Communisation and its Vicissitudes (event/discussion) - Colorama - Sunday 18/3

40 posts / 0 new
Last post
demetra
Offline
Joined: 30-06-11
Mar 14 2012 18:54
Communisation and its Vicissitudes (event/discussion) - Colorama - Sunday 18/3

Communisation and its Vicissitudes

Endnotes and Blaumachen are holding a discussion on communisation with a presentation of the journal Sic (International Journal for Communisation).

Next Sunday (18/3) 6pm at Colorama (52-56 Lancaster Street, London SE1).

We will also talk about:
- Communisation and politics
- Struggles in Greece

Please join us and distribute to all those you think will be interested. (Request by our hosts: please do not distribute via Facebook and Twitter.)

Some information about Sic & Communisation

Sic aims to be the locus for an unfolding of the problematic of communisation. It comes from the encounter of individuals involved in various projects in different countries: among these are the journals Endnotes, published in the UK and the US, Blaumachen in Greece, Théorie Communiste in France, Riff-Raff in Sweden, and certain more or less informal theoretical groups in the US (New York and San Francisco). Each of these projects will continue to exist on their own. Also participating are various individuals in France, Germany, and elsewhere, who are involved in other activities and who locate themselves broadly within the theoretical approach taken here.

Communisation

In the course of the revolutionary struggle, the abolition of the division of labour, of the State, of exchange, of any kind of property; the extension of a situation in which everything is freely available as the unification of human activity, that is to say the abolition of classes, of both public and private spheres – these are all ‘measures’ for the abolition of capital, imposed by the very needs of the struggle against the capitalist class. The revolution is communisation; communism is not its project or result.

One does not abolish capital for communism but by communism, or more specifically, by its production. Indeed communist measures must be differentiated from communism; they are not embryos of communism, rather they are its production. Communisation is not a period of transition, but rather, revolution itself is the communist production of communism. The struggle against capital is what differentiates communist measures and communism. The content of revolutionary activity is always the mediation of the abolition of capital by the proletariat in its relation to capital. This activity does not constitute an alternative in competition with the reproduction of the capitalist mode of production, but rather the latter’s internal contradiction and its overcoming.

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, a whole historical period entered into crisis and came to an end – the period in which the revolution was conceived in different ways, both theoretically and practically, as the affirmation of the proletariat, its elevation to the position of ruling class, the liberation of labour, and the institution of a period of transition. The concept of communisation appeared in the midst of this crisis.

During the crisis, the critique of all the mediations of the existence of the proletariat within the capitalist mode of production (mass parties, unions, parliamentarism), of organisational forms such as the party-form or the vanguard, of ideologies such as leninism, of practices such as militantism in all its variations – all this appeared irrelevant if revolution was no longer to be an affirmation of the class, whether it be workers’ autonomy or the generalisation of workers’ councils. It is the proletariat’s struggle as a class that has become the problem, i.e. has become its own limit. This is how the class struggle signals and produces the revolution as communisation in the form of its overcoming.

In the contradictory course of the capitalist mode of production since the 1970s the affirmation of the proletariat and the liberation of labour have lost all meaning and content. There is no longer a worker’s identity facing capital and confirmed by it. The revolutionary dynamic of contemporary struggles consists in the active denial – against capital – of the proletarian condition, even within ephemeral, limited bursts of self-management or self-organisation. The proletariat’s struggle against capital contains its contradiction with its own nature as a class of capital.

The abolition of capital, i.e. the revolution and the production of communism, is immediately the abolition of all classes and therefore of the proletariat. This occurs through the communisation of society, which is abolished as a community separated from its elements. Proletarians abolish capital by the production of a community immediate to its elements. In this way they transform their relations into immediate relations between individuals – between singular individuals that are no longer the embodiment of a social category, including the supposedly natural categories of the social sexes of woman and man. Revolutionary practice is the coincidence of the changing of circumstances and of human activity, i.e. self-transformation.

A problematic

This minimal approach of communisation constitutes neither a definition, nor a platform, but exposes a problematic.

The problematic of a theory, here the theory of revolution as communisation, does not limit itself to a list of themes or objects conceived by theory; neither is it the synthesis of all the elements which are thought. It is the content of theory, its way of thinking, with regards to all possible productions of this theory:

- the analysis of the current crisis and of the class struggles intrinsic to it;
- the historicity of revolution and communism;
- the periodisation of the capitalist mode of production and the question of the restructuring of the mode of production after the crisis at the end of the 1960s and the beginning of the 1970s;
- the analysis of the gender relation within the problematic of the present class struggle and communisation;
- the definition of communism as goal but also as movement abolishing the present state of things;
- a theory of the abolition of capital as a theory of the production of communism;
- the reworking of the theory of the value-form (to the extent that the revolution is not the affirmation of the proletariat and the liberation of labour).

By definition no list of subjects coming under a problematic can be exhaustive.

Spikymike
Offline
Joined: 6-01-07
Mar 15 2012 20:15

It would be good to get an informed and critical discussion around this 'problematic' as you call it somewhere up north and outside of the London scene sometime - maybe fit it into some other conference agenda if the opportunity arises?

Arbeiten's picture
Arbeiten
Offline
Joined: 28-01-11
Mar 16 2012 00:33

looks interesting, will try and make this

rhh1
Offline
Joined: 15-09-06
Mar 16 2012 07:27

Now that is a brilliant exposition of the meaning of the struggle against capital.

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Mar 16 2012 11:05

This looks interesting, but it's south of the river (sad face)

ocelot's picture
ocelot
Offline
Joined: 15-11-09
Mar 16 2012 12:09

So long as its not a problematic of a theory divorced from any practice...

Red Marriott's picture
Red Marriott
Offline
Joined: 7-05-06
Mar 17 2012 13:07
Quote:
Theology

Millenarian groups claim that the current society and its rulers are corrupt, unjust, or otherwise wrong. They therefore believe they will be destroyed soon by a powerful force. The harmful nature of the status quo is always considered intractable without the anticipated dramatic change.
[...]
In the modern world, economic rules or vast conspiracies are seen as generating oppression. Only dramatic change will change the world and change will be brought about, or survived, by a group of the devout and dedicated. In most millenarian scenarios, the disaster or battle to come will be followed by a new, purified world in which the believers will be rewarded.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millenarianism

revol68's picture
revol68
Offline
Joined: 23-02-04
Mar 17 2012 13:13
Red Marriott wrote:
Quote:
Theology

Millenarian groups claim that the current society and its rulers are corrupt, unjust, or otherwise wrong. They therefore believe they will be destroyed soon by a powerful force. The harmful nature of the status quo is always considered intractable without the anticipated dramatic change.
[...]
In the modern world, economic rules or vast conspiracies are seen as generating oppression. Only dramatic change will change the world and change will be brought about, or survived, by a group of the devout and dedicated. In most millenarian scenarios, the disaster or battle to come will be followed by a new, purified world in which the believers will be rewarded.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millenarianism

grin

Thing is though, it's pretty damn seductive and in a way acts to sustain some semblance of sanity and hope in an insane and hopeless world.

ocelot's picture
ocelot
Offline
Joined: 15-11-09
Mar 17 2012 13:47

Or as a comrade at the "Communisation..." book-launch at HM 2012, it appeared to him as a clear case of Negative theology

Quote:
Apophatic theology (from Greek ἀπόφασις from ἀπόφημι - apophēmi, "to deny")—also known as negative theology or via negativa (Latin for "negative way")—is a theology that attempts to describe [Communism], the Divine Good, by negation, to speak only in terms of what may not be said about the perfect goodness that is [Communism][1] It stands in contrast with cataphatic theology.

In brief, negative theology is an attempt to achieve unity with [Communism] through discernment, gaining knowledge of what [Communism] is not (apophasis), rather than by describing what [Communism] is. The apophatic tradition is often, though not always, allied with the approach of mysticism, which focuses on a spontaneous or cultivated individual experience of the [communist] reality beyond the realm of ordinary perception, an experience often unmediated by the structures of traditional organized [leftism] or the conditioned role-playing and learned defensive behavior of the [left militant].

playinghob's picture
playinghob
Offline
Joined: 5-05-07
Mar 18 2012 10:26

Today!

Caiman del Barrio
Offline
Joined: 28-09-04
Mar 18 2012 11:30
Steven. wrote:
This looks interesting, but it's south of the river (sad face)

roll eyes

Am I the only person who turns off at hearing the word "communisation"? I mean, I dunno, but titling a public event with two utterly impenetrable words...what use will this have to folk who aren't pursuing postgrads in Humanities/Arts?

jonthom's picture
jonthom
Offline
Joined: 25-11-10
Mar 18 2012 13:35
Caiman del Barrio wrote:
Steven. wrote:
This looks interesting, but it's south of the river (sad face)

roll eyes

Am I the only person who turns off at hearing the word "communisation"? I mean, I dunno, but titling a public event with two utterly impenetrable words...what use will this have to folk who aren't pursuing postgrads in Humanities/Arts?

You're not the only one. Personally I'd never even heard the word "vicissitudes" before today...

That said I suppose this sort of thing is specifically aimed at academic types doing politics rather than a more general audience. Which is fair enough if you're into that sort of thing I guess, though it does smack a bit of theory for the sake of theory to me.

playinghob's picture
playinghob
Offline
Joined: 5-05-07
Mar 18 2012 14:19

Now I quite fancied this, a pleasant evening south of the river, so I emailed a comrade who responded thus:

"Nah mate, just a bunch of egg heads trying to out do one another with long words. I'll be in the pub with the REAL workers."

embarrassed

demetra
Offline
Joined: 30-06-11
Mar 18 2012 14:31

Well not to say this is typical of the british attitude to theory (which is why the scene here has left it to academics to deal with it). In Greece for example these discussions happen exclusively in the left-communist activist scene, in social centres etc, where theory is seen as part of the class struggle. But just to make it clear: we are definitely not targeting academics, quite the opposite, which is why the announcement was posted here.

revol68's picture
revol68
Offline
Joined: 23-02-04
Mar 18 2012 14:35

Bad craic when nerdy Marxists are calling you out on being wordy nerds.

Theorie Communiste have the excuse of being French, their fanbois and girls don't.

That's before we get onto the fact that for such an apparently ultra left tendency it reproduces the kind of determinism the most orthodox of Marxist's would cringe at, as shown by Duave's destruction of TC in Endnotes #1.

revol68's picture
revol68
Offline
Joined: 23-02-04
Mar 18 2012 14:37
demetra wrote:
Well not to say this is typical of the british attitude to theory (which is why the scene here has left it to academics to deal with it). In Greece for example these discussions happen exclusively in the left-communist activist scene, in social centres etc, where theory is seen as part of the class struggle. But just to make it clear: we are definitely not targeting academics, quite the opposite, which is why the announcement was posted here.

I'm not opposed to theory at all, I'm opposed to old wine in new bottles being sold at overinflated prices cos it's from a fancy French vineyard.

jonthom's picture
jonthom
Offline
Joined: 25-11-10
Mar 18 2012 14:55
demetra wrote:
Well not to say this is typical of the british attitude to theory (which is why the scene here has left it to academics to deal with it). In Greece for example these discussions happen exclusively in the left-communist activist scene, in social centres etc, where theory is seen as part of the class struggle. But just to make it clear: we are definitely not targeting academics, quite the opposite, which is why the announcement was posted here.

It's not really an issue of "theory", more that - at least on the surface - I'm not really clear on what this has to offer in practical terms; the arguments we make, the actions we take, the way we form strategies and so on. I'll admit that a lot of it goes over my head, though. That said, having a deeper understanding does have some value in itself, and can have practical use that might not be immediately obvious.

I also think a fair bit of my issue is more to do with the language than the ideas. Whatever "communisation and its vicissitudes" might mean, I'd imagine there's got to be some more accessible way of expressing it...

While anti-intellectualism can be a problem, there's also a problem with ideas that are meant to be for wider consumption being expressed in ways that are only accessible to a minority of (generally) academically-minded folks.

revol68's picture
revol68
Offline
Joined: 23-02-04
Mar 18 2012 15:02

The poverty of the majority of the Communisation theory is shown up in "Communisation and it's discontents", where the best essays in terms of clarity and content are critical, the worst of the essays read like communisation genre pieces, ultra left pulp fiction.

Caiman del Barrio
Offline
Joined: 28-09-04
Mar 18 2012 21:16

Yeah I think the language is wholly inappropriate. Now I'm not one for dumbing down the English language or rejecting poetic, attractive turns of phrase in deference to some conception of the uneducated, unwashed masses (cos I think overly repetitive, boring language is in itself a turn off), but elements of this (and the whole communisation thing as a whole, wtf does it even mean?) seem to be a conscious attempt of elitism. Not content with the shared language and concepts already in existence (with varying degrees of currency amongst the wider working class), they find it necessary to invent a new word as a means of further enforcing segregation and going to higher, more ivory ground.

basically, I'm calling 'hipster' on Libcom for the 2nd time in 5 mins. wink

Juan Conatz's picture
Juan Conatz
Offline
Joined: 29-04-08
Mar 19 2012 06:23

Is communization a new word though? I thought Kropotkin used it?

Joseph Kay's picture
Joseph Kay
Offline
Joined: 14-03-06
Mar 19 2012 07:15

It was certainly used by William Morris in contrast to the transitional state of state socialists. Although no doubt Morris was a 'programmatist'.

raw
Offline
Joined: 8-10-03
Mar 19 2012 09:59

Can anyone write a report back or was this talk recorded?

Awesome Dude's picture
Awesome Dude
Offline
Joined: 31-07-07
Mar 19 2012 11:03

Damn missed this...then again I was in my local pub enjoying a damn good selection of ales and talking with ordinary workers about how much we hate our jobs and what we can actually do about it.

Caiman del Barrio
Offline
Joined: 28-09-04
Mar 19 2012 13:50
Juan Conatz wrote:
Is communization a new word though? I thought Kropotkin used it?

OK my bad it's not new, but I think there's still a point about the concept of moving to higher, more elitist, less accessible ground though. After all, a hipster only claims to be original inasmuch as s/he's able to recuperate/reinvent something obscure from the past... wink

bzfgt
Offline
Joined: 25-02-09
Mar 19 2012 14:13
Caiman del Barrio wrote:
Steven. wrote:
This looks interesting, but it's south of the river (sad face)

roll eyes

Am I the only person who turns off at hearing the word "communisation"? I mean, I dunno, but titling a public event with two utterly impenetrable words...what use will this have to folk who aren't pursuing postgrads in Humanities/Arts?

"Vicissitudes" is pretty penetrable, since it's in the dictionary.

revol68's picture
revol68
Offline
Joined: 23-02-04
Mar 19 2012 14:29
bzfgt wrote:
Caiman del Barrio wrote:
Steven. wrote:
This looks interesting, but it's south of the river (sad face)

roll eyes

Am I the only person who turns off at hearing the word "communisation"? I mean, I dunno, but titling a public event with two utterly impenetrable words...what use will this have to folk who aren't pursuing postgrads in Humanities/Arts?

"Vicissitudes" is pretty penetrable, since it's in the dictionary.

"magniloquent" is also in the dictionary...

bzfgt
Offline
Joined: 25-02-09
Mar 19 2012 16:04
revol68 wrote:
bzfgt wrote:
Caiman del Barrio wrote:
Steven. wrote:
This looks interesting, but it's south of the river (sad face)

roll eyes

Am I the only person who turns off at hearing the word "communisation"? I mean, I dunno, but titling a public event with two utterly impenetrable words...what use will this have to folk who aren't pursuing postgrads in Humanities/Arts?

"Vicissitudes" is pretty penetrable, since it's in the dictionary.

"magniloquent" is also in the dictionary...

Hence it also is anything but "impenetrable."

revol68's picture
revol68
Offline
Joined: 23-02-04
Mar 19 2012 16:12

so the only language that could be described as impenetrable would be constructed from words not found in a dictionary. very odd criteria.

bzfgt
Offline
Joined: 25-02-09
Mar 19 2012 16:28

What you say doesn't follow from what I say. S/he said "two utterly impenetrable words [my emphasis]", not that the language is impenetrable.

If I said "The vicissitudes of magniloquence are cadaverously pink," all my words would be penetrable and my grammar would be correct, but my language would be utterly impenetrable. As you can see, that's a different claim.

Caiman del Barrio
Offline
Joined: 28-09-04
Mar 19 2012 17:11

Well I'm glad that's cleared up then. I take it all back...

Ramona's picture
Ramona
Offline
Joined: 19-09-03
Mar 19 2012 17:26

That aside, did anyone go to this? Any good?