change world w/o taking power
john holloway (1st edition 2002, this edition – 4th, 2019).. 286 pgs via hoopla
reading it while reading david graeber and stevphan shukaitis intro to constituent imagination
notes/quotes:
8
in this latest edition of change the world (4th) 3 things are clear: first, we urgently need to change the world radically; secondly, it cannot be done thru the state; and thirdly, changing it w/o takin state power is very difficult
11
there are millions and millions of people who share the same sentiment, who want to get rid of this stupid murderous, suicidal system but don’t know how to do it
need 1st/most: means to undo our hierarchical listening to self/others/nature as global detox/re\set.. so we can org around legit needs
imagine if we listened to the itch-in-8b-souls 1st thing everyday & used that data to connect us (tech as it could be.. ai as augmenting interconnectedness as nonjudgmental expo labeling)
[skimming a lot so far.. like didn’t read preface to 1-3 editions]
17
1 – the scream
in the beginning is the scream. we scream.. when we write or when we read, it is easy to forget that the beginning is not the word, but the scream.. faced w the mutilation of human lives by capitalism, a scream of sadness/horror/anger/refusal: no
scream, word, et al.. to me.. that’s all beginning of sea world.. which has been since forever
the starting point of theoretical reflection is opposition, negativity, struggle.. it is from rage that thought is born, not from the pose of reason, nor from the reasoned sitting back and reflecting on the mysteries of existence that is the conventional image of the thinker.. we start from negation from dissonance..
ugh.. to me.. this is whalespeak.. ie: is thought/reflection even relevant to living a legit free life?.. i don’t know.. thinking not so much..
20
millions of children live on the streets of the world.. in some cities, street children are systematically murdered as the only way of enforcing respect for private property
(page numbers keep changing.. so ones i give will just be approx)
21
what would a true world look like? we may have a vague idea: it would be world of justice, a world in which people could relate to each other as people and not as things, a world in which people would shaper their own lives..
to me.. justice, shaping lives.. irrelevant s (to legit free people)
23 of 368
but don’t need a pic of what a true world would be like in order to feel there is something radically wrong w world that exists.. doesn’t necessarily mean we have a pic of a utopia to put in its place.. that is our starting point: rejection of a world we feel to be wrong
true.. but focusing on what is wrong is just cancerous distraction ness.. keeping us in broken feedback loop mode.. keeping us in sea world.. hari rat park law et al
and so they urge us (and we feel the need) to study society, and to study social and political theory.. and a strange thing happens.. the more we study society, the more our negativity is dissipated or sidelined as being irrelevant.. there is no room for the scream in academic discourse.. more than that: academic study provides us w a language and a way of thinking that makes it very difficult for us to express our scream..
language as control/enclosure et al
24
the scream is systematically dq’d by dissolving it into its context.. it is because of infantile experiences that they scream.. because of their modernist conception of the subject.. because of their unhealthy diet.. all of these explanation backed up by statistically supported research the scream is not entirely denied, but is robbed of all validity.. by being torn from ‘us’ and projected on to a ‘they’ the scream is excluded from the scientific method.. when we become social scientists, we learn that the way to understand is to pursue objectivity, to put our own feelings on one side.. it is not so much what we learn as how we learn that seems to smother our scream.. it is a whole structure of thought that disarms us.. t
need to get back/to not yet scrambled ness
25 of 361
call us childish or adolescent if you like, but this is our starting point: we scream
33 of 361
2 – beyond the state?
what can we do to make the world a better, more human place? what can we do to put an end to all the misery and exploitation..
need 1st/most: means to undo our hierarchical listening to self/others/nature as global detox/re\set.. so we can org around legit needs
imagine if we listened to the itch-in-8b-souls 1st thing everyday & used that data to connect us (tech as it could be.. ai as augmenting interconnectedness as nonjudgmental expo labeling)
change the world thru the state: this is the paradigm that has dominated rev thought for more than a century
34 of 366
the intensity of the disagreements (as to rev or reform) concealed a basic point of agreement: both approaches focus on the state as the vantage point from which society can be changes.. both aim at the winning of state power
37 of 366
an important aspect of this misunderstanding is the extent to which rev (and even more so reform ist) movements have tended to assume that ‘society’ can be understood as a national (state bound) society..
38 of 366
the focusing of rev on the winning of state power thus involves the abstraction of the state from the social relations of which it is part..
40 of 366
self determination and state sovereignty become confused, when in fact the very existence of the state as a form of social relations is the very antithesis of self determination..
the struggle has an aim: to conquer political power.. the struggle is a means to achieve that aim.. those elements of struggle which do not contribute to the achievement of that aim are either given a secondary importance or must be suppressed altogether: a hierarchy of struggles is established.. the instrumentalisation/hierarchisation is at the same time an impoverishment of struggle.. *so many struggles.. ways of fighting.. simply remain unseen when the world is seen thru the prism of the conquest of power.. we learn to suppress them, and thsu to suppress ourselves.. at the top of the hierarchy we learn to place that part of our activity that contributes to ‘building the rev’ at the bottom come frivolous personal things like affective relations, sensuality, playing, laughing, loving.. class struggle becomes puritanical: frivolity must be suppressed because it does not contribute to the goal.. the hierarchisation of struggle is a hierarchisation of our lives and thus a hierarchisation of ourselves..
*actually.. they too (struggles/fighting ness).. cancerous distractions
41 of 366
the fixing of a hierarchy of struggles is usually expressed in the form of the party progamme..
inherent in the idea that the goal of the movement is to conquer political power.. the struggle is lost from the beginning.. once the logic of power becomes the logic of the rev process.. once negative of refusal is converted into the positive of power building.. and usually those involved do not see it: the initiates in power do not even see how far they have been drawn in to the reasoning and habits of power.. they do not see that if we revolt against capitalism, it is not because we want a diff system of power, it is because we want a society in which power relations are dissolved.. you cannot build a society of non power relations by conquering power.. once the logic of power is adopted, the struggle against power is already lost.. t
the idea of changing society thru the conquest of power thus ends up achieving the opposite of what it sets out to achieve.. the attempt to conquer power involves the extension of the field of power relations into the struggle against power.. what starts as a scream of protest against power.. against dehumanisation/treatment of humans as a means rather than ends, becomes converted ito its opposite.. into the assumption of the logic, habits and discourse of power into the very heart of the struggle against power.. for what is at issue in the rev transformation of the world is not whose power but the very existence of power.. not who exercises power, but how to create a world based on the mutual recognition..t of human dignity , on the foundation of social relations which are not power relations..
42 of 366
the realism is the realism of power and can do no more than reproduce power.. the realism of anti power.. or better.. the anti realism of anti power.. must be quite diff if we are to change the world.. and change the word we must..t
need to try a legit nother way.. sans any form of m\a\p
42 of 366
3 – beyond power?
the world cannot be changed thru the state
the great problem w trying to retreat into a life of private dignity and saying ‘let’s make the best of what we’ve got’ is that the world does not stand still
43 of 353
this then is the revolutionary challenge at the beginning of the 21st cent: to change the world w/o taking power.. formulated most clearly by the zapatista uprising
45 of 353
reality and power are so mutually encrusted that even to raise the question of dissolving power is to step off the edge of reality.. to ask for a theory of anti power is to try to see the invisible, to hear the inaudible.. to try to theorise antipower is to wander in a largely unexplored world..t
yeah.. all that.. everyday.. the little prince – see with your heart.. quiet enough ness.. vagus wandering law .. et al
how can the world be changed w/o taking power? the answer is obvious: we do not know..
graeber can’t know law et al
let us forget our ‘*fear of ridicule’ and ask then: **how can we even begin to think of changing the world w/o taking power?..t
*olivier wrong about you law et al..
**
need 1st/most: means to undo our hierarchical listening to self/others/nature as global detox/re\set.. so we can org around legit needs
imagine if we listened to the itch-in-8b-souls 1st thing everyday & used that data to connect us (tech as it could be.. ai as augmenting interconnectedness as nonjudgmental expo labeling)
48 of 366
to focus on doing is quite simply to see the world as struggle
yeah.. cancerous distraction
49 of 366
it might be argued w some force, that changing society should be thought of not in terms of doing but in terms of not doing, laziness, refusal to work, enjoyment.. lafargue.. the right to be lazy.. laziness in capitalist society, however, implies refusal to do, an active assertion of an *alt practice.. laziness and pursuit of pleasure.. both of which are very much negative practices in a society based on their negations..
norton productivity law et al.. maté laziness law.. carson laziness law.. right to be lazy.. laziness.. et al
*not really alt if refusal et al.. because entwined in same song.. need to let go.. of any form of m\a\p
54 of 376
to begin to think about power and changing the world w/o taking power.. we need to start from doing.. doing implies *being able to do.. the scream is of no significance w/o doing, and doing is inconceivable unless we are able to do..
*that’s a form of m\a\p.. a form of power.. oi
55 of 376
power in the first place is simply that: can ness.. capacity to do.. ability to do things.. doing implies power
yeah.. to me.. that’s not.. ‘w/o taking power’ (even w your ‘it is when social flow of doing is fractures that power to is transformed into its opposite, power over’..).. i don’t think legit free people would think about.. be about.. any of this.. oi
58 of 376
capital is based on the freezing of the past doing of people into property..
to me.. that goes for any form of m\a\p.. so.. like insisting on doing ness.. no matter how pure/natural
65 of 376
the struggle of the scream is the struggle to liberate power-to from power-over..
cancerous distraction.. they are of same song
67 of 376
this book is an exploration of the absurd and shadowy world of anti power.. in a world in which power is so completely taken for granted that nothing else is visible..
to me.. anti power is still power.. even moreso.. because you’re thinking it’s not
in what i’m reading here as well.. no? if you’re refusing it.. if you’re anti ing it.. you are assuming it.. focusing time/energy on it.. need to let go
73 of 376
4 – fetishism: the tragic dilemma
fetishism is the term marx uses to describe the rupture of doing.. .. core of marx’s discussion of power and central to any discussion of changing the world.. it is the centrepiece of the argument of this book..
fetishism is a category that does not fit easily into normal academic discourse.. partially for that reason, it has been relatively neglected by those who would force marxism into the moulds of the diff academic disciplines.. it is almost completely ignored by those who regard themselves as marxist economists.. also by marxist sociologist and political scientists.. relegated and classified in this way.. the concept loses its explosive force.. the force of the concept lies in that it refers to an unsustainable horror: the self negation of doing
deeper horror – missing pieces
70 of 355
the young marx discusses the self negation of doing not in terms of fetishism but in terms of ‘alienation/estrangement’..
only thing that matters (that truly alienates et al): missing pieces
77 of 338
but for us who scream, they (money/commodity/capital.. as modes of existence.. forms in which social relations currently exist.. frozen/rigidified) are neither self evident nor eternal
crazywise (doc) et al
fetishism as pointing to the dehumanisation of people.. and the difficulty/impossibility of revolution..t
93 of 338
classification, the formation of collective id’s on the basis of defn .. is of course.. not just of immediately political relevance.. it is fundamental to the sci procedure as it is conceived in capitalist society..the attempt to conceptualise the world on the basis of static and non contradictory categories.. rather than on basis of movement and contradiction.. thru classification.. conceptual hierarchies are formed.. ordered.. makes possible the quantification and mathematisation of the object of study.. t
graeber violence/quantification law et al
96 of 338
freedom in this context becomes simply knowledge of and subordination to the laws, the acceptance of necessity.. t
the argument could go on and on.. the point is that at the basis of an immensely complex social structure lies a simple principle.. id.. the principle of id is so basic to capitalist social org that to underline its importance seems absolutely meaningless.. simply because it seems so obvious..
97 of 338
id is the antithesis of mutual recognition of community, friendship and love..
98 of 338
the reality that confronts us reaches into us.. what we scream against is not just out there.. it is also inside us.. it seems to invade all of us.. to become us.. that is what makes our scream so anguished, so desperate.. that too is what makes our scream seem so hopeless.. t
wilde not-us law and why we need global detox if want legit change..
huge to black science of people/whales law et al
101 of 338
the violence of id, then, is by now means merely conceptual.. the sci method of identitarian thought is the exercise of power-over.. power is exercised over people thru their effective id..t thus.. capitalist production is based on id: this is mine.. law too is based on id
identity ness.. marsh label law ness.. naming the colour ness
need: daily curiosity as our only label(s)
id, defn, classification is a physical as well as a mental process.. jews id’d, classified, numbered in concentration camps were objects of more than a mental exercise.. id, defn, classification is the basis of the physical, spatial and temporal org of armies, hospitals, schools and other institutions.. the political econ of detail. B power is based on the same process of id and classification.. as is whole operation of the state.. a state is inconceivable w/o the defn of citizens and the simultaneous exclusion fo non citizens.. t
siddiqi border law et al
102 of 338
power cannot be taken, for simple reason that power is not possessed by any particular person/institution.. *power lies rather in the fragmentation of social relations..t **this is a material frag which has its core in the constantly repeated separation of the done from the doing.. which involves the real mediation of social relations thru things.. the real transformation of relations between people into relations between things..
*yeah that.. any form of m\a\p as perpetuating our missing pieces state .. as keeping us from org-ing around legit needs et al
**don’t think it has to do with done/doing ness.. but think i see line of thinking.. as process/living/being vs label/defn et al?
the state then is not the locus of power it appears to be.. it is just one element in the shattering of social relations.. .. power as the fragmenting of social relations..
to me.. so too would be anti power..
103 of 338
we are left w a dilemma.. the power of capital is all penetrating.. it shapes the way in which we perceive the world.. there seems to be no way out.. t
104 – 338
how can we possibly change a society in which people are so dehumanised?.. this is the dilemma of the urgent impossibility of revolution.. t
need 1st/most: means to undo our hierarchical listening to self/others/nature as global detox/re\set.. so we can org around legit needs
huge.. and we’re missing it
imagine if we listened to the itch-in-8b-souls 1st thing everyday & used that data to connect us (tech as it could be.. ai as augmenting interconnectedness as nonjudgmental expo labeling)
1\ undisturbed ecosystem (common\ing) can happen
2\ if we create a way to ground the chaos of 8b legit free people
there are 3 possible ways out of the dilemma:
1\ give up hope.. make whatever small changes may be possible.. not an option..
part\ial ness is killing us.. for (blank)’s sake
105 of 338
2\ forget the subtleties and focus elusively on the binary nature between proletariat and capitalist class.. problems associate with
106 of 338
3\ accept there can be no certainty of a happy ending.. but nevertheless look for hope in nature of capitalist power itself.. ubiquitous power implies ubiquitous resistance.. try to understand and participate in the force of all that which exists in antagonism.. in the form of being denied
this is both 1&2.. part\ial ness and cancerous distractions.. oi
need to try a legit nother way
106 of 338
5 – fetishism and fetishisation
128 of 316
there is a world of diff between saying fetishism is not absolute but rather a continuous struggle between fetishisation and anti fetishisation and saying fetishism leaves certain areas of people uneftishised.. we are not unfetishised.. we are part of an antagonistic movement against fetishisation.. the struggle against fetishisation implies a struggle to overcome our fragmentations.. a struggle to find adequate forms of articulating our we ness.. to find ways of uniting in mutual respect our distinct dignities..
eed 1st/most: means to undo our hierarchical listening to self/others/nature as global detox/re\set.. so we can org around legit needs
imagine if we listened to the itch-in-8b-souls 1st thing everyday & used that data to connect us (tech as it could be.. ai as augmenting interconnectedness as nonjudgmental expo labeling)
6 – anti fetishism and criticism
theory is simply part of the daily struggle to live w dignity. dignity means the struggle to emancipate doing and liberate that which exists in the form of being denied.. theoretically, this means fighting thru criticism for the recovery of doing.. this is what marx means by science
oi.. dignity et al as cancerous distraction
criticism is an assault on id..
nah.. it perpetuates id ness et al.. oi
we attack the world w all the stubborn curiosity of a 3 yr old.. w the *diff perhaps that our ‘why’s are informed by rage.. our why asks for a reason.. our why holds that which exists up to the judgement of reason..
*so .. not legit curiosity.. nothing like curiosity of a 3 yr old.. oi
136 of 316
criticism, understood as an analystical and genetic movement is the movement of defetishisation, the theoretical voice of the scream.. criticism is both destructive and regenerative.. .. the destruction of being is at the same time the recuperation of doing.. the restoration of human power-to
oi.. just cancerous distractions
138 of 316
to criticise is to recognize that we are a divided self.. to criticise society is to criticise our own complicity in the reproduction of that society.. that realisation *does not weaken our scream in any way.. on the contrary, it intensifies it, makes it more urgent
*yeah.. because criticism/scream..e tall.. all cancerous distractions
139 of 316
7 – the tradition of scientific marxism
174 of 338
8 – the critical revolutionary subject
190 of 338
9 – the material reality of anti power
213 of 338
to understand the force of anti power we must go beyond he figure of the militant.. the scream w which we started the book is not the scream of the militant, but the scream of all the oppressed.. it is necessary to go beyond the force of overt militancy to ask about the force of all who refuse to subordinate themselves, the force of all who refuse to become capitalist machines.. *it is only when grounded in the ubiquity of resistance that revolution becomes a possibility
*oi
213 of 338
10 – the material reality of anti power and the crisis of capital
the 3rd point in understanding the reality of anti power is that capital depends absolutely upon labour for its existence.. upon the transformation of human doing into value producing labor
204 of 320
agains this ‘us against them’ of radical theory, marx cries out: ‘but there is no ‘them’ there is only us.. we are the only reality, the only creative force.. there is nothing but us.. nothing but our negativity’
233 of 320
the theory of crisis is not just a theory of fear but also a theory of hope.. ‘enough.. of your stupid power games.. exploitation.. ‘
233 of 320
11 – revolution?
if the crisis expresses the extreme dis articulation of social relations, then revolution must be understood in the first place as the intensification of crisis
245 of 320
how then do we change the world w/o taking power? at end/beginning of book.. we do not know.. more desperately urgent than ever.. but we do not know any more what revolution means.. this is a book that does not have an ending.. does not have a happy ending..
246 of 320
epilogue: moving against and beyond relvections on a discussion
fine.. but what on earth do we do
256 of 320
the notion of self emancipation then implies that we start from a ubiquitous rebelliousness, a moving against/beyond existing limits.. the aim of revolutionary theory and practice is to distill or articulate this rebelliousness..
cancerous distractions
277 of 320
is a socially self determining society, a communist society really possible? we do not know.. but it does not matter.. the first problem of theory is to open our eyes to see the invisible..
need 1st/most: means to undo our hierarchical listening to self/others/nature as global detox/re\set.. so we can org around legit needs
quiet enough to see ness
imagine if we listened to the itch-in-8b-souls 1st thing everyday & used that data to connect us (tech as it could be.. ai as augmenting interconnectedness as nonjudgmental expo labeling)
278 of 320
communism is a utopian star.. it is not an unreachable goal that inspires us.. it is an urgent necessity.. the drive to social self determination is urgent.. a frenetic search for cracks in the surface of domination.. perhaps above all communism is a wave after wave of unanswered questions.. a world to be created, a world w commas, but no full stop
_________
_________
________
________
________
_________
_________
be you. 