post scarcity anarchism
anarch\ism et al
notes/quotes from 156 pages:
intro 1 (1970)
we of this century have finally opened the prospect of material abundance for all to enjoy.. a sufficiency in the means of life w/o the need for grinding.. day to day toil.. we have discover resources.. totally unknown a generation ago.. have devised machines that auto make machines.. have perfected devices that can execute onerous tasks more effectively than strongest human muscles.. can surpass industrial skills.. can calc w greater rapidity and precision that most gifted human minds.. *supported by the qualitatively new tech.. we can begin to provide **food, shelter, garments, and broad spectrum of luxuries w/o devouring the precious time of humanity and w/o dissipating its invaluable reservoir of creative energy in mindless labor.. in short.. ***for first time in history we stand on the threshold of a post scarcity society..t
the word ‘threshold’ should be emphasized here for in now way has the existing society realized the post scarcity potential of its tech
to view the word ‘post scarcity’ simply as meaning a large quantity of socially available goods would be as absurd as to regard a living organism simply as a large quantity of chemicals.. scarcity is more than a condition of scarce resources: the word, if it is to mean anything in human terms, must encompass the social relations and cultural apparatus that foster insecurity in the psyche.. t
ie: missing pieces.. huge
in organic societies this insecurity may be a function of the oppressive limits established by a precarious natural world.. in a hierarchical society it is a function fo the repressive limits established by an exploitative class structure.. by the same token the word ‘post scarcity’ means fundamentally more that a mere abundance of the means of life: it decidedly includes the kind of life these means support.. the human relationships and psyche of the individual in a post-scarcity society must fully reflect the freedom, security and self expression that this abundance makes possible .. post scarcity society, in short, is the fulfillment of the social/cultural potentialities latent in a tech of abundance.. t
need: tech as it could be
not surprisingly, subcultures begin to emerge which emphasize a natural diet as against the society’s synthetic diet.. extended fam against monogamous fam.. mutual aid against competition.. communism against property.. and finally.. anarchism as against hierarchy and the state.. in the very act of *refusing to live by bourgeois strictures, the first seeds of the utopian lifestyle are planted..
the schizoid attitude of the public toward tech.. fear and hope.. should not be dismissed.. expresses a basic intuitive truth.. the same tech that could liberate man in a society *org’d around the satisfaction of human needs must inevitably destroy him in a society org’d around ‘**production for the sake of production’.. t
key: org around legit needs
need: means to grok legit needs
**norton productivity law et al
if there is any truth to marx’s claim that hierarchical society was ‘historically necessary’ in order to ‘dominate’ nature.. we should never forget that the concept of ‘dominating’ nature emerged from the domination of man by man.. both men and nature have always been the common victims fo hierarchical society.. today.. all the institutions and values of hierarchical society have exhaust their ‘historically necessary’ functions.. no longer is there any social rational for property and classes, for monogamy and patriarchy, for hierarchy and authority, for B and the state.. these institutions and values, together w the city, the school and the instrumentalities of privilege, have reached their historical limits.. in contrast to marx, we would have little quarrel w bakunin’s view that the institutions and values of hierarchical society were always a ‘historical necessary evil’.. if bakunin’s verdict seems to enjoy a moral superiority over marx’s today, this is because the institutions have finally lost their moral authority..
oi.. so much whalespeak
this lib approach to praxis is carried still further in the anarchist conception fo ‘direct action’.. da is a basic revolutionary strategy, a mode of praxis intended to promote the individuation of the ‘masses’.. makes people aware can affect own destiny
endnotes – if ‘power to the people’ means nothing more than power to the ‘leaders’ of the people.. then the people remain an undifferentiated, manipulatable mass.. as powerless after the revolution as they were before..t.. in the last anal.. the people can never have power until they disappear as a ‘people’
any form of people telling other people what to do
finally, anarchist praxis also emphasizes spontaneity.. an inner process.. not external/manip’d.. like life itself, spontaneity can exist on many diff levels; it can be more or less permeated by knowledge, insight, and experience.. *in a free society, the **spontaneity of a 3 yr old would hardly be of the same order at that of a 30 yrs old.. although both would be free to develop ***w/o restraint.. the behavior of the 30 yr old would be based on a ****more defined and more informed self.. by the same token, spontaneity may be more informed in one affinity group than in another, more seasoned by knowledge and experiences..
*we have not yet seen one.. so we have no idea.. am thinking **not yet scrambled.. would be for all .. rather than the ***restraint of 30 yr olds and certain affinity groups et al have from being ****more defined/seasoned by info/knowledge et al
carried to its logical conclusions, the struggle for black libration is the struggle against imperialism; the struggle for a balanced environ is the struggle against commodity production; the struggle for women’s lib is the struggle for human freedom
intro 2 (1985)
today almost anyone’s book will make its way into the bibliographies of this professoriat if it is labelled marxist.. irrespective of the hodge podge of ideas the term is obliged to encompass.. use the word anarchist and the book is likely to be consigned to academic oblivion..
david on tenure not tenure and no anarchists in the academy et al
on marx dealing w nature as stingy.. dominating humanity in his grim realm of necessity et al
the new left has aged badly.. it lives in spiteful hatred of its won youth and in fear of a revival of student militancy, a revival that may jeopardize its academic positions and peer recognition
i need hardly say that in this academic ecumene, anarchists are literally too gauche to have a place in the academic firmament and their literature must be closed out of reading lists and course adoptions.. if there is a reasonable amount of peace in the academy today.. it is due not only to the careerism of students in an econ precarious world.. but the careerism of their ‘radical ‘ profs in an academically tight market.. the ‘professoriat’ has become an interest in tits own right and strategically tends to function more as a safety valve for student dissent than a stimulus.. a fact which more intelligent conservatives appreciate only too well
america’s vicious reaction to the shootings at kent state.. ‘the national guard should have shot more’ was the characteristic reply of angry parents to their shocked children.. the popularity of nixon, and finally the onset of econ crisis, placed a final seal on the closing of the 60s..
what stands out most sharply about his era was its innocence.. the cultural upwelling that tried to enchant everyday life foundered on its inability to understand the historic trends that produced it.. everyday life in effect concealed the need to grasp the *large social context in which the ‘new left’ and the **counterculture flourished.. what was painfully lacking was the ***maturing, steadying effect of consciousness and a theoretical coherence of ideas which would have untied the disparate threads of the movement.. as it came to be called, by giving it meaning and a sense of direction and ultimately the ****org structures that were needed to interlink it and make it socially effective..
*sea world so no need to grasp.. *nothing tried yet beyond those walls
rather.. needed to go deeper to that which needs no ***maturing
ie: ****org around legit needs
seized by fear.. loss of self assurance that came from violate innocence.. succumbed to econ shocks that raised serous doubts about its material viability.. 60s will not recur.. nor should it.. what it addressed was a sense of disempowerment, alienation, displacement and a need for existential meaning w/i a period, rich in the goodies that filled a vacuous life could not supply.. above all it sought an authentic and creative form fo community.. not that these problems are unique to the 60s.. they have existed in diff forms and degrees *since the end of ww2.. the distinctive nature of era .. it saw decay of traditional society side by side w an unprecedented period of material abundance..
*rather always.. we’ve been in sea world to date..
education, in my view is the top ‘priority’ for a radicalization of out time.. to step rapidly out into another historic void will simply produce same fear and sense of isolation that brought 60s to an end.. this ed must speak clearly the transclass phenom.. must deal w problems ethical not simply economic
endnotes – spontaneity and org .. 1980 essay by bookchin..
now have on 21 p pdf on kindle.. thanks anarchist library.. (ha.. few days later.. i think these are ch’s in this book)
politics in my view is the recovery of the greek notion of a local public sphere.. the municipality.. in contrast to the statecraft of the nationstate which we have so mistakenly designated as ‘politics’.. we have yet to give enough attention to the city as a terrain for *citizenship, self empowerment, mutual aid, that transcends the parochialism of tribal society and avoids the chauvinism of the nation state.. yet the radical tradition is filled w revolutionary movement structured around the neighborhood or the city itself.. ie: paris commune of 1871.. we have yet to reclaim the **democratic content of the great revolutions.. a distinctly ***libertarian core
market system has created a phenom that *never existed in precapitalist or traditional society as a whole: a fetishization of needs.. to break the grip of fet of needs.. is to recover the **freedom of choice, a project that is tied to the freedom of self to choose.. (from eco of freedom).. post scarcity is a precondition under c for exorcising the should of econ over society.. for creating a sufficiency in goods that ***permits the individual to choose what he/she really needs/wants.. by sheer abundance.. put simply.. under capitalism we must try to achieve a level of abundance that ****renders abundance meaningless and permits us to take possession of ourselves as free people.. capable of choosing the lifeways that suit us
*always existed.. ie: in sea world to date.. we have no idea what legit needs are
****yeah that.. ie: perhaps let’s try/code money (any form of measuring/accounting) as the planned obsolescence w/ubi as temp placebo.. where legit needs are met w/o money.. till people forget about measuring
by same token.. post scarcity anarchism does not fet tech.. tech and resources of abundance furnish c w means of assimilating large sections of society to the established system of hierarchy and authority.. they provide the system w the weaponry.. , detecting devices.. and propaganda media for the threat as well as the reality of massive repression
finally, the forms of freedom.. written 17 yrs ago, sill constitutes the basis for my views on libertarian municipalism (including the assembly as the authentic basis for democracy)
i don’t have to be reminded that social ecology can breed its opposite in utterly reactionary perversion of its truth.. or that it can be coopted in name and tarnished in spirits.. much of my life has been devoted to writing critical articles against those who pervert or infiltrate authentically ecological views w utterly alien notions that have been bred by explicit reactionaries as well as self styled ‘radicals’..
what 60 should teach us is there is no sub for consciousness.. truth will emerge only fro isight, critical thinking, a reality principle that does not sacrifice principles to opportunistic gains.. ed remains on the order of the day.. indeed, more so today than earlier because of the complexity of our problems and the massive drift toward intellectual vulgarity
oh my.. i see ed as sub for consciousness..
imagine if we just focused on listening to the itch-in-8b-souls.. first thing.. everyday.. and used that data to augment our interconnectedness.. we might just get to a more antifragile, healthy, thriving world.. the ecosystem we keep longing for..
impure as they may be.. there are still areas of life.. notably the municipalities.. that can be reclaimed as a new political sphere by an active citizenry in popular assemblies, confederated and ultimately developed into a counter power w counter institutions that stand opposed to those of the nation state..
oi.. notes impure.. then adds cancer.. same song
intro 3 (2004)
one of most influential works in the is collection ‘eco and rev thought’
‘end of history’.. nuclear weapons.. et al.. ecology in particular has become the most realistic source of the new scenarios for supplanting the ‘invasions’ ‘inventions’ and endless variety of methods for achieving our species self extermination
technics in short seeks to raise and answer question that by modern standards of beauty and truth are currently nontechnical if not anti technical.. w emphasis on *unity in diversity.. created a tapestry of life that waves all the elements of development into a whole that is ever expanding and all encompassing.. bringing together the many w the one.. turning the many into a one w/o violating the id of each
*discrimination as equity ness
wedded to socialism, social ecology opens a new eco terrain that gives it the calling to create a second nature.. bringing freedom in to the realm of the first primeval nature.. science becomes politics: completely involved in the problems and hopes of the world.. ecology becomes a political movement and most important.. a means for changing the world.. not passively observing it..
there can be *no society as such w/o institutions, system of governance, and laws.. the only issue in question is whether these structures and guidelines are authoritarian or libertarian.. for they constitute the very forms of social existence
social ecology.. is not anarchism any more than it is individualism.. a new form of libertairan socialism: libertarian in its concept of an organic and from the group up mode of praxis.. socialist in its belief that power must be conceived as confederal communities..
ecology and rev thought was filled w predictions that have never been acknowledged.. i warned of toxic wastes in water and on land and many of the ills that beset the planet today.. these predictions were unheard of at the time and have never been duly accredited
accredited? duly?.. ugh
a year later toward a lib tech.. my account of social and tech alts .. was less widely read but was widely pilfered.. the world was afflicted by the pop rubbish fo ‘radical ecologists’ exotic technicians and biologists like buck fuller.. and the like.. who in my view became celebrities more than serious social theorist.. people who on monday applaud paul ehrlich.. then suddenly denounce the same .. views on tuesday have hardly earned my admiration.. but such is the way of the world, as my 70 yrs of active radicalism have taught me..
post scarcity anarchism
post scarcity anarchism (1967-68)
preconditions and possibilities
endnotes – in marx’s view capitalism as a system org’d around ‘production for sake of production’ results in econ immiseration of the proletariat.. ‘production for sake of production’ is paralleled today by ‘consumption for sake of consumption’.. in which immiseration takes a spiritual rather than an econ form.. it is starvation of life
today however.. capitalism is a parasite on the future, a vampire that survives on the tech and resources of freedom
a century ago.. scarcity had to be endured; today, it has to be enforced.. hence the importance of the state in the present era.. expanding to concrete minutiae of everyday experience.. from arena of survival to arena of life
eros derived impulses can be repressed/sublimated.. but they can never be eliminated.. they are renewed w every birth of human being and w every generation of youth.. it is not surprising that the young articulate the life impulses in humanity’s nature.. the lure of the marvelous..
as raoul vaneigem has observed: ‘perhaps it isn’t enough to say that hierarchical power has preserved humanity for 1000s of years as alcohol perseveres a fetus.. by arresting either growth or decay‘..
if a man had to acquire the conditions of survival in order to live (as marx emphasized) now he must acquire the conditions of life in order to survive.. a new sense of urgency.. no longer choice of socialism or barbarism.. but of anarchism or annihilation.. the problems of necessity and survival have become congruent w the problems of freedom and life.. they *cease to require ‘transitional’ stage.. or centralize orgs to bridge gap between existing and the possible.. the possible in fact is all that can exist.. hence the problems of ‘transition’ which occupied the marxists for nearly a century, are eliminated not only by the *advance of tech.. but by the social dialectic itself.. the problems of social reconstruction have been reduced to practical tasks that can be solved **spontaneously by self liberatory acts of society.. t
*huge.. means we can leap
endnote: raoul vaneigem ‘the totality for kids‘
what is posed is no longer a change in form but the absolute negation of all hierarchal forms as such..
the absolute negation of the state is anarchism.. a situation in which men *liberate not only ‘history’ but all the immediate circumstances of their everyday lives.. the absolute negation of the city is community.. a community in which the social environ is decentralized into rounded, eco balanced communes.. the absolute negation of B is immediate as distinguished from mediated relations.. a situation in which **rep is replaced by face to face relation in a general assembly of free individuals.. the absolute negation of the centralized econ is regional ecotech.. a situation in which the instruments of production are ***molded to the resource of an ecosystem.. the absolute negation of the patriarchal fam is liberated sexuality.. in which all forms of sexual regulation are transcended by the ****spontaneous, untrammeled expression of eroticism among equals.. the absolute negation of the marketplace is communism.. in which *****collective abundance and coop transform labor into play and need into desire..
all ie’s of part\ial ness: *could be if only.. but haven’t let go enough yet to see/be that; **public consensus always oppresses someone(s) so not legit free.. any form of democratic admin as cancerous; ***need to be org’d around legit needs; ****rather hari rat park law et al.. same song ness as oppression of patriarchy.. just pretending/hoping not.. perpetuating myth of tragedy and lord; *****collective/coop ness compromises brown belonging law et al.. where we get **** .. what we need is a means to get back/to grokking legit needs..
what eco has shown is that balance in nature is achieved by organic variation and complexity, not by homogeneity and simplification.. ie: more varied the flora and fauna of an ecosystem.. more stable the population of a potential pest.. the more environ diversity is diminished the greater will the population of a potential pest fluctuate.. w the probability that it will get out of control.. *left to itself.. an ecosystem tends spontaneously toward organic diff..
this does not mean that interference by man must be avoided.. the need for a productive agri.. itself a form of interference w nature.. must alway remain in the foreground of a eco approach to food cultivation and forest management.. no less important is the fact that man can often produce changes in an ecosystem that would *vastly improve its eco quality.. but these efforts require insight and understanding, not the exercise of brute power and manipulation
this is under section titled: spontaneity and utopia.. so managing spontaneity.. oi
this concept of *management.. this new regard for the importance of spontaneity.. has far reaching application for tech and community.. for social image of man in a liberated society..
if only.. will never get to legit liberation/spontaneity with *any form of m\a\p
guy debord ‘daily life is the measure of everything: of the fulfillment or rather the non fulfillment of human relationships.. of the *use we make of our time’..
it is plain that the goal of revolution today must be the liberation of daily life.. any revolution that fails to achieve this goal is counterrevolution.. t
out of revolution must emerge a self that takes full possession of daily life, not a daily life that once again takes full possession of the self..
the power of man over man can be destroyed only by the very process in which man acquires power over his own life and in which he not only ‘*discovers himself.. but.. in which he formulates his selfhood in all its social dimensions
like taylor compulsory law – do we trust people’s capacity to be curious.. et al..
the revolutionary group must clearly see that its goal is not the seizure of power but the dissolution of power.. it must see that the entire problem of power .. of control from below and control from above, can be solved only if there is no above or below.. t
josef weber: must be ‘marked always by simplicity and clarity, always 1000s *unprepared people can enter and direct it..t.. always it remains transparent to and **controlled by all‘..
**rather.. controlled by none.. ie: undisturbed ecosystem
most important process going on in america today is the sweeping de institutionalization of the bourgeois social structure.. a basic far reaching disrespect and a profound disloyalty are developing toward the values, forms, aspirations.. and above all the institutions of the established order.. on a scale unprecedented in american history.. millions of people are shedding their commitment to the society in which they live.. they no longer believe in its claims.. no longer respect its symbols.. no longer accept its goals.. and most significantly.. they refuse almost *intuitively to live by its institutional and social codes..
if only.. could be.. esp if by *this.. but we’re too intoxicated to see/be that.. need detox.. ie: means to undo our hierarchical listening
hari rat park law et al
this molecular movement creates an atmosphere of general lawlessness: a growing personal day to day disobedience, a tendency not to ‘go along ‘w the existing system, a seemingly ‘petty’ but nevertheless critical attempt to circumvent restriction in every facet of daily life.. the society in effect, becomes *disorderly, undisciplined.. a condition that reveals itself most dramatically in an increasing rate of official crimes.. be it an angry gesture, a ‘riot’ or a conscious change in lifestyle, an ever increasing number of people.. who have no more a commitment to an organized revolutionary movement than they have to society itself.. begin spontaneously to engage in their own defiant propaganda of the deed.. emergence of the crowd/mob et al..
*what we need.. ie: carhart-harris entropy law.. but need it all together.. or the dance won’t dance.. humanity needs a leap.. to get back/to simultaneous spontaneity .. simultaneous fittingness.. everyone in sync.. otherwise yeah.. even more destruction/cancer
yeah.. whales in sea world with momentary bursts of light.. what we need is to get out of sea world.. at the same time.. for (blank)’s sake.. otherwise same song.. perpetuating tragedy of the non common
the ‘rioter’ has begun to break, however partially and intuitively, w those deep seated norms of behavior which traditionally weld the ‘masses’ to the established *order.. he actively sheds the internalized structure of authority, the long-cultivated body of conditioned reflexes, and the **pattern of submission sustained by guilt that tie one to the system even more effectively than any fear of police violence and juridical reprisal.. contrary to the views of social psychologists, who see in these modes of direct action the submission of the individual to a terrifying collective entity called the ‘mob’ the truth is that ‘riots’ and crowd actions represent the first gropings of the mass toward individuation.. the mass tends to become demassified in the sense that it begins to assert itself against the really massifying ***automatic responses produced by the bourgeois family, the school and the mass media.. by the same token, crowd actions involve the rediscovery of the streets and the effort to liberate them.. ultimately, it is in the streets that power must be dissolved: for the streets, where daily life is endured, suffered, and eroded, and where power is confronted and fought, must be turned into the domain where daily life is enjoyed, created and nourished.. the rebellious crowd marked the beginning not only of a ****spontaneous transmutation of private into social revolt, but also of a return form the abstraction of social revolt to the issues of everyday life..
****fromm spontaneous law et al
the day to day popular resistance which marked the 18th century and culminated in open revolution was soon disciplined by the newly emerging industrial order.. as well as by naked force.. absorbed into the factory system and tamed by industrial discipline.. formerly rootless intellectuals and footloose nobles found secure places in the economic, political, social and cultural hierarchy of the new bourgeois order.. society hardened again into rigid, particularized class and institutional forms.. critique was consolidated into apologia, revolt into reform.. declasses into clearly defined classes and ‘mobs’ into political constituencies.. ‘riots’ became the well behaved processionals we call ‘demonstrations’ and spontaneous direct action turned into electoral rituals..
our own era is a transitional one, but w a profound new diff.. ie: french revolution rose under the fiery cry: ‘bread and the constitution of 93’
what we are witnessing is the breakdown of a century and a half of embourgeoisement and a pulverization of a bourgeois intuitions at a point in history when the boldest concepts of utopia are realizable.. unfolding most dramatically in the us.. w/in a period of a little more than two decades..we have seen the collapse of the ‘american dream’ or what amounts to the same thing, the steady destruction in the us of the myth that material abundance, based on commodity relations between men, can conceal the inherent poverty of bourgeois life..
endnotes: the above lines were written in 1966.. since then we have seen the graffiti on the walls of paris, during the may-jun revolution : ‘all power to the imagination’.. ‘i take my desires to be reality because i believe int he reality of my desires’.. ‘never work’.. ‘the more i make love, the more i want to make revolution’.. ‘live w/o dead times’.. ‘ the more you consume the less you live’.. ‘culture is the inversion of life’.. ‘one does not buy happiness one steals it’.. ‘society is a carnivorous flower’.. these are not graffiti, they are a program for life and desire..
ecology and revolutionary thought (feb 1965)
in our ow time.. we have seen the assimilation of these once liberatory sciences by the established social order.. indeed, we have begun to regard *science itself as an instrument of control over the thought processes and physical being of man.. this distrust of science and of the scientific method is not w/o justification.. ‘many sensitive people, esp artists’ observes maslow ‘are afraid that science besmirches and depresses, that ti teas things apart rather than integrating them, thereby killing rather than creating’..
there is one science, however, that may et restore and even transcend the liberatory estate of the traditional sciences and philosophies.. it passes rather loosely under the name ‘ecology’ – a term coined by haeckel a century ago to denote ‘the investigation of the total relations of the animal both to its inorganic and to its organic environ’.. innocuous enough.. reduced.. ie: would hardly offend sensibility of american med association.. et al
broadly conceived of however, ecology deals w the balance of nature.. in as much as nature includes man, the science basically deals w the harmonization of nature and man.. an integrated and reconstructive science.. leads directly into anarchic areas of social thought.. for in final anal.. it is impossible to achieve a harmonization of man and nature w/o creating a human community that lives in a lasting balance w its natural environ
hari rat park law et al
the issues w which ecology deals are imperishable in the sense that they cannot be ignored w/o bringing into question the survival of man/planet.. the critical edge of ecology is due not so much to the power of human reason.. a power which science hallowed during its most revolutionary periods.. but to a still higher power.. the sovereignty of nature.. it may be that man is manipulable.. as the owners of mass media argue.. or that elements of nature are manipulable.. as the engineers demo.. but ecology clearly shows that the totality of the natural world.. nature viewed in all its aspects, cycles and interrelationships.. cancels out all human pretension to mastery over the planet.. the great wastelands of the mediterranean basin, once areas of thriving agri or a rich natural flora, are historic evidence of nature’s revenge against human parasitism..
what is the disruption that has turned man into a destructive parasite? what produces a form of parasitism that results not only in vast natural imbalances but also threatens the existence of humanity itself?
mechanical standardization vs organic differentiation
more diversified environ in terms of flora and fauna, less likely there is to be eco instability.. stability is a function of variety and diversity..t if environ is simplified and variety of species reduce.. fluctuations in population become marked and tend to get out of control.. they tend to reach pest proportions..
can avoid using toxic chems.. insecticides/herbicides by allowing for greater interplay between living things.. we must leave more room for natural spontaneity,..t for the diverse bio forces that make up an ecological situation..
there is more to anarchism than decent communities.. a precondition for eco principles.. (small uses/destroys less).. to sum up the critical message of ecology: if we diminish variety in the natural world, we debase its unity and wholeness; we destroy the forces making for natural harmony and for lasting equilib.. and .. we intro an absolute retrogression in development of natural world .. to sum up reconstructive message of ecology: if we wish to advance unity/stability/harmony of natural world.. we must conserve an promote variety..
herbert read’s ‘the philosophy of anarchism’.. ‘progress is measured by the degree of differentiation w/in a society’.. what first strikes us is that the the ecologist and the anarchist place a strong emphasis on spontaneity.. both regard authority as inhibitory.. both view differentiation as a measure of progress.. t.. eco uses term ‘biotic pyramid’.. anarchist ‘individuation’.. to both .. an ever increasing unity is achieved by growing differentiation..
on anarchism not just decent to harmonize man and nature but man and man.. on need for face to face et al.. in a sense.. we must humanize humanity
but sans any form of m\a\p
a relatively self sufficient community, visibly dependent on its environ for the means of life.. would gain a new respect for the organic interrelationships that sustain it..
towards a liberatory technology (may 1965)
tech must be viewed as the basic structural support of a society; it is literally the framework of an economy and of many social institutions
a development of the productive forces is the ‘absolutely necessary practical premise (of communism’ wrote marx and engels in 1846.. ‘because w/o it want is generalized and w want the struggle for necessities and all the old filthy business would necessarily be reproduced’..
the problem of dealing w want and work.. produced the great divergence in revolutionary ideas between socialism and anarchism.. how was this world of necessity to be ‘administered’.. how could the allocation of goods and duties be decided?.. t.. marx left this decision to a state power.. a transitional ‘proletarian’ state power.. to be sure, but nevertheless a coercive body.. established above society
huge.. and something we can to today: org around legit needs
the problem of want and work.. of the realm of necessity.. was never satisfactorily resolved by either body of doctrine in the last century.. it is to the lasting credit of anarchism that it uncompromisingly retained its high idea of freedom .. the ideal of spontaneous org, community, and the abolition of all authority.. although this ideal remained only a vision of man’s future, of the time when *tech would eliminate the realm of necessity entirely.. t.. marxism increasingly compromised its ideal of freedom.. until today.. almost indistinguishable form ideologies of modern state capitalism..
problem was deeper than getting to where tech would elim realm of necessity by abundance et al.. need it undo our hierarchical listening so that we grok legit needs first.. then org around legit needs
in retrospect.. ironically.. both ages of tech (coal/steal and electricity).. seemed to enhance the importance of toil in society.. as number of industrial workers increased.. not only was toil ‘ennobling’.. but the workers were extolled as only useful individuals in the social fabric.. socialism was equated w a work oriented society and liberty with the material security provided by full employment.. the world of necessity had subtly invaded and corrupted the idea of freedom
so obvious is this fact (material abundant and workless ness provided by machines) to millions of people in us and europe.. that it no longer required elab explanation of rhetorical exegesis.. this tech revolution and the prospects it holds.. become an article of faith to an every increasing number of young people
in 65 .. oi
in fact.. real issue we face today is not whether this new tech can provide us w the means of life in a toil less society, but whether it can help to humanize society.. entirely new relationships between man and man.. t.. demand for ubi anchored in promise of tech.. and possibility of satisfying material needs w/o toil.. this quantitative approach is already lagging behind tech developments that carry a new qualitative promise.. the promise of decentralized, communitarian lifestyles.. or what i prefer to call ecological forms of human association
i am asking a question quite diff from what is ordinarily posed w respect to modern tech.. is this tech staking out a new dimension in human freedom.. in the liberation of man? can it not only liberate man from want and work but also lead him to a free, harmonious, balanced, human community.. that would promote the unrestricted development of his potentialities.. t
imagine if we just focused on listening to the itch-in-8b-souls.. first thing.. everyday.. and used that data to augment our interconnectedness.. we might just get to a more antifragile, healthy, thriving world.. the ecosystem we keep longing for..
tech as it could be
less obvious is the impact produced by industrial growth.. this impact is not always technological; it is more than the sub of machines for human labor.. one of the most effective means of increasing output in fact has been the continual reorg of the labor process..extending and sophisticating the division of labor.. ironically, the steady breakdown of tasks to ever more inhuman dimensions.. to an intolerably minutiae, fragmented series of operations and to a cruel simplification.. t of the work process.. suggests the machine that will recombine all the separate tasks of many workers into a single mechanized operation .. .. how mechanized mass manufacture emerged.. where an independent.. highly skilled worker engages in many diverse operations.. thru the purgatory of the factory.. where these diverse tasks are parceled out among a multitude of unskilled or semiskilled employees.. to the highly mechanized mill.. were tasks of many are largely taken over by machines.. and finally to the automated/cybernated plant.. where operative are replaced by supervisory technicians and highly skilled maintenance men
there is practically no industry that cannot be fully automated if we are willing to redesign the product, the plant, the manufacturing procedures and the handling methods..
so.. wilde not-us law et al
if it’s true society gauged by way it treats women.. its sensitivity to human suffering can be gauged by working conditions provides for people in raw material industries, particularly in mines and quarries.. in ancient world.. mining was often a form of penal servitude.. reserved for most hardened criminals and most intractable slaves.. and the most hated prisoners of wars.. the mine is the day to day actualization of man’s image of hell.. it is *a deadening, dismal, inorganic world that demands pure mindless toil..
mumford from technics and civilization: ‘field and forest and stream and ocean are the environ of life: the mine is the environ alone of ores, minerals, metals.. in hacking and digging the contents of the earth.. the miner has **no eye for the forms of things.. what he sees is sheer matter and until he gets to this vein it is only an obstacle which he breaks thru stubbornly and sends up to the surface.. if the miner sees shapes on the walls of the cavern.. as the candle flickers.. they are only the monstrous distortions of his pick or his arm: ***shapes of fear.. day has been abolished and the ****rhythm of nature broken: continuous day and night production first came into existence here.. the miner must work by artificial light even thought the sun be shining outside; still further down in the seams, *****he must work by artificial ventilation too: a triumph of the ‘manufactured environ’..‘
*sea world abounds.. killing us softly w its song..
**black science of people/whales law .. we have no idea
***structural violence et al
****mumford non-specialized law et al
easy to foresee a time.. when rationally org’d econ could auto manufacture small ‘packaged’ factories w/o human labor.. such a tech .. *oriented entirely toward human needs and **freed from all consideration of profit and loss, would eliminate the pain of want and toil.. the penalty, inflicted in the form of denial, suffering an inhumanity, exacted by a society based on scarcity and labor
yeah that.. ie: *org around legit needs sans **any form of m\a\p .. if only.. ie: tech as it could be.. but.. mufleh humanity law: we have seen advances in every aspect of our lives except our humanity– Luma Mufleh
the possibilities created by a cybernated tech would no longer be limited merely to the satisfaction of man’s material needs.. we would be free to ask how the machine, the factory and the in could b used to foster human solidarity and to create a balanced relationship w nature and a truly organic ecocommunity.. would our new tech be based on the same national division of labor that exists today? .. fosters industrial centralization.. (although a system of workers’ management based on the individual factory and local community would go far toward eliminating this feature).. ..
not far/humane enough
or does the new tech lend itself to a system of small scale production.. based on a regional econ and structured physically on a human scale? places all econ *decisions in hands of local community.. in these circumstances, the popular assembly of the local community, convened in face to face democracy, takes over the full management of social life.. **the question is whether a future socitey will be org’d around tech or whether tech is not sufficiently malleable so that it can be org’d around society..
sendzimir’s planetary mill is a stroke of engineering genius; the small work rolls, turning the two circular cages, replace the need for the four huge roughing stands and the six finishing stands.. et al
visions of microchip ness.. heads down.. specializing away.. geeking out on successes of progresses.. on faster rats on a treadmill.. not realizing the dehumanization of it all
the new tech produced not only miniaturized components.. smaller production facilities.. but also highly versatile multi purpose machines.. for more than a century.. trend moved toward tech specialization and single purpose devices.. underpinning the intensive division of labor required by new factory system.. led to.. **machine being thrown away when product no longer needed.. importance.. make it possible to produce a large variety of products in a single plant.. community’s econ would be more compact/**versatile.. more rounded and self contained..
so from dehumanization (68).. to **throw away.. to ***putting human back together
i do not claim that all of man’s econ activities can be completely decentralized, but the majority can surely be scale to human communitarian dimensions.. we can shift econ power from national to local.. popular assemblies.. this shift would be *revolutionary change of vast proportions.. for it would create powerful econ foundations for sovereignty and autonomy of the local community
sounds all good and well.. ‘decent.. restored to communitarian dimensions’.. but why.. for what/who?.. we need to look up from the treadmill.. ie: detox.. via a means to undo our hierarchical listening.. realize that it doesn’t matter how efficient or small scale or communitarian..or how much we say it’s *rev of vast proportions.. if not org’d around.. if not about legit needs.. it’s not legit/needed change.. just more efficient rat racing
it would be unfair perhaps to say that he is disrespectful to natural environ.. the fact is.. he scarcely knows what eco means or what his environ requires to remain in balance.. the balance between man and nature must be restored..
ie: a nother way
here i’ll try to show how new tech can be used ecologically to reawaken man’s sense of dependence upon the environ.. by reintroducing the natural world into the human experience.. we can contribute to the achievement of human wholeness
again.. sounds like building a robotic sea world (trying to stuff human ness into it).. so more robot ness.. more manufacturing consent.. voluntary compliance et al1st 4 lines.. sounds like building robotic sea world.. manufacturing consent.. voluntary compliance et al..
in a future revolution , the most pressing task of technology will be to produce a surfeit of goods w minimum of toil..t
man, standardized by machines, is reduced to a machine.. man the machine is the bureaucratic ideal..t
endnotes (that link to above): the ‘ideal man’ of the police B is a being whose innermost thoughts can be invaded by lie detectors, electronic listening devices and ‘truth’ drugs.. the ‘ideal man’ of the political B is a being whose innermost life can be shaped by mutagenic chemicals and socially assimilated by the mass media.. the ‘ideal man’ of the industrial B is a being whose innermost life can be invaded by subliminal and predictively reliable advertising.. the ‘ideal man’ of the military B is a being whose innermost life can be invaded by regimentation for genocide
oh.. and yeah..
freed of B manip.. men would rediscover the beauty of a simpler, uncluttered material life.. man would recover a sense of the things that are for man, as against the things that have been imposed upon man.. the reclusive ritual of bargaining and hoarding would be replaced by the sensitive acts of making and giving.. things would cease to be the crutches for an impoverished ego and the mediators between aborted personalities;..t they would become the products of rounded, creative individuals and the gifts of integrated, developing selves.. (on the simplicity of getting rid of all the B and bs)
the forms of freedom (jan 1968)
if rev thought is to be taken at all seriously it must speak directly to the problems and forms of social management.. there is sufficient historical experience, and a sufficient theoretical formulation of the issues involved.. to indicate what social forms are consistent w the fullest realization of personal/social freedom
the earliest social ‘specialists’ who interposed themselves between people.. the priest and tribal chiefs who permanently mediated their relations.. established the formal conditions for hierarchy and exploitation.. brings into question all forms of social org based on indirect rep.. on management by the few.. ‘election/admin’.. the most striking evidence of this social refocusing are the demands voiced by increasing numbers of american youth for tribalism and community.. these demands are ‘regressive ‘only in the sense they go back temporally to pre hierarchical forms of freedom.. they are profoundly progressive in the sense they go back structurally to non hierarchical forms of freedom
back/to what? when were we ever non hierarchical listening?.. we have no ie’s.. so.. we have no idea what legit non hierarchical listening is like.. no idea what legit free people are like.. but.. today we have the means to unleash/try that
councils used just as much to perpetuate class society as to destroy it.. the council form contains many structural limitations which favor the development of hierarchy.. most advocates of workers’ councils tend to conceive of people primarily as econ entities.. either as workers or non workers..
or as students or teachers.. any form of m\a\p
indeed.. no movement that raised the demand for workers’ councils can be regarded as revolutionary unless it tries to promote sweeping transformation in the environ of he work place..
rather.. let go of the work place.. let go of work
the article does not dispute the need for workers’ councils.. factory committees.. as a revolutionary means of appropriation the bourgeois econ.. on the contrary.. *experience has shown repeatedly that the factory committee is vitally important as an initial form of econ admin.. but no rev can settle for councils and committees as it final or even its exemplary mode of social org.. not broad enough to rev work, free time, needs, and the structure of a society as a whole..
paris commune may be revered for many diff reasons.. for its intoxicating sense of libidinal release.. for its radical populism.. for its deeply revolutionary impact on the oppressed or for its defiant heroism in defeat.. but the commune itself.. viewed as a structural entity was little more than a popular municipal council.. more democratic and plebeian than other such bodies the council was nevertheless structured along parliamentary lines.. it was elected by ‘citizens’ grouped according to geo constituencies.. in combining legislation w admin.. the commune was hardly more advance than the municipal bodies in the us today..
it does not malign the paris commune to divest it of ‘historical’ burdens it never actually carried.. the commune was a festival of the streets.. largely a city council.. established to coord municipal admin under conditions of rev unrest..
here we encounter a basic contradiction in class concepts of rev power: proletarian socialism, precisely because it emphasizes that power must be based exclusively on the factory, creates the conditions for centralized, hierarchical political structure..
the fact remains that council modes of org are not immune to centralization, manip and perversions.. at best they can be the stepping stones to a decentralized society.. at worst they can easily be integrated int hierarchical forms of social org
yeah.. public consensus always oppresses someone(s).. any form of democratic admin.. of people telling other people what to do (maté trump law et al).. isn’t enough.. and cancerous from the get go (like 10-day-care-center\ness ness).. good news is.. today we can let go of meeting/councils ness..
it does not minimize their (popular assembly) limitations to say that they developed methods of functioning so successfully libertarian in character that even the most imaginative utopias have failed to match in speculation what they achieved in practice..
oi.. we have no idea what legit free people are like.. public consensus always oppresses someone(s)
taken as a whole, this was *a remarkable system of social management; run almost entirely by amateurs.. the athenian polis reduced the formulation and admin of public policy to a completely public affair.. indeed the *greatness of the achievement lies int eh fact that athens, despite the slave patriarchal and class features it shared w classical society, as a whole developed into a working democracy in the literal sense of the term..
*oi.. still people telling other people what to do.. then adding .. by the way.. patriarchy and slaves et al.. oi
inviting the poorest and most destitute of the sans culottes to participate in the assembly..
oi .. seat at the table ness
not merely fighting orgs; they rep’d genuine forms of self management.. took over complete admin of city.. individual section policed own neighborhoods, elected own judges.. provided public aid to poor.. contributed to maintenance of national guard.. took on added tasks of enrolling volunteers for revolutionary army.. collecting donations for the war effort.. and equipping and provisioning entire battalions.. took responsibility for the maintenance of govt fixed prices.. it must be borne in mind that this complex of extremely important activities was undertaken not by professional Bs but by ordinary shopkeepers and craftsmen.. bulk of responsibilities discharged after working hours.. popular assemblies usually met during evenings.. replaced officers at will.. et al..
oi.. rather perhaps self management in/of sea world.. oi
whosoever calls himself a revolutionist and *does not study these events on their own terms, thoroughly and w/o **theoretical preconceptions, is a dilettante who is playing at revolution..
assembly and community must become ‘fighting words’ not distance panaceas.. they must be created as modes of struggle against he existing society, not as a theoretical or programmatic abstractions..
reacting/fighting is abstracting/distracting.. it is preconditioning ness.. oi oi oi
listen marxist (may 1969)
when the hell are we finally going to create a movement that looks to the future instead of the past
we argue that the problem is not to ‘abandon ‘marxism or to ‘annul’ it but to transcend it dialectically.. just as marx transcended hegelian philosophy, ricardian econ and blanquist modes of org
oi.. like you’re doing 99..?
the rev struggle w/in the advance capitalist countries has shifted into a historically new terrain: it has become a struggle between a generation of youth that has known no chronic econ crisis and the culture, values, and institutions of an older, conservative gen whose perspective on life has been shaped by scarcity, guilt, renunciation, the work ethic and the pursuit of material security
taken as a whole the unions strengthen the system an serve to perpetuate it.. to reinforce this class structure by babbling about the ‘role of the working class’ to reinforce the traditional class struggle by imputing a ‘revolutionary’ content to it, to infect the new rev movement of our time w ‘workeritis’ is reactionary to the core..
fdavid on creative refusal and spending our energies on defense.. et al
the worker becomes a revolutionary not by becoming more of a worker but by undoing his ‘workerness’.. and in this he is not alone; the same applies to he farmer, the student, the clerk, the soldier the B, the professional.. his ‘workerness’ is the disease he is suffering from..
supposed to’s of school/work et al – huge
worker begins to become revolutionary when.. he comes to detest his class status here and now, when he begins to shed exactly those feature which the marxists most prize in him.. his work ethic, his character structure derived from industrial discipline, his respect for hierarchy, his obedience to leaders his consumerism.. his vestiges of puritanism.. .. he achieves an un class consciousness.. he degenerates magnificently.. what he is shedding are precisely those class shackles that bind him to all systems of domination.. he abandons those class interests that enslave him to consumerism, suburbia and a bookkeeping conception of life..
most promising devel in factories today is emergence of young workers who smoke pot f-off on their jobs, drift into and out of factories, grow long hair, demand more leisure time rather than more pay, harass all authority figures.. even more promising is the emergence of this human type; in trade schools and highs cools.. the reservoir of the industrial working class to come..
sans any form of m\a\p
above all, a social rev cannot be achieve w/o the support of the youth, from which the ruling class recruits its armed forces
(marx) enthusiastically praised the paris commune as a ‘model to all the industrial centers of france’.. ‘would give way to self govt of the producers’..
to state these concerns broadly, marx was occupied above all w the preconditions of freedom (techno logical development, national unification, material abundance) rather than w the conditions of freedom (decentralization, the formation of communities, the human scale, direct democracy).. his theories were still anchored in the realm of survival, not the realm of life..
on marx concepts being false/misleading.. they emerge from the limitations of his vision.. more properly from the limitations of his time.. (we are not trying to say marx was correct in holding .. merely that make sense when viewed in time and place)
anarchism is a libidinal movement of humanity against coercion in any form.. resist all forms that seek to imprison the spontaneous development of social order
that would have to be any form of m\a\p.. so revolts et al.. counters..
anarchic movements of past failed largely because material scarcity, a function of low level of tech, vitiated an organic harmonization of human interests.. any society that could promise little more maturely than equality of poverty invariably engendered deep seated tendencies to restore a new system of privilege.. in the absence of a tech that could appreciably reduce the working day, the need to work vitiated social institutions based on self managements..
wrong focus for tech.. need tech to get us back to enough ness.. not to make us more things while reducing working hours
indeed much that passes for ‘marxism’ in state and revolution is pure anarchism.. ie: the *sub of revolutionary militias for professional armed bodies and the sub of org of self management for parliamentary bodies.. they believe in direct action to foster the initiative of the ‘masses’ to preserve the spirit fo revolt, to **encourage spontaneity.. they tried to develop organization based on mutual aid and brotherhood in which control would be exercised from below upward, not downward from above.
economically, the ‘masses’ were always compelled to return to a daily life of toil
the most important social message of marxism is that freedom has material preconditions.. we must survive in order to live..
rather.. must grok/trust enough ness in order to live alive
there can be no social revolution w/o winning the workers, hence they must have our active solidarity in every struggle they wage against exploitation..
a note on affinity groups
a discussion on listen marxists (aug 1970)
any rev movement that fails to deal energetically and militantly w them (econ, racial and B actualities/problems) will be as distorted as a movement that deals w them singly or severally.. to the exclusion of others
today economic planning has one basic purpose: to confine a highly advanced technology w/in a commodity framework..t
let’s try tech as it could be
nothing was really changed for those (welfare mothers radicalizing) who did not ego trip as ‘leaders’, ‘politicals’ and ‘organizers’
to revolutionaries w a ‘post scarcity consciousness’.. this kind of situation would be intolerable.. they would try to catalyze an order of relationships between mothers entirely diff form organization format imposes.. they would try to foster a deep sense of community, ..
from intimacy would grow hopefully a supportive system of kinship, mutual aid, .. the women might collab to establish a rotating system of baby sitters and child care attendants, the coop buying of good food at greatly reduced prices.. mutual learning of survival skilles..
w advances in the standard of living and in ed, the population of these areas (3rd world) could be expected to stabilize sufficiently to remove pressure on the land..
oi.. schooling the world et al
accordingly any authoritarian org, any system of repression, any manipulatory tactic can become acceptable indeed admirable, if it favors the ‘building of socialism’ or ‘resistance to imperialism’ as thought ‘socialism’ or ‘anti imperialism’ is meaningful when it is poisoned by manip, repression, and authoritarian forms of org.. categories replace realities; abstract goals replace real goals ‘history replaces everyday life.. the universal, which requires a complex, any sided anal to be grasped is replaced by the particular; the total by the one sided
in contrast to most radical works ‘listen marxist’ continually speaks of ‘hierarchical society’ instead of ‘class society’ of ‘domination’ instead of ‘exploitation’ ..what significance do these differences in language have?
govt and revolution are utterly ‘incompatible’ – varlet.. began to occupy selves w/domination not only exploitation; hierarchy not only class rule.. pleasure not simply happiness
it is possible to eliminate exploitation and class rule or to achieve happiness.. w/o achieving a life of pleasure or eliminating domination and hierarchy.. marx, by ‘scientifically’ anchoring exploitation, classes, and happiness in the econ domain, actually provided the rationale fo ra theoretical regression from the original socialist values.. marxian econ solutions such as nationalization of property may even create the illusion that hierarchy has disappeared..
marxism created a stupendous intellectual furniture that one must clear away to make contact w reality.. the field abounds w ‘experts’ and heavies, w academics and authorities whose bs makes original, indeed dialectical, thought virtually impossible.. once we rescue the essentials, the theoretical garbage must be junked..
the may-june events in france
1\ france: a movement for life
this was not a solemn revolt.. B plotted and manipulated.. it was witty, satirical, inventive and creative.. and therein lay its strength, its capacity for immense self mobilization, its infectiousness..t
of paramount importance is the light that the man-june revolt cast on the problem of authority and hierarchy
socially conditioned habits.. (it does not have to be argued at any great length that the habits of authority and hierarchy are instilled in the individual a the very outset of life in the family milieu of infancy, in childhood ed at home and in school, in the org of work ‘leisure’ and everyday life.. this shaping of the character structure of the individual by what seem like ‘archetypal’ norms of obedience and command constitutes the very essence of what we call the ‘socialization’ of the young)
what distinguishes march 22nd and groups such as the anarchists and situationists form all others is that they worked not for the ‘seizure of power’ but for its dissolution
this single fact.. the revolt of the young is the most damning evidence of the system’ inability to prevail on its own terms.. not only is it natural that an uprising breaks out spontaneously.. but it is also natural that it unfolds spontaneously..
2\ excerpts from a letter
this can not be avoided.. partly by making all committees and councils directly answerable to assemblies, partly by using the new tech to shorten the work week radically.. thereby freeing the whole people for active participation in the management of society
free to manage.. oi.. aka: mtgs mtgs mtgs.. oi..
capitalism has already established the physical mechs of circulation.. this physical mech can be improved upon.. but it would still work after rev.. it needs no police, jails, armies or courts to maintain it.. the state is superimposed on this tech system of distribution and actually serves to distort it by maintaining artificial system of scarcity (this today is the real meaning of the ‘sanctity of property’)
rather.. always been distorted.. by our not grokking legit needs.. circulation (or whatever) needs to be org’d around legit needs.. and as long as we don’t do that (grok/org around legit needs).. coercion/police/structural violence will be used to perpetuate it
people freed from idiotic work.. could join brothers/sisters in productive jobs.. drastically shortening everyone’s work week.. in this new system, the producers and the community could jointly manage the econ from below.. coordinating their admin operation thru factory committees, councils of factory committee reps, and neighborhood action committees, all directly accountable to the plant and neighborhood assemblies.. society takes direct control of its affairs.. state, B, its armies, police, judges and jails can disappear
the boards’ plan must be examined by all the workers in the plants that are to be closed down, and those whose operations are to be expanded.. the plan itself may be accepted, modified or simply rejected.. the board has no power to enforce ‘decisions’ it merely offers recs.. decision making powers.. rest entirely w the communities involved..
another crucial problem that face the may-june revolt.. had the armament workers not merely occupied the arms factories but worked them to arm the revolutionary properly.. had the railroad workers transported these arms to the revolutionary people in the cities, towns, villages.. had the action committees org’d armed militias.. then the situation in france would have changed drastically.. an armed people, org’d into militias by its own action committees (and there are plenty of reservists among the young people to train them).. would have confronted the state.. most don’t believe bulk of army would have fired on the people.. if people were armed
oh my.. yeah war with war.. oh my.. that’ll do it.. and no police needed.. oi.. ukraine happening now.. oi oi oi
let me emphasize again.. that all i have sketched out was perfectly possible.. all that was necessary was for the workers to work the factories and turn their strike committees into factory committees.. this decisive step was not taken; hence the people were not armed and the bourgeois system of property relations was not shattered.. thus the struggle was channeled into an election campaign on strictly bourgeois grounds.. for these reasons and others, the revolt receded and in so doing produced a ‘backlash’ form the mass of people who were watching and waiting.. these people might have been won to the revolution had it succeeded..
what was needed in france was an awareness among the workers that the factories had to be worked, not merely occupied or struck.. or to put it differently.. what the revolt lacked was a movement that could develop *this consciousness in the workers..
key oi ness.. develop *this consciousness (to fight and win).. rather than develop consciousness.. manufacturing consent et al.. oi
desire and need (1967)
the whole person.. concrete and abstract, sensuous and rational, personal and social.. never finds adequate rep
the whole person doesn’t need rep.. can’t be rep’d.. oi
endnote: a sense of incompleteness haunts western philosophy after hegel’s death and explains much of the work of kierkegaard, schopenhauer, stirner, nietzsche, the surrealists and the contemp existentialists.. for the marxians merely to dismiss this post hegelian development and ‘bourgeois ideology’ is to dismiss the problem itself..
in the paris commune of 1871, we have the expression not merely of social interest but of social libido.. it is hard to believe that the repression following the fall of the commune.. the mass shootings, the ruthless trials, the exile of 1000s of penal colonies.. owed its savagery strictly to class vengeance.. the bourgeois directed his vengeance against his own subterranean humanity.. in the spontaneous outburst of social libido which we call the paris commune the bourgeois saw the breakdown of the repressive mechs that maintain hierarchical society.. he recoiled w the horror and ferocity of a man who suddenly comes face to face w his unconscious drives..
for this reason it is idiotic to predict the behavior of people after revolution in terms of their behavior before it.. they will not be the same people..t
desire itself is the sensuous apprehension of possibility.. a complete psychic synthesis achieved by a ‘yearning for’..
the real responsibility we face is to eliminate not the psychic pain of growth but rather the psychic suffering fo dehumanization, the torment that accompanies the frustrated and aborted life..
the death of us ness
to put this matter differently, the revolutionist is created and nourished by the breakdown of all the great bourgeois universals .. property, class, hierarchy, free enterprise, the work ethic, patriarchalism, then nuclear family and son, ad nauseam..
the lumpen’s acts of disorder become the nuclei of a new order and his spontaneity implies the means by which it can be achieved..t
imagine if we just focused on listening to the itch in 8b souls.. first thing.. everyday.. and used that data to connect/coord us.. we might just get to a more antifragile, healthy, thriving world.. the ecosystem we keep longing for
but the disintegrated consciousness is the consciousness of reversal and indeed of absolute reversal.. its dominating element is the concept, which draws together the thoughts that to the honest consciousness lie so wide apart; *hence the brilliance of its own language.. (but then goes on) this mind’s speech.. language.. consists in the reversal of all conceptions/realities.. ‘a farrago (a confused mixture) of wisdom and madness’.. (then goes on) .. hegel’s anal.. contains all element of the absolute refusal advanced so poignantly at the present time.. today the spirit of negativity must extend to all areas of life if it is to have any content.. it must demand a complete frankness blanchot’s ‘no longer tolerates complicity‘.. **to lessen this sprit of negativity is to place the very integrity of the self in the balance.. established order over innermost recesses.. it seeks complicity not only in appearances but also from most guarded depths fo the human spirit.. manipulating the unconscious.. to gain command over self’s sense of possibility.. over its capacity for desire..
*huge resonation to idiosyncratic jargon ness.. but deeper.. idio jargon over reversal/refusal.. like curiosity over decision making.. because **that’s distraction.. if legit yearning.. complicity becomes irrelevant.. no inspectors of inspectors if it’s all of us being legit us
undisturbed ecosystem et al
bluntly, to drop out is to drop in.. the real question we face is where we drop in, where we stand in relation to the whole.. t
but the revolution can no longer be imprisoned in the realm of need.. it can no longer be satisfied merely w the prose of political econ.. t
huge huge huge
this is like missing pieces (yearning) over need (food/shelter.. assumed physical necessities) ..
need to org around legit/deeper/yearning needs/desires
there are no hierarchies in nature other than those imposed by hierarchical modes of human thought, but rather differences merely in function between and w/in living things.. the revolutionary project will always remain incomplete and one-sided until it recognizes the need to remove all hierarchical modes of thought, indeed all conceptions of ‘otherness’ based on domination .. from its own midst..t
huge – ginorm small huge
need: means to undo our hierarchical listening
our being is becoming not stasis.. our science is utopia.. our reality is eros, our desire is revolution..