Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 09:17:30 +0000 From: "steve.devos-AT-krokodile.co.uk" <steve.devos-AT-krokodile.co.uk> Subject: Re: Raoul Vaneigem, Refusals and Passions and psychogeography eric/all Two thoughts... why dread the return of meta-narratives ? Aren't you being nostalgic for a version of the post-modern which the left post-modernists Negri and Hardt (for example) have undercut claiming the post-modern as caused by economic changes. Not surprising that the postmodern Fukayama dislikes their position so much... The question which is always unaddressed when meta-narratives are raised is how we can break the false-universals of capital, the unfragile reactionary narratives of the counter-reformation, neo-liberalism, neo-conservatism and so on, without the use of the universalism of egalitarism. The suggestion that the American multitude has accepted the false-consciousness of it's state of mind as a colonizer, as empowered and voted against exiting from the dialectical phenomenon of empowered/powerless. Caught up in this system the colonizing subject is in a condition of ontological ambivilance being both the supporter of colonization and terror and yet is 'both the organiser and the victim'... So of course the multitude in this sense voted Bush in - for there is no historical inevitableness in the model rather the multitude is ambivilant, and probably this results from the attempt to become or maintain a post-marxist communist position. Which is why I think the three listed below are deeply necessary. As the lack this causes in the theorisation of the multitude makes it difficult to address the relationship of the human subjects within the society of the spectacle, especially given the way in which these days the aspect of the spectacle which is triumphant is founded on fear itself. I realize i haven't directly addressed the dialectic and anti-dialectic but wanted to collect our thoughts on this... steve Eric wrote: >Steve, > >More about this later. > >I think it can be summed up - Debord was Hegelian, Deleuze was not. > >Glen asked about a discussion of the multitude. Perhaps the multiple is >what voted Bush in for a second term. It might be fruitful to discuss >the multitude from the POV of Society of the Spectacle, Lyotard's >postmodern fable and Deleuze's society of control. > >This is worth discussion in my opinion in order to grapple with the >differences. > >eric > > > >
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005