Diseñamos formas de ser saber y hacer ciudadanía con herramientas como Grafoscopio y el Data Week.

differentiated experiences, and it should guide our understanding of digital citizens.

Esto me recuerda la objeción hecha en el seminario de saberes otros. ¿Es la ciudadanía un concepto que sólo ocurre dentro de tradiciones Anglo Europeas? Particularmente si es el estado nación el que condiciona la noción de ciudadano (una forma regulada de habitar un territorio), qué otros territorios se configuran desde los saberes otros? Cuál es el territorio indígena, cuál el territorio hacker?, por ejemplo

Conceiving the enactment of rights as dissensus is more powerful than understanding dissent as civil disobedience. For all its illustrative history, civil disobedience still evokes a reactionary politics, whereas dissensus is creative and affirmative. Although significant as a specific act, civil disobedience is rather too narrow to understand political acts in general. Staging dissensus brings into play the imaginary, performative, and legality of rights all at once and constitutes subjects as citizen subjects of power. Julian Assange, Edward Snowden, Anonymous, Aaron Swartz, and Open Rights are not only definite individuals or collectives of civil disobedience but stand for a political subjectivity enacting rights as the staging of dissensus. This is what we gather from their acts. When they enact rights that they do not have and the rights that they should have, they bring into being political subjects who cannot be known in advance. Their acts are contestations over who is counted as political and what counts as politics. To put it slightly differently, the performative and imaginary force of rights lies in the double movement between their inscription and enactment.

Acá estaría el derecho a scrappear como una forma de reapropiación de los bienes comunes y de repolitización de lo publico.

[...] ‘Western concepts and political principles such as the rights of [hu]man[s] and the citizen, however progressive a role they played in history, may not provide an adequate basis of critique in our current, increasingly global condition.’[20] Poster says this is so, among other things, because Western concepts arise out of imperial and colonial histories and because situated differences are as important as universal principles.[21] This contradiction of the figure of the citizen can be expressed in another paradoxical phrase: universalism as particularism.

[...] Rather, critical citizenship studies often begins with the citizen as a historical and geographic figure—a figure that emerged in particular historical and geographical configurations and a dynamic, changing, and above all contested figure of politics that comes into being by performing politics.[7]