Visualizzazione post con etichetta Fèlix Guattari. Mostra tutti i post
Visualizzazione post con etichetta Fèlix Guattari. Mostra tutti i post
venerdì 14 ottobre 2016
venerdì 16 settembre 2016
venerdì 2 settembre 2016
OUT NOW ! Obsolete Capitalism :: Accelerazione, rivoluzione, moneta nell'Anti-Edipo di Deleuze e Guattari (Rizosfera, 2016) - collana «I forti dell'avvenire» (SF 002 it)
CLICCA QUI PER SCARICARE GRATUITAMENTE IL LIBRO
La ricerca nel cuore di tenebra dell'accelerazionismo, l'Anti-Edipo di Deleuze e Guattari, è arrivata al suo punto di non-ritorno. Si è palesata una mostruosità concettuale: l'accelerazionismo pulsionale o quantico, una «formazione» che si esprime tramite una nuova politica di corpi, onde oscure e forze il cui rapporto con la tecnologia è mediato dal bricolage pulsionale di singolarità e comunità invisibili e inoperose, a metà strada tra sperimentazione sociale e ricerca individuale. Una nuova via per ripensare concetti quale moneta, rivoluzione e accelerazione e riunire in un'unica trama cospirativa Deleuze, Foucault, Klossowski, Guattari e Nietzsche.
Ecco l'incipit del libro
venerdì 29 luglio 2016
domenica 19 giugno 2016
4.13 Against the Black Death: good health and new hope - Part XXXIV - Excerpt from the essay «Acceleration, Revolution and Money in Deleuze and Guattari's Anti-Oedipus», Obsolete Capitalism Free Press/Rizosphere, 2016
Against the Black Death: good health and new hope
All we have written is the result of a research project that involved three main cores, heterogeneous but still tied and unified by a subversive thinking. The first core is represented by the posthumous fragments on the will to power, where the heart of this research lies, The Strong of the Future, that is, the Nietzsche that wrote in 1887-1888; the second core can be identified in the essay on conspiracy and the community of singularities generated by the Eternal Return, that is, the Klossowski of Nietzsche and the Vicious Circle (1969); the third core is constituted by the present accelerationist passage in The Civilised Capitalist Machine where the nomad pluralities appear, that is, the Anti-Œdipus of Deleuze and Guattari (1972). Three cores for three books of the Adversary – a lawless, anarchic and antichrist Adversary – whose task is “is not to be found in the neurotic or perverse re-territorializations that arrest the process or assign it goals; it is no more behind than ahead, it coincides with the completion of the process of desiring-production, this process that is always and already complete as it proceeds, and as long as it proceeds” (AE, 382). If, for what concerns industrial capital or digital post-capitalism, “we really haven’t seen anything yet” because with its de-territorializations “it may dispatch us straight to the moon” (AE, 34) and conquer new planets or galaxies with its Black Deaths, according to Deleuze and Guattari the non-identitary nomad “will never go too far with the deterritorialization, the decoding of flows” (AE, 382). Zarathustra, in one of its most visionary speeches, The Bestowing Virtue, prophesizes: “Truly, a place of healing shall the earth become! And already is a new odor diffused around it, a salvation-bringing odor - and a new hope!” (Z, 65). thus, the masterpiece written by Deleuze and Guattari – which, as we have demonstrated, is not only an authorial work but a rhizomatic gem – finishes with a morning song to accelerate the momentum of the Eternal Return: “For the new earth is not to be found in the neurotic or perverse re-territorializations that arrest the process or assign it goals; it is no more behind than ahead, it coincides with the completion of the process of desiring-production, this process that is always and already complete as it proceeds, and as long as it proceeds” (AE, 382). The appearance of those who walk through the revolutionary avenue changes, being them the strong of the future, or the non-homogeneous singularities, or the nomad pluralities, but the imperative of the microcomunism of the unequal remains the same: Accelerate and Destroy. The inhuman Kingdom is already among us.
December 2015
(The End)
domenica 12 giugno 2016
4.12. Towards a new land: to dismantle and to reconstruct the mechanism - Part XXXIII - Excerpt from the essay «Acceleration, Revolution and Money in Deleuze and Guattari's Anti-Oedipus», Obsolete Capitalism Free Press/Rizosphere, 2016
Towards a new land: to dismantle and to reconstruct the mechanism
It follows that the greatest mistake for a revolutionary is to think that revolution will coincide with himself, with his own name in History. Indeed, those who make revolution fail are individuals that attribute ends to it, that perform sudden stops or that allow it to continue in a vacuum – “betrayals don’t wait their turn, but are there from the very start” (AE, 379). Conversely, the lucid revolutionaries, who notice the presence of groups which overtake the goals chosen by their closed set, with that level of awareness have either to prevent the formation of negative sovereignties – by creating a sort of new revolutionary anthropology – subtracting from developing sovereign nuclei the stability and the point of equilibrium through the creation of insurgent obliquely un-centred communities. This is the sense of the “overturned sovereignty” claimed by Deleuze and Guattari. Drift/bifurcation or subtraction/imbalance, these are the two “insurrectional” tasks that have to be prepared for revolution, rather than opposing and resisting to the point of equilibrium of sedition, that is, a blind idea of return. Alternatively, if we conceive the “seditious” as an individual that stands outside his ego, we have to regard him as a hollow object, whose purpose is to connect himself to “revolutionary” processes pre-existent to his effort and his thought. As for other coeval behaviours, this connection could function as a positive, accelerating and non-inhibiting catalysation. The reaction and the subsequent fusion, though, do not induce the individual to remain unaltered in his stability, but instead the accelerating catalytic process radically transforms it. The accelerating factor of the catalytic reaction, then, affects both fields: the collective revolutionary process and the individual de-subjecting process – in this regard, Foucault remarks that “one has to dispense with the constituent subject, to get rid of the subject itself” (PK, 117). If desire lives because it does not have an aim, returning to Deleuze and Guattari, it generates effects of acceleration of the revolutionary process in a materialistic sense and not in an ideological one, where ‘ideology’ means the political process driven by party officials who are revolution professionals. There cannot be “creation” if we repeat the same ideological rituals of previous revolutions, of which we still preserve the idle forms lacking any propulsive dynamism. We ought to prevent the serialization of insurrection and its “mono and macro” form. Indeed, as Klossowski writes, “if the meaning of all eminent creation is to break the gregarious habits that always direct existing beings toward ends that are useful exclusively to the oppressive regime of mediocrity - then in the experimental domain to create is to do violence to what exists, and thus to the integrity of beings. Every creation of a new type must provoke a state of insecurity: creation ceases to be a game at the margins of reality; henceforth, the creator will not re-produce, but will itself produce the real” (NVC, 129). Deleuze and Guattari hold a similar stance – “we are claiming the famous rights to laziness, to non-productivity, to dream and fantasy production, once again we are quite pleased, since we haven't stopped saying the opposite, and that desiring-production produces the real” (AE, 380). Every production of reality is in fact a crack, a breach into the social body, but such fracture happens only “by means of a desire without aim or cause that charted it and sided with it. While the schiz is possible without the order of causes, it becomes real only by means of something of another order: Desire, the desert-desire, the revolutionary investment of desire. And that is indeed what undermines capitalism: where will the revolution come from, and in what form within the exploited masses? It is like death—where, when? It will be a decoded flow, a de-territorialized flow that runs too far and cuts too sharply, thereby escaping from the axiomatic of capitalism” (AE, 378). Not only this production of Reality in the desert of the sub-reality of monetary circuiting undermines capitalism, but it also nullifies, as a primary target, the theory of state or any theory of institutions deriving from revolutionary struggles, because schizo-analysis – as the thought of Nietzsche, Klossowski and Foucault – does not rigorously offer “any political programme”, not for a group, nor for a party, nor for masses, because this would be all unfair and irrational. (AE 437) The authors of the Anti-Œdipus, as well as the sappers of the Rhizosphere are all aware of the negative, violent and brutal task of schizo-analysis – as they are aware of the genealogy, of the archive, of the philosophy of the future and of the Vicious Circle: “de-familiarizing, de-œdipalizing, de-castrating; undoing theater, dream, and fantasy; decoding, de-territorializing – a terrible curettage, a malevolent activity” (AE, 381). All this Destroy, Destroy primarily and essentially indicates to free from any obstacle the “process”, to accelerate the process, to accelerate and to destroy, since the process to be accelerated is, as we have mentioned, “the process of desiring-production, following its molecular lines of escape” (AE, 381). And we can overlook if someone more or less recently has confused the “molecular escape” with the “molar production”, or if he has interpreted going “even further away in market movements” as following in a conformist way the commercial strategy of disarticulation of existing entities since the process is unique in nature, or if someone has believed that we ought to accelerate the rush of turbo-capitalism so that it would crash at the first bifurcation, or – even worse – if someone exchanged the desire for goods consumption and for self-repression, with the impulsive desire of production of Reality, aimed at modifying what exists and at liberating the differences. Let us say it here, once and for all: the capitalist process of decoding produces infinite abstract quantities – money and its pair of repetitive and spectral syntheses, credit and debit, driven and controlled by the systemic Axiomatics of immanence; the schizophrenic process of decoding produces, instead, particles of power that are non-evident, radiating and immeasurable – desire, manipulated by impulses, that is, by desiring-machines. These are nothing but differences in regime, not in nature: indeed the two aspects of the process have contact but do not confuse one with the other. The schizo-nomad remains always at the boundary of capitalism: it represents its inherent tendency brought to fulfillment as well as its exterminating angel (AE, 35). However, desiring production – impulsive or concealed – and social production – monetarised and abstract – are the two differences that have been the object of study of the materialist psychiatry of Deleuze and Guattari. They represent the “way of life” or the “Reality” that we desire: Feasible Reality vs. Artificial Reality.
click here TO READ MORE
click here TO READ MORE
domenica 5 giugno 2016
4.11. How to escape from axiomatics and to make the modern immanent machine break down? - Part XXXII - Excerpt from the essay «Acceleration, Revolution and Money in Deleuze and Guattari's Anti-Oedipus», Obsolete Capitalism Free Press/Rizosphere, 2016
How to escape from axiomatics and to make the modern immanent machine break down?
Part XXXII - Excerpt from the essay «Acceleration, Revolution and Money in Deleuze and Guattari's Anti-Oedipus», Obsolete Capitalism Free Press/Rizosphere, 2016
Here we finally return to the plot of money and revolution, under the sign of the Œdipic contrast. If, in our modern empirical experience, our societies are pervaded with economic optimism – descending from the eighteenth-century positivism thoroughly analysed by Marx at the socio-productive level and by Nietzsche at the impulsive-energetic level – and with cybernetic processual evolution of monetary and credit circuits farsightedly described by Deleuze and Guattari, what strategies could be adopted to escape from commercial axiomatics and to make the modern immanent machine break down? Which relation exists between money and revolution? Shall we switch to a detailed and bureaucratic plan descending from a totalising “keys-in-hand” theory that explains and foresees everything, according to fixed relations between the forms of the Earth and of human set theory, or shall we adopt a plan of impulsive consistency corresponding to the always productive swinging energy of desire, of the real and of imbalance? Between organisation-administration and chaos-creation, what levels of synthesis and innovation should we choose in order to “search and destroy” and to then rebuild? Shall we build revolutionary subjects and identities within class or economic determinations, or shall we de-construct forms, to discover the “hollowness” of subjects and to increase the speed of activation of the revolutionary “process” of the irregular idle, of the non-exchangeable group and of the community of singularity? Nonetheless, from a different perspective, as Ewald seemed to argue, if the seventies history has handed over to us a “fact” in all its tragic evidence, that is the disappearance of the social revolutionary horizon, that is, the sinking of the concept of insurrection as magnet for political action from the Enlightenment onwards. Are we assisting to the Death of Revolution as palingenetic event and qualified creative rupture, mother of modern politics – as Foucault seems to foresee after 1978 and after the Rhizosphere period, or are we facing the perpetual revolutionary becoming as human condition at the times of post-revolution and post-capitalist control-based neo-societies – as Deleuze and Guattari argued in the multi-stratum desert of A Thousand Plateaus? Something has changed after 1978, revolutionaries become spectres like beautiful losers, as if the sedition and the overturning of desire on the carpet of Reality were symmetrical to the decline of industry and to the erosion of the historically fixed capital. The productive practices of industry and the concept of cathartic revolution decay together with the West, in a miserable and stagnant dusk. To us, authors of this volume, the intersection between “money and revolution” suggested by Klossowski and Deleuze, and by the whole anti-œdipic rhizosphere, seems still profoundly relevant, no longer in the westerly vulgate but instead on a global scale, the only possible one today. In the wildest present circumstances, the reproduction of money and liquidity has not stopped, neither have the attempts to become revolutionaries and pathologically seditious, in every single planetary background. Daily events speak for themselves. As Foucault consciously wrote, the triangle of “desire, value and simulacrum” still dominates us, and we seem unable to grasp it nor to understand it in its horrific geometrical effectiveness. How to escape from axiomatics and to make the modern immanent machine break down: the question of the Anti-Œdipus is still relevant in the present, as it has been in the past. Part of the answer, within the context of the evolution of the relation between technology and liberation, can certainly be generated and developed by the conflation of three specific fields of our age: cyberpunk, blockchain/DAO technology, and the heterarchical movement P2P. The new alliance between peer to peer – a digital evolution of anarchic and self-organised reticular logics of autonomist philosophy of existentialist punk dis-intermediation – and DIY – the do-it-yourself already post-capitalist in its very own nature. The fourth pillar, which has to escort the three fields indicated above, could be the philosophy of the rhizosphere, or of the future. The “philosophy of the future”, in order to return joyful and dangerous, must abandon the collusive position that has occupied in the industry of knowledge and of wisdom, and return to being an informal peripatetic wayfarer – a gypsy scholarship. With great awareness it must experiment, fail, create: study, deconstruct and reconstruct, even itself. The gypsy scholarship, though, conceived as pedagogy of freedom and insurrection, cannot become science, absorbed by institutions: it is like a gust of The Fixer, or the glow of a moment lasting for a century.
CLIC HERE TO READ MORE
CLIC HERE TO READ MORE
domenica 29 maggio 2016
4.10. Infinite reproduction of money and credit - Part XXXI - Excerpt from the essay «Acceleration, Revolution and Money in Deleuze and Guattari's Anti-Oedipus», Obsolete Capitalism Free Press/Rizosphere, 2016
Infinite reproduction of money and credit
4.9. Pt. XXXI -
Excerpt from the essay «Acceleration, Revolution and Money in Deleuze and Guattari's Anti-Oedipus», Obsolete Capitalism Free Press/Rizosphere, 2016
If money is the infinite reproduction of a flow of abstract quantities, we can then conceive it as a software related to a hardware, i.e. the digital chrematistics, which has already introjected in our age its metamatic nature, and swiftly travels within digital networks, inside a superior, artificial and over-human circulation. Money, in the Anti-Œdipus and even more today, is a decoded abstraction that sums up value, order, number, calculous, distribution and speed. For a Left, and a revolutionary movement, that, still in 1972, in disconnected and confused ways, take as reference the field of “Marxist humanism”, the shift of the axis of critical theory from the world of production and industry to the domain of flows and of money-credit has been opposed for a long time, if not openly rejected. The shift in paradigm, though, released certain effects and reached an unstoppable critical mass of its own. The infinite reproduction of money in the global circuit has reached its accelerated peak thanks to the role played by the global network of Central Banks of constant injection and coordinated punctual inflating. Infinite money, thus, has circuits of commercial perpetual reproduction, which we will term “relative”, and circuits of perpetual financial reproduction, which we will term ‘absolute’, managed by supranational global institutional networks. It will be necessary to restart from here, from this Nietzsche-Klossowski-Deleuze axis and, generally, from the French revolutionary Rhizosphere, in order to perfect the tools and analyses capable of dig into real information of gregarious sovereignty formations. Certainly the aggressive and polemical work of Deleuze and Guattari in the phase of the Anti-Œdipus had the great merit of identifying the growing systemic fault line that was about to shift, to deteriorate and to rupture – the great historical asymmetry between infinite and money, mobility and credit, stability and capital – which brought market economies, with deep and abrupt transitional crises, from the planned quantitative industrial world to the post-productive cybernetic-credit-financial world. Additionally, one of the most relevant merits of the Anti-Œdipus is having theorised, starting from the considerations of Nietzsche and Foucault, the monetary and credit infinite. If the “infinite creditor” was to be traced back “new collective memory” conceived by Nietzsche in The Genealogy of Morals, and concerning “a debt system: […] a voice that speaks or intones, a sign marked in bare flesh, an eye that extracts enjoyment from the pain”, “infinite money” is then to be related to Foucault’s Lectures on the Will to Know that he gave in February 1971. The “infinite creditor” is certainly according to Nietzsche the Christian God, while the debt, in ancient societies as well as in commercial ones, fulfils the task “to breed man, […] to form him within the debtor-creditor relation, which on both sides turns out to be a matter of memory – a memory straining toward the future” (AE, 180). “Infinite money”, according to Foucault in 1971, is born instead from a chrematistics in the strict sense, artificial, “which seeks only the acquisition of money itself and consequently in unlimited quantities. This rests on exchange” (LKW, 145). Deleuze and Guattari return to the topic of the infinite in the Anti-Œdipus, adopting the thesis of the philosopher of Poitiers: “The abolition of debts, when it takes place – they refer to Solon, the Athenian legislator – is a means of maintaining the distribution of land, and a means of preventing the entry on stage of a new territorial machine, possibly revolutionary and capable of raising and dealing with the agrarian problem in a comprehensive way” (AE, 197).
Immediately after, they refer to Cypselus, tyrant of Korinthos: “in other cases where a redistribution occurs, the cycle of credits is maintained, in the new form established by the State, money” (AE, 196). However, in greater depth, Deleuze and Guattari, returning to Foucault’s studies on Greek tyrants, affirm that “money – the circulation of money – is the means for rendering the debt infinite. […] The infinite creditor and infinite credit have replaced the blocks of mobile and finite debts. There is always a monotheism on the horizon of despotism: the debt becomes a debt of existence, a debt of the existence of the subjects themselves” (AE, 197). Money in the Anti-Œdipus is, thus, turned into THE “systemic dispositif” of power aimed at perpetuating infinitely the credit cycle, similarly as the tyrant of Korinthos taught us; however, even more distinctively, contemporary money created ex-nihilo by the coordinated action of central and commercial banks, and therefore infinite, is the prerequisite and the supporting structure of more subjecting infinites, which, under the double-face umbrella of credit/debit, result as refund/existence, duty/guilt, crisis/resource, catastrophe/bifurcation. Money is, hence, the fulcrum and the pivot on which the contemporary power system rests for all its policies: money is its main weapon, due to its synthetic credit-debit relation which becomes the “transmission belt” of the commercial and institutional credit world. This monetary paradigm of power that Foucault traces back to the VII century B.C. in Ancient Greece, has been overlooked by Marxists, but not by the intellectuals of the Rhizosphere. Until today, the demystifying and incendiary work of anti-œdipic and rhizomatic authors has not reached in our culture the “masterpiece” status that it deserves, because obscure and gregarious forces – the braking powers – are still operating, with the aim of keeping society under the conforming and homogeneous pressure of perpetual slavery, gregariousness that Nietzsche so appropriately defined in the accelerationist fragment on the strong of the future. The Anti-Œdipus, far from resting on innocuous ‘irenisms’, continues to generate hybrid processes of affirmative and transforming energy thanks to its deep analytical capacity. Everything is made clear: “There we no longer have any secrets, we no longer have anything to hide. It is we who have become a secret, it is we who are hidden, even though we do all openly, in broad light” (DI, 46).