Burn Baby Burn

Oakland in Flames

Platonist Voluntarism?

‘it has often been observed that non-materialist currents – whether they be those of Platonism or of Maoism – are often more conducive to activism (when not indeed to outright voluntarism) than the various official materialisms have historically been.’
Fredric Jameson, ‘Marx’s Purloined Letter’ in Michael Sprinker (ed.) Ghostly Demarcations (London and New York: Verso, 1999 / 2008), p.38

I’m deeply unclear about what Fredric Jameson means here. Certainly we can all recognise the voluntarism in Maoism, most notoriously embodied in the ideological function of ‘Mao Tse-Tung Thought”, but Platonism? Of course we could mention the fusion of Maoism and Platonism contained in Lardreu and Jambet’s L’Ange (1974), although that work marked the beginning of a retreat from GP voluntarism at the same time as incarnating a hopeless voluntarism itself – although as the people qua angel did not need the militant then quite what action could be taken remains unclear. Other than that, we might consider the accusations of Platonism directed at Althusser (for example by Sebastiano Timpanaro) and then how high Althusserianism all too rapidly tipped over into voluntarism in Althusser’s auto-critique. Still, if there are any Platonist voluntarists out there, how’s that working out for you?

Agambenian Anarchism

Excellent report on the 'Tarnac 9' from Alberto. I'd like to comment more on this attempt to articulate an Agambenian anarchism, not least in terms of the attempt to give some more substance to the concept of indistinction. Writing on Badiou it struck me on the amount of common ground between his concept of indiscernability and the work of Ranciere, Agamben, or even Negri. All some to pose resistance to power as 'grounded' in some uncapturable ontological (or in Badiou's case exceptional to ontology) indiscernibility that cannot be 'seen' by power, and which I guess then 'surges forth' in certain forms or at certain moments. I'm a little concerned at how this might function as an alibi, in supposing an always resistant moment that comes to the rescue. I have never really been convinced by Deleuze's contention (in relation to Foucault) that 'resistance comes first'. I'd like to believe that, but I'm not sure it's true - either practically or ontologically / metaphysically. Also, as Peter Hallward has already pointed out, this topoi of 'invisibility' seems to risk a kind of inactivity, or ignoring the necessary visibility to actually change power relations.

One of the Gang of Four

Gentlemen and scholar Graham Harman has a new blog, which I suggest you consult. I have disagreements with Graham's perspective, but this is all the more reason to read him as it is no doubt a sign he is correct. One thing I certainly value is his sincerity (for me a cardinal virtue). I can also endorse this point by Graham:

"It’s interesting to note that Franz Kafka, who made perhaps the fewest technical experiments with language of any great 20th century writer, may turn out to be the most important of them all. In fact, he has my vote already."
Simplicity, it seems to me, is the most difficult of achievements.

Slogans to be Spread By Every Means

Poetry on the Barricades

Let's Be Realists We Seek the Impossible

Philosophy in the Streets

Courtesy of Moses Boudourides

Phantom India

Thought for the Day

14. Men are not only prone to forget benefits and injuries; they even hate those who have obliged them,and cease to hate those who have injured them. The necessity of revenging an injury or of recompensing a benefit seems a slavery to which they are unwilling to submit.

La Rochefoucauld, Maxims