domenica 13 dicembre 2015

E.2.4. The withdrawal of the left wing nationalism from the world market - Pt. VII - Excerpt from the essay «Money, Revolution and Acceleration in Deleuze and Guattari's Anti-Oedipus», Obsolete Capitalism Free Press/Rizosphere, 2016

The withdrawal of the left wing nationalism from the world market

To withdraw from the world market, as

Samir Amin advises Third World countries to do, in a curious revival of the fascist "economic solution"? Or might it be to go in the opposite direction? To go still further, that is, in the movement of the market, of decoding and deterritorialization? For perhaps the flows are not yet deterritorialized enough, not decoded enough, from the viewpoint of a theory and a practice of a highly schizophrenic character. (AO, 238)

Samir Amin, the exponent of the marxist, anti-capitalist, unaligned «Third-World Left» with his nationalist and isolationist position, reminds Deleuze and Guattari of a revival of the fascist "economic solution" of 20s and 30s of the XX century. Therefore another revolutionary option is then discarded and the two French philosophers paradoxically ask: what about going “towards the opposite direction?A question which produces a double effect: on one side it rejects some of the classical hypothesis of the European «revolutionary humanism»: traditional left wing movements like socialism, communism or social democracy are not even taken into consideration for a revolutionary path. Not to mention the revolutionary trade unionism, the radical reformism or the naive anarchic spontaneity, the new post - ’68 political manifestations, the so-called “little churches” by Guattari. (DI, 264).
Neither is the armed struggle, the nihilist frontal attack to the system. So where is such question taking us? Coherently we should suppose towards the exact contrary of the «marxist nationalism» that is to say a worldwide revolution against the same global capitalism of the decoded and deterritorialized monetary flux, mentioned by Deleuze and Guattari. The only possible marxist or revolutionary global theory antagonistic of capitalism is the one of Lev Trotsky, whom Guattari sympathized with in the 50’s but the idea of a «permanent revolution» or of Fourth International never suited Deleuze and Guattari who have never been nostalgic of soviet times. “Yet no revolutionary tendency was willing or able to assume the need for a Soviet organization that would have allowed the masses to take real charge of their interests and desires. Machines called political organizations were put in circulation, and they functioned according to the model Dimitrov had developed at the Seventh International Congress — alternating between popular fronts and sectarian retractions — and they always lead to the same repressive results. (...) By their axiomatics, these mass machines refuse to liberate revolutionary energy. Red flag in hand, this politics in its underhanded way reminds one of the politics of the President or the clergy.” (DI, 268). Which chances may a turbo-trotskyist plan have when referred to «the civilized capitalist machine»? With regards to the economic aspect, can we find an economic theory alternative to capitalism with the same global «tension» and the same will of power? Neither a neo marxist as Suzanne de Brunhoffs’s, nor Bernard Schmitt with his theory of quantum fluxes, show the same strength. Without convincing answers on the horizon and with all historical possibilities of revolution are set aside, which opposite direction is possible? At this point Deleuze and Guattari reveal the “second effect” of their statement: to push the revolutionary motion alongside with the decodification and deterritorialization of the economic market. Why doing so, we may ask, and what do revolutionary anti- market forces share with the capitalistic ones? Which alliance could be established from a position of withdrawal from the market to one of a wild laissez-faire economy? Moreover what are the two French philosophers referring to when they speak about a theory and practice of a highly schizophrenic character that is supposed to further deterritorialize and decode the flows? Were Deleuze and Guattari really looking for a compromise with the market, when questioning themselves about the revolution of the future? 


Nessun commento:

Posta un commento