domenica 10 gennaio 2016

E.2.8. Going further in the movement of decoding and deterritorialization - Pt. XI - Excerpt from the essay «Money, Revolution and Acceleration in Deleuze and Guattari's Anti-Oedipus», Obsolete Capitalism Free Press/Rizosphere, 2016



Going further in the movement of decoding and deterritorialization


Let us better analyse the proposal of going further. To go against
Samir Amin’s left wing nationalism means, for Deleuze and Guattari, to go further in the movement of decoding and deterritorialization of the market, where the movement does not solely apply to the market but to the revolutionary realm too. The expression to go further can be read as a prolongation not only of the capital itself - as it may seem under an «economical» reading of the passage - but as a movement to take the process as far as possible, overturning the initial meaning. Deleuze reports in his Nietzsche (1965) that the same expression had already been used by Nietzsche in a passage from The Antichrist: “Mankind has ventured to call pity a virtue (--in every superior moral system it appears as a weakness--); going still further, it has been called the virtue, the source and foundation of all other virtues--but let us always bear in mind that this was from the standpoint of a philosophy that was nihilistic, and upon whose shield the denial of life was inscribed. Schopenhauer was right in this: that by means of pity life is denied, and made worthy of denial--pity is the technic of nihilism” (AC, 11). The phrase «to go [still] further» is repeated twice in the passage The Civilized Capitalist Machine. If we follow Nietzsche’s interpretation of the nomadic deterritorialization and the lawless destruction - the decoding - we understand that the «process» to accelerate is quite the opposite of the one proper to the market. In Nietzsche’s thought the market movement implies a nihilist praxis, a double negative movement, a «saying “no” to life»,
in Nietzschean words. The first movement represses any impulse and destroys any difference, any self-organized network, being its only goal the constant flow of goods to create and distribute richness through the the remuneration of the capital. The second movement, immanent to the first one, produces a process of levelling and compliance as necessary condition to the survival of humanity at such level of artificiality. In Nietzsche’s fragment entitled The Strong of the Future the same process is highlighted and the two positive movements of liberation and differentiation - Nietzsche’s «saying yes to life» - represent, in Deleuze and Guattari’s words, a way to “free[ing] flows, going further and further into contrivance: a schizophrenic is someone who's been decoded, deterritorialized” especially when considering the process as a theory and a praxis of fluxes with high schizophrenic content. “We make a distinction between schizophrenia as a process and the way schizophrenics are produced as clinical cases that need hospitalizing: it's almost the same thing in reverse. The schizophrenics in hospitals are people who've tried to do something and failed, cracked up. We're not saying revolutionaries are schizophrenics. We're saying there's a schizoid process, of decoding and deterritorializing, which only revolutionary activity can stop turning into the production of schizophrenia.” (N, 23) At this point their question is: what is schizoanalysis if not a militant libidino- economic, libidino-political analysis? (N, 19) Moreover, assuming that the subconscious produces desire through a schizo-process, which goal does schizoanalysis have? Deleuze stunning definition follows: “Schizoanalysis has one single aim- to get revolutionary, artistic, and analytic machines working as parts, cogs, of one another. Again, if you take delire, we see it as having two poles, a fascist paranoid pole and a schizo-revolutionary pole. That's what we're interested in: revolutionary schisis as opposed to the despotic signifier.” (N, 24) Our task now is to identify whether Nietzsche’s strong of the future exponents, and anticapitalist parasitic bohemians, introduced by the accelerationist fragment in the Anti-Œdipus, may correspond to Deleuze and Guattari's anti-oedipal desiring machines and a-fascist nomadic singularities. 

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE

Nessun commento:

Posta un commento