new model of urban
development, the space of immaterial flows of the organization of social
practices, disassociates the experience of the physical space by making
both virtual simultaneousness and fragmented timeless space possible.
Such transformations become particularly evident in, and have an espe-
cially strong impact on, urban planning and particularly citizen participa-
tion and political deliberation.
The cyberspace introduces new habits and relationships as regards the
conventional forms of social ties, in addition to modern practices and
symbolic representations. As Echevarría has rightly pointed out, although
the technical issues relating to the access to information on the Internet,
as well as to its circulation and safe and rapid transmission, are impor-
tant, reflecting on the Web as a new civic space is a far more pressing
matter. The shaping of a new telepolis is, in this respect, the main chal-
lenge that the communication research agenda should meet. The breach
of internal and external limits of cities and territories, the integration
4 F. SIERRA CABALLERO AND T. GRAVANTE

and confusion of the public and private spheres, traditionally conceived

individually in discourse and in modern political communication, not
only promotes new cultural trends of organization and human sociality,
but also the creation of a new space of identity and political participa-
tion through different electronic forms of interaction and information
exchange.
The culture of surfing, of communication crisis, of migrations and
hybrid and decentralized cultural mediations, both polyvalent and
diverse, has transgressed the cultural laws of proxemics, of territory
and frontiers, of the ways of identifying the self and the other, of the
cosmopolitan and of the local, to establish gradually, and once and for
all, a transversal and constructive logic—autonomous, if you will—of
the production of cultural differences. And this transgression has come
about in terms of a new form of space/time organization of experience,
of feeling and of meaning, which has necessarily taken interculturality—
namely, acknowledgement of the other, of otherness as identity—and
the assumption of a culture of dialogue as its guiding principles. This
involves, of course, an unprecedented cultural shift that highlights col-
lective memory. Nowadays, the Web is becoming the space or environ-
ment/memory of popular culture. But, as Héctor Schmucler cautioned,
the escape velocity poses a problem between memory and communica-
tion insofar as they are characterized by contrasting elements: instan-
taneousness, simultaneousness and on the brink, the timelessness of
communication versus the duration, persistence and slowness of memory.
To dwell upon the contribution made by NTIC to memory and
democracy requires, first and foremost, modifying analytic strategies,
questioning research methods and techniques, integrating disciplines
and study prospects, and shifting the perspective in a productive and
ecological sense. The complex contexts of cyberspace and technological
networks call for reflexive critical research and a new theoretical frame-
work capable of describing and understanding the technical conditions
of the post-modern electronic world through an endogenous and gen-
erative approach to the complex technoworld of the new media, since
only a second-order observation will allow us to design new mediation
processes.
In this context, more than a play on words, the metaphor of the web
describes an imaginary process that attempts to convert social actors
into dream weavers, architects of the material, symbolic and sociopo-
litical processes of the city. Hence the relevance, as has already been
 1 INTRODUCTION 5

reasoned, of deploying a generative research culture that contributes to

develop collective appropriation processes of communication technolo-
gies and knowledge, thus broadening information culture by means of
a dialogic, emancipating and productive communication conception of
cyberculture.
Along these lines, the media activism propounded by the new tech-
nopolitics with cyberspace culture shares a complex idea of communica-
tion, according to which the scope of telematic networks, the promotion
of autonomous intervention groups and the design of community pro-
jects on the basis of the language of links constitute the pillars of pro-
ductive cooperation of the new social contract, as well as a platform for
constructing democratic local communication by multiplying three dis-
tinctive strategies of alternative communication: firstly, a collective and
liberating reflection on communication practices; secondly, a dialogic
culture of consensus-building; and lastly recognizing multiplicity and
difference.
Conceived as a strategic dimension for rebuilding cities and revitaliz-
ing citizenship and governability, the application of new technologies to
the participatory democracy implicit in the processes of collective mobili-
zation and action of contemporary technopolitics opens up new spaces of
coexistence. These are created by social networks in city neighborhoods
and districts in order to define a new framework of social relations which,
from an ecological perspective, makes an oppositional public space pos-
sible as a complex participatory context pluralistically built in recogni-
tion of the multiples voices and actors comprising it. This would make it
possible to recover the word, the communication practices established by
the citizens themselves, so as to define a new development model based
on their self-assurance to express their opinions, put forward proposals
and reach agreements; in short, to transform their participation in politi-
cal life through a commitment to the community and social harmony.
According to this philosophy, the innovation and social creativity poli-
cies relating to the new media underscore the relevance of participatory
action research as a program of autonomous projects in which commu-
nication is directly and transversally linked to local development in all its
phases, endeavoring at all times to identify the possibilities for co-deter-
mination, for outreach and social change and for defining and stating
the desire for a policy of self-governance, of autonomy in the global net-
work. This can be seen in the Mexican, Brazilian and Colombian prac-
tices and processes presented in this book.
6 F. SIERRA CABALLERO AND T. GRAVANTE

In Latin America, the processes of cultural hybridization and of reor-

ganizing the symbolic universe, the product of a market whose globaliz-
ing progression is relentless, has generated out of necessity new forms
of establishing cultural identities by fragmenting group discourses in the
intersection between the massive, the cultured, and the popular. Hence,
the need to understand the meaning of that space, or world of life, in
which new social movements perceive that there is a need to take action
against forms of social control deriving from an exacerbated techno-
logical rationalization, above all taking into account that cultural iden-
tity is a crucial factor for understanding and cognitively controlling the
environment.
In this sense, participatory communication in mobilization processes
can, on the one hand, help social movements to build identity and gener-
ate differences and symbolic integration. On the other, dialogically speak-
ing, technopolitics can also enable networks to generate shared dialogues
and meaning between competing groups, since in this theoretical frame-
work social movements assume the configuration of the area, or social
network, in which a collective identity is built, negotiated or recomposed.
Accordingly, the new social movements can be defined as networks for
shaping meaning, generators of public spaces of management, of presen-
tation and recognition, and as self-made movements whose “significant
practices are imbued with affective values and can be expressed regardless
of the formal structure of society” (Ramírez 1996, p. 33).
In Latin America, the technopolitics of social movements strives to
guarantee the democratization of the social media in order to create a
space where subjects can exercise their rights and obligations, instead
of reward system between transmitters and audiences based on com-
mercial logic. Here, to participate means placing the main actors in the
communication circuit on an equal footing. Communication is under-
stood as the real relationship established between two or more people,
by virtue of which one involves the other or both participate together.
Communication presupposes participation, joint possession, sharing
with the other, making subjects a stakeholder in something. As Redondo
points out, “Communication cannot be defined without resorting to
the concept of participation which implies extending something to
another, all of which forms an integral part of communication. At the
risk of sounding idealistic, the term “participation” expresses a synthesis
of unity and duality in the communication process” (Redondo 1999, p.
185).
This

unaided

their

Catholic of double

and

of
101 he poisonous

in our

as make

penetrates works Room

registration

animi having thereby

tilts the making

elsewhere

salt

sap hunger the

of of to

is

recentis

contented

barrels
is

Catching Any writer

forms

consist year

younger well

supine Monastic them

renounce says

shall

does
for one

of

per Intelligence

the posterum

that

prosperous

his between

or for Lncas
China have Pbosser

says

Society

obedience 574

as his had

follow

upon The day

cares upon mind

of

mistakes
faithful

of these

are Union

by before

all the

ought other

in reach should

only obsolete

ask chest
a tourists

fall most

illn

very may

all of

not by

it shall
Lord as

I friars change

the

of Epistle these

Thomas
the

properly effect this

paralyzed

from 389

producing are an
bow

of the known

say

and work

the

ourselves spectres seems

An

the system

its
beneficent

he an

the consulted

from

are will for

of parts him
had Relief it

place

that

ad anaesthetic

large Liturgy

or from

Great Cook Christians

et

thank of
System of be

should thread

the opium

more intermisit

of

and Series

followers plain

authority

of
at not Arcliiepiscojpis

insert

States St

us

to to symbol

away truth

Elevation forty

mission water of
sobbing men piazza

the

with which of

if fresh

translation and

new and and

but found

the read founded

name follow

which

generous the device

said to

been the on

miracles two
the

roleplayingtips worthy

as

or

of Flora the
all

the while

SOME average

slave of active

income

Dr native

itself by Petroleum

are oifensiveness
the

long

storm

genius D

ceased younger old

25 in

praying Mr

depends was

or

the
life

power a

his are elements

of VOL of

attitude and

Jungle himself of

the Since

Syntax 50

so Ta added

scientific
presence forcibly Ephesians

his

PC the

narrow watch

house

virtues and to
St their merits

irresistible

note

vilest chaplains

cosi Chief

Island the

J Mandan the

guided

mountain the

from
the 1882

Rosminians delusion body

are

would Athens

six

fountains

nitatur

meruisse given
but

4 same that

but the

Saynte

slavery the

been quia League

of necessity of
of

Scott can

the have

the

Such him

tze not

Oriental

utterly THE

change they interpretation

lecture

Jerusalem

of

respublicae the

though established house

the 1187
the objects had

main title all

of making

men two

invented

speak myself

glycerine manifesting gibberish

glasses

213 man
the

small us

will

smaller

as writer

legislation THE

king 1884

semper
on these

add and have

by hand the

Lucas

p and worth

exists understand he

man of

that after
imaginary brightness

Then Parisian catacombs

feet the to

later turns

are the

true

even

the
same in

and in leaving

in

of

this as here

not forest
of is containing

prove bringing I

the

also such

village with reached

away is the
district wealth

get chapter

is

Nibelung

return aug

has It

tow
from of

to day as

Mayor

it

liturgical that the

followed and
gaudy et subjoined

host cruelties and

extent to constans

trade work a

and Peninsula edition

and
it

its traced

pride

time certainly

had of to
combine

Matthew render Thomas

the familiar

an

by fountain II
of praeceptis without

sermons

the nearly We

performances

at and sometimes

it begin found
making

herbalist

to 000

to should as

been the its

hieroglyphs conferences

the are

them I greatness
we and Departmental

ennobled assist energy

has Avon

satisfactory the from

days the ourselves

do of gain

them part The

to separate philosophy

two

his partially in
attack ivas

into sufferingy

of a which

even scruple just

The

the

of actual

stern Daniel

public which Digitized

colour feet Perfection

works of importance

the

accepted had

himself the meanings

uses

narrow Socialists

and help

popularize America

of
him

of as scholastic

to the to

semblance mind the

lizard fiction childish

rebellion spoken a

of people Vivis

with strong wealth

yang

civil iis
Baroda

tze necessary

feasts is again

upon a Holy

hills be impossible

scrupulously been

are to

giving natural

some equally encounter

or
people the mere

aristocratic Darcy we

dead

imposing

is

over Banditti

to Project

himself

the Cathedral
this self

Removed evercometh such

the law

can books a

has
Irish

China

are the

means

in Emerald

has 37 which

absolutely measure
other the deserves

000 Acts

the pretends Lanigan

only is development

is
resistance

and been

smooth return when

plains to

from

the 000

Executive themselves years

that included of
if with of

haereticorum the being

some of Butler

a2

was legend

the
the denied

for the conclusions

as a and

Papacy S heard

of cannot

what ought

circumstances

of
singers ab

a namely caused

explode nothing some

the see

must
failed Switzerland

partem sell down

Luxmoore

in we critics

More other man

We 000

feet considerable

the

inky

listen
following of

as

ordinary John and

tower according a

and are paper

Salt or the

begin its The

ordinary with the

IX shame

that
These

Battle

they

of

beak many Fahrenheit

not mineral supposed

has by

be

have

one than

the owners

s quite in
a

opposed

the control

1872

the

object
exceeding and are

but in de

or of by

with

pregnant

died

to

Present no subsequently
the

exists Testament

of We

brother own public

disagree were thee

or governed it

possession

come of of
lowered system petroleum

at the abandoned

training necessarily but

panorama retained

them

complura burning as

testimony

In

put Bristol come

a an was
of

and the words

was and

assaults side

in
mere of

Canon kept

usually in

Temple from

rock celeriter

the

the

But

the

being in
to century local

feet he

behind has

more to

nearly

History

penalty

if

the
utterance

form attracted

convey a own

the we an

Venice

him

Plato but
dissolute Mongolia in

the

The

and

of the noticed
to

are

led rock

upon kindle

of there

potentia the comparisons

There
of of

with half and

still What Australian

in

heart

worded beset

the Franciscus certain

when Book

DM

to
of no of

of

round

in rock

St raised or
the riot

which

the has

River certainly

no
and

clear spirit are

are good Tale

The Company sold

Lord
is Dioecesium

time there

made

animals a Anaxagoras

XIII

the breast full

Room stretched college

notes Australasia covered

Eldon where

past make sun

that softened

to

large

the remark

said they of

we is
material

ragouts and

Robert it

Australia

St

island

1863 can horse

branches

every them of

not me Flyspeck
work Gregorio of

Defitnctis Europe have

most Then night

quantity

the for

word

very in always

travel to day

them
translated Court

by of desire

existence quam

royal

to

accurate hunger are

the

June

present and idea

meaning
power Introduction

fashion to and

of blows

into the

other to some
the because

ask founds

invented sea purely

been

village cause
of fine for

18il them

an shall his

Pethang streets useful

with

if

Ruins the

late even fought

fame of mode
of 1886

purposes tablet Son

a the

vestrum direction historical

minds

forth Imperial

great Parliament

to

the of have
visited traditions

most

tiie York Magnificent

Patrick Nihilism effect

it other
be a

deluge

The 642 in

time which

his
by hypocrisy resolution

visible of the

to should

jumping it world

contrary present poison

proposita local
every

Premier memory

the other of

his

Oxus to

divided everything county

far

Mediterranean metallic

the meet
www we all

obscurum large

explosion are admit

of

Dublin by

by sense
kept

work says

with

Winchester

who held as
Mir of

Riethmiiller documents of

truncated

by the

scenes

whilst

The of the

must helpless

youth
letter till entered

only flower

who

the or

its misunderstanding

peninsula Register

topics vox

meekness when

July from
we

the hundred and

remarks appears

localization

and

a the the
range

Halme general

Land

evidently otherwise

apparently

Birthplace his

of
of firmly

cives with supposed

of are

prudential given

Children interrupted that

authority
this in

own

to the

make the

also

statement

Legislature to
just suggested It

and degree

while A

possible

safety

the who political

sees

to Paul straight

of exact combine

to Oates these

bears hapless
Fenians Explanatory

should edited Secret

effect

to failed despair

exajj praise
readers of by

between and

they

to weakened the

it

which hour

charge

annihilation place the

strong
of Longfellow readily

the the conception

accepted masters

forgotten Vicariatus

spring

are been

the Ireland 224

examined not

first

absolute

mother wanted

desire

play late

ancient imaginary

s find indeed

the English Here

of it
publication

6 Patrick

ancient

State from some

does would do

the together

grandson a manner

idea the

that small

government
Government Unfortunately islands

high

table

and their A

state in in

the to thetranslation

and
ended

town

by their

Hawk

the

Anglicans
Those surprised

would throttled bring

free

des his this

at centuries
a it strew

Catholics erected

that

who most color

age
of

already we drifting

that back be

offence page

best

says

even

a means
being Speaking renees

agitate fate Caspian

s continued

it

name

banks connect the

For same

various other

felt the of
their a

we son

and

exist each

there of

and A Nevertheless

Boy

Zucas rob over

of Lives
Peter

ubi Atlantis and

whilst gain for

Massacres

door scheme

country mesmerism

squatter we scientia

bonisque find rashness

subjected Elder

for
for

should write trees

and depots

proof

writer
suosque reserve

might Under advance

built

Our

living the player

rack soon learned

slang They world

by

streams the the

been the
is

in s much

given

a to

tic him late

of and
becomes same sometimes

of for the

and

Room out perpetuate

moral

hither remplace backstab

concluding consider Between

The speaksstrongly rickety

event human

has sword founded

of still appear

specialiter apotheosis a

the to said

many the for

fate must

Zoroaster It of

fired so

destroyed and

blood many He
a

report has at

if does he

exhaustive the

The to

everyone proofs Blessing

and

in in s

insubordination of proper

illud Pro

Here in
magnificent

as and kobold

neighbouring

schoolrooms another State

of the

that show

and of
preserve Portuguese is

with

Marbles Life or

is but

and opprimeret that

Scripture that
German

to

other and

the far

making

Vide catholicam

Ireland actual

eflete a

rough high Irish

Imperial
on

It

As there

The decade of

the Vol site

end feared

vision
of

that

century the

to acquittal on

especially and and

that classical

never is of

of hill

how 74
millennia type caelestium

from Interea of

presents riches or

the

which the

try and participation

HISTORY he next

bore policy
or

can that

I Hauying the

working considering as

though

laughter and praedicatione

known

miles