Saturday, May 25, 2013

Solidarity With The Swedish Rioters

"It is not destruction itself that is valuable, of course, but the refusal to submit, which will ultimately be capable of transforming itself into a positive project of converting these machines in such a way that they increase the real power of men."  The Bad Days Will End. IS #7, 1963

Friday, May 24, 2013

McKenzie Wark Responds

From Facebook:  The pro-situ crowd are annoyed. What makes them think i disagree with any of this? Or that they themselves would not be implicated in such broad brush 'critique'?

As a specific response to question #1: well, the words and actions that have brought us to this point.  In the first instance, because Mr. Wark's books are historically inaccurate and often factually incorrect.  In the second instance, because "3D-Guy" doll represents a distortion of Situationist theory.  Mr. Wark claims it a work of detournement, but that technique is about hijacking elements of dominant culture (or spectacle, if you like) to attack dominant culture.  So, either detourning Guy Debord is intended to attack Guy Debord for being a representative of dominant culture, or the intention is to use the image of Guy Debord to make some kind of meta-commentary on the proliferation of disposable/degraded images, in which case the whole thing becomes an abstract, hall of mirrors, academic intellectual exercise; in other words, precisely the thing myself and others have objected to.

... we must reject not only the remains of specialized art 
but also those of specialized politics... IS #6, 1961

To be very clear: we are not Debord cultists.  We do not hold the man up as an idol beyond reproach.  Indeed, newly translated writings (found here) from our comrade Gianfranco Sanguinetti (the man who first brought the Rhizome contest to our attention), offer an evolving, multi-faceted portrait of a complex and contradictory figure - a human being, in other words.  So: McKenzie Wark offers a 3D doll, we offer at least a glimpse of  the real man.

The SI's work was subjected to distortion and calumny (Masperized, to use their own idiom) in its own time.  As time goes on, the danger grows ever larger that a distorted view of the SI will be entrenched in the common lexicon, especially since we're talking about a theoretical vantage point shared by only a very small group of people at any given time.  That is why we respond so vehemently to what we see as falsifications - recuperations.  Relegating the Situationists to history as a curio worthy of academic discussion is antithetical to the both the spirit and the stated aims of the Situationists.  Or, to be a bit more sloganeering about it: don't bring the SI into the university, bring down the university with the SI.

Perhaps some of their [the Situationists'] subtle arts might work within the belly of this new digital beast, so that we might live within it, but not give it our undivided attention.  So ends Mr. Wark's recent Guardian op-ed, and it amounts to an eloquent auto-critique.  The Situationist project was manifestly not about finding ways to survive within the belly of the beast.  It was about slicing the beast's belly open and making something better out of its entrails.  What sounds "utopian" to some is more simply radical.  Yes, the theories and demands are grand; as they should be in a world whose masters can no longer even be bothered to offer hope, just more belt-tightening and drudgery on the long march to annihilation.

The comments to the Facebook post are very illuminating.  First off, I am glad to see that someone appreciates the phrase "pub quizzes for dolls."  I was rather happy with that one myself.  I can't be bothered to respond to what are mostly ad-hoc attempts to out-snark one another, but I must point out the amazing irony at being called "misanthropic," "disabling," and a purveyor of an "everything sucks" attitude by someone who apparently hopes for nothing more from existence than "some actual bright spots that might make people pause for a brief moment before pissing on my grave."

The rest posted without comment.

  • Ben Brucato Clearly written by Americans who string together a series of conservative and reactionary tropes and call it radical critique. I'd consider most of this garbage had they not penned one excellent phrase: "pub quizzes for dolls"!
  • Aragorn Bang this critique would have been AWESOME 15 years ago
  • Aragorn Bang (the critique of you... )
  • Davin Heckman Intellectual life in the 21st century tends to privilege misanthropic postures.... it's just intellectually easy to think that because a lot of things suck, everything sucks. If you answer everything sucks before it's even considered, it comes across like a kind of rigorous skepticism. And, given the state of the academic job market and my many friends who struggle to find good teaching jobs, I have to admit that I can fall into the trap of resenting people who enjoy inflated market share. I cannot say they are entirely wrong with pushing back against "expertise".... but, hey, you've been given a platform, I trust you to use it! And I think you know this. Anything that can turn the charms of commodity culture against itself, and popularize the idea of a critical human creativity is an opportunity.
  • McKenzie Wark Davin Heckman yes, i quite agree with many of their sentiments. I just find the overall affect of it disabling.

  • Davin Heckman Of course it's disabling... That's the point? Utopia is impossible, so you can pursue it indefinitely, but never have to actually get there.... and, of course, people are always the obstacle in these pure schemes. There's real injustice in the world. We all are benefiting from injustice in various degrees. So, you make a calculation about what to do. Resist? Sell out? Or try to find some way to bring justice closer to realization, recognizing that every decision carries with it a capacity for error and, at best, compromised benefits. I've only found one reasonable way to work through it.... Trying very hard to love people.
  • McKenzie Wark Davin Heckman there's always a gap between theory and practice, but i think it best to openly acknowledge that gap and work inside it, rather than try to wish it away with maximalist theoretical statements. But i don't want to limit theory's utopian drive. That keeps the gap open and alive.
  • Davin Heckman That's what I try to do. At least that's what I have told myself. But, of course, in the grand reckoning of all things, I should be accountable to others. The big list will undoubtedly be a litany of humiliations and embarrassments, with, if I am open enough and dedicated enough, some actual bright spots that might make people pause for a brief moment before pissing on my grave.
  • Stephen Caldwell Whenever "recuperation"gets casually thrown around as original sin,I always bear in mind Peter Doggert's point in 'There's a riot goin' on' that corporations were advertising "The revolution" at least a year before the events of 1968

Wednesday, May 22, 2013

Succinct Evisceration

For those wondering why all the animosity towards McKenzie Wark, please read Anthony Hayes' demolition of The Beach Beneath the StreetHere.

Critical Theory Is A Weapon


1.      The Situationist critique of modern capitalism remains a vital and cohesive attack, but since the SI’s dissolution, very few have attempted to seriously advance its critique.  Regardless, amidst the slow suicide of the West, Situationist theory remains the best jumping off point for a new radical critique of the whole of capitalist society.  This is not a matter of “preserving a legacy.”  Leave that to the wardens of dead time, the curators of decay.  The goal remains the same, and all the more crucial for being buried so long: “to rediscover the history of the movement of history itself.” (IS #7, 1963)

2.     “We will wreck this world,” ran a line in the very first Situationist magazine.  The statement is all the more astute for being a precise ironic encapsulation of the attitude of the world’s masters.  “In a world that really has been turned on its head, truth is a moment of falsehood,” as Guy Debord elegantly detourned Hegel.  To decipher the veritable words of power, invert the vapid positivisms.  When Barack Obama speaks of putting “hands on the arc of history” to “bend it once more toward the hope of a better day,” what he is really saying is “we will wreck this world.”

3.     “The Left,” or what passes for it these days, has long since accepted its tenured irrelevancy.  One can find a bit more fervor on the Extreme Right, largely motivated by fearful irrationality.  The theoretical emptiness of the Right hardly merits mention.  Its deliberately a-historical ideology hinges on a nihilistic love for authority.  The surrender of the Left stings a bit more, but we’re over it.  That the traditional ideologies and their myriad micro-variants have nothing left to offer is understood by nearly everyone.  Nowadays apathy itself is culpa levis as compared with criticism of the totality of society.  When history is stalled out, ideology loses its power to seduce.  In any case, reviving ideology would be like fucking a corpse.  We don’t need to revive dead ideas; we demand a liberated real life.

4.     Power demands respect, but it does not preach by example.  One definition of the social system of spectacle would be a series of promises made in bad faith.  “This existence postulates a fluid fidelity, a succession of continually disappointing commitments to false products.” (Comments on the Society of the Spectacle, 1988)   To promise eternal youth.   To deliver micro-managed rigor mortis.  This is the fundamental crime, and it is unforgivable.  No excuses ever, for anyone in authority; that is the first principle.  When it comes to power, we deny the good intention, the respectable mistake, the indiscretion, the extenuating circumstance.

5.     “The triumph of an economic system founded on separation leads to the proletarianization of the world.” (The Society of the Spectacle, 1967)  Now that the process is nearly complete, we can see very well its effects.  The autonomous economy, imposing the logic of the commodity – that is, the logic of utility, interchangeability, disposability – upon the whole of society, remolds and reorders society according to its dictates.  These dictates mediate all social relations – whether human qua human or human qua economy – through appearances.   That is, through abstractions of real conditions.  Marx’s formula for the commodity stated 21 yards of linen = 1 coat.  The modern economy takes for granted its ability to render equivalent dissimilar concrete things, and so dispenses with any quantitative or qualitative distinctions.  Linen = coat.  Progress = regression.  Arbeit mach frei.  One thousand dead Dhaka factory workers equal a smart outfit from Benetton, and the only discussion is about “business ethics” and the appropriate level of compensation.  Noticeably absent from the discussion is the fact that scores of human beings are disposable so long as crisp dress shirts continue to proliferate at market-friendly prices.

6.     “The prisoner seemed to feel he had to amuse the soldier, he danced round and round in front of him in his tattered cothes, while the soldier squatted on the ground, laughing and slapping his knees.” (In the Penal Colony, Franz Kafka)  In 1850’s America, midnight runners smuggled slaves out of the South.  In 1960’s Berlin, people dug tunnels or hopped barbed wire to get past the Wall.  Today, enterprising individuals use tunnels to smuggle KFC and Viagra into Gaza – for a price, of course.  There may not be a more searing indictment of the poverty of our era, when the prisoners can imagine nothing more than a mild cosmetic makeover of their cells.

7.     Radical theory is crucial for a new avant-garde.  A true avant-garde is a revolutionary front or it is nothing.  There is no hope left in aesthetics.  Today’s Yellowist is yesterday’s sub-Dadaist; in any age they are nothing more than salesmen.  The task is assaulting the world of today by utilizing and advancing the best theories of the past.

8.     “The Empire is the codification of derangement.” (VALIS, Phillip K. Dick)  Dialectical historical reasoning has been cauterized.  Within this eternal present of fragile perfection radical thought is submerged in a sea of binary oppositions rooted in empty ideology.  Of course, specific aspects survive, diffused within the generalized tendency to reification.  However, the metaphysics of the era are plainly visible when George W. Bush can claim, with a straight face, to be pro-war, pro-death penalty, and pro-life; when Barack Obama can accept the Nobel Peace Prize and also escalate indiscriminate drone bombing.  The incoherence of ideology becomes the ideology of incoherence.

9.     Even ostensible opponents of the prevailing order are likely to be reformists, at best, recuperators at worst.  What remains of the Left is content hyping specific, discrete manifestations of denigration – an institutional injustice, a corporation behaving unethically, a hypocritical politician, and so on – while steadfastly refusing to even see the totality, let alone assail it.  Thus, in the Guardian, George Monbiot bemoans “consumerism” without ever moving beyond a merely tallying of degradations.  Listing symptoms takes the place of confronting the disease.  The pseudo-ideology “consumerism” is identified, explicated, lamented and filed away.  The same blinkered perspective applies to Rolling Stone’s Matt Taibbi, frothing at the mouth denouncing Goldman Sachs without ever placing them in the larger context, without once daring to break the great taboo of the New Left.  Better to rape an eight-year-old than criticize capitalism.  The critique of Monbiot and Taibbi is tidy and academic.  Their refusal to engage with the totality reinforces the spectacle’s best notions about itself; criticism is permitted, even welcomed; as long as it plays by the rules.  Tidiness is boredom.  And “boredom is always counter-revolutionary.” (IS #7, 1963)

10.     Education remains the main indoctrination apparatus for the integrated spectacle.  At the early levels of schooling, the methods are direct.  Nowhere is this more apparent than in the United States, where the rigid testing that begins in grade school explicitly discourages critical thinking in favor of rote regurgitation.  Within higher education, the approach is rather more subtle, but no less effective.  George Monbiot is an Oxford grad after all, and Matt Taibbi went to Bard.  Even McKenzie Wark, he of the 3D Guy Debord action figure, can hang a liberal arts degree on his wall.  Certain people spoil their lives by an unhealthy and exaggerated devotion to education.

11.     Science, as well, pursues edification only through a base dedication to utility, whether in developing new anti-depressants, refining weapons technology, or perfecting the various forms of alienated communication.  Of course, this utility is a false utility, functioning as it does to debase the quality of human life in order to reinforce the mandate of the commodity-spectacle economy, which knows nothing else other than proliferation ad infinitum.  In either case, progress for the economy – which is always purely quantitative – is qualitative regression for human beings.  So the Dow Jones breaks 15,000 for the first time, and nations all over the world are on the brink of collapse.  Suicide rates skyrocket and health care spending must be ravaged in the name of “fiscal responsibility,” which is necessary to “jumpstart the economy.”  A tiny minority rules immune to consequence, with everyone else consigned to “the peremptory, unreasonable, degrading tyranny of want,” to quote Oscar Wilde.

12.     However, it is not so long ago that ideas pulled up the paving stones.

 13.     “Disobedience, in the eyes of anyone who has read history, is man’s original virtue.” (The Soul of Man Under Socialism, Oscar Wilde)  The spectacle, for all its glitter and flash, speaks a dead language.  Dissent begins with a reinvestment in the language of revolt.  The language will evolve concurrent with subversive action.  Theory is a first step.  Unified theory and practice, in the form of a general strike, is the ultimate goal.  Propaganda, as the SI realized, will be essential.  Detourned  or destroyed advertisements, hacked website, pamphleteering and posters, and continuous communication among like-minded, autonomous individuals will be parts of the process.  Selective sabotage cannot be ruled out.  An encouraging sign are the recent studies in the UK suggesting an epidemic of absenteeism, lateness, and strategic stalling in the white collar workforce, a “silent strike,” and something to build on as awareness of capitalism’s hollow promise spreads.

14.     The recovery and reigniting of history begins with a radical critique of prevailing conditions. Dialectical reason is the first weapon in the arsenal.   To think dialectically is to subvert authority.  The tyranny of the commodity-spectacle economy is not yet total.   The free thought of human beings, its most basic enemy, remains less than completely shackled.   But make no mistake; the specialists of subservience are working hard to rectify this.  We must fight back now.  There is never any other time.

Society for Comparative Vandalism
May 2013