0330368362.macmillan Children's Books - Alexander, Sama - Jodie.dec.100

The Communist Horizon
The Communist Horizon

JODI DEAN
VFRSO
London NewYork
FilYt published hy VelYo 2012
Jodi Dean 2012
All rights reserved
The moral rights of the author have been asserted
1 3 57 9 10 8 6 4 2
Verso
UK: 6 Meard Street, London WlF OEG
U.S.: 20 Jay Street, Suite 1010, Brooklyn, NY 11201
Y .versobooks.com
Verso is the imprint of New Left Books
eiSBN: 978-1-8467-955-3
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress
Typeset in Bodoni by MJ Gavan, Trr, Corwall
Printed in the US by Maple Vail
Contents
Introduction 1
1 Our Soviets 23
2 Present Force 39
3 Sovereignty of the People 69
4 Common and Commons 1 19
5 Desire 157
6 Occupation and the Party 207
Introduction
T
he term "horizon" marks a division. Understood
spatially, the horizon is the line dividing the
visible, separating earth from sky. Understood tempo
rally, the horizon converges with loss in a metaphor for
privation and depletion. The "lost horizon" suggests
abandoned projects, prior hopes that have now passed
away. Astrophysics offers a thrilling, even uncanny,
horizon: the "event horizon" sunounding a black hole.
The event horizon is the boundary beyond which events
cannot escape. Although "event horizon" denotes the
curvature in space/time effected by a singularity, it's
not much different from the spatial horizon. Both
evoke a fundamental division that we experience as
impossible to reach, and that we can neither escape
nor cross.
I use "horizon" not to recall a forgotten future but
to designate a dimension of experience that we can
never lose, even if, lost in a fog or focused on our feet,
2 THE COMMUNIST HORIZON
we fail to see it. The horizon is Real in the sense of
i mpossible-we can never reach it-and in the sense
of actual (Jacques Lacan's notion of the Real includes
both these senses). The horizon shapes our setting.
We can lose our heaings, hut the hmizon is a nec
essary dimension of our actuality. Whether the effect
of a singulaity or the meeting of eath and sky, the
horizon is the fundamental division establishing
where we are.
With respect to politics, the horizon that conditions
our expe1ience is communism. I get the term "commu
nist horizon" from Bruno Bosteels. In Th Actuality of
Communism, Bosteels engages with the work of
A
lvaro
Garcia Linera. Garcia Linera ran as Evo Morales's vice
presidential ru1ming mate in the Bolivian Movement
for Socialism-Political Instrument for the Sovereignty
of the Peoples (MAS-IPSP). He is the author of multi
ple pieces on Marxism, politics, and sociology, at least
one of which was written while he served time in prison
for promoting an armed uprising (before becoming vice
president of Bolivia, he fought in the Tupac Katai
Guerrilla Army). Bosteels quotes Garcia Linera's
response to an interviewer's questions about his paty's
plans following their electoral victm)': "The general
I NTRODUCTION 3
horizon of the era is communist."1 Garcia Linera
doesn't explain the term. Rather, as Bosteels points
out, Garcia Linera invokes the communist horizon "as
if it were the most natural thing in the world," as if
it were so obvious as to need neither explanation nor
justifcation. He assumes the communist horizon as an
ineducible feature of the political setting: "We enter
the movement with our expecting and desiring eyes
set upon the communist horizon." For Garcia Linera,
communism conditions the actuality of politics.
Some on the Left dismiss the communist horizon as
a lost horizon. For example, in a postmodern plural
ist approach that appeals to many on the Left, the
economists writing as J. h. Gibson-Graham reject
communism, offering "post-capitalism" in its stead.
They argue that descriptions of capitalism as a global
system miss the rich diversity of practices, relations,
and desires constituting yet exceeding the economy
and so advocate "reading the economy for diference
rather than dominance" (as if dominance neither
1 Bruno Bosteels, The Actuality of Communism, London:
Verso, 201 1 , 236.
presupposes nor relies on difference). 2 In their view,
reading for difference opens up new possibilities for
politics as it reveals previously unacknowledged loci
of creative action within everyday economic activities.
Gibson-Graham do not present Marxism as a failed
ideology or communism as the fossilized remainder
of an historical expe1iment gone horibly wrong. On
the contrary, they draw inspiration from Man's appre
ciation of the social chamcter of labor. They engage
Jean-Luc Nancy's emphasis on communism as an idea
that is the "index of a task of thought still and increas
ingly open. ": They embrace the reclamation of the
commons. And they are concerned with neoliberalism's
naturalization of the economy as a force exceeding the
capacity of people to steer or transform it.
Yet at the same time, Gibson-Graham push away
from communism to launch their vision of post
capitalism. Communism is that against which they
construct their altemative conception of the economy.
It's a constitutive force, present as a shaping of the
view they advocate. Even as Nancy's evocation of
2 J. K. Gi bson-Graham, A Post-Capitalist Politics,
Minneapol i s, MN: Uni versi ty of Mi nnesota Press, 2006, 59.
3 Ibi d. , 82.
I NTRODUCTION 5
communism serves as a horizon for their thinking,
they explicitly jettison the term "communism," which
they position as the object of "widespread aversion"
and which they associate with the "dangers of posing
a positivity, a nonnative representation." Rejecting the
positive notion of "communism," they opt for a te1m
that suggests an empty relationality to the capitalist
system they ostensibly deny, "post-capitalism." For
Gibson-Graham, the term "capitalist" is not a term
of critique or opprobrium; it's not part of a manifesto.
The term is a cause of the political problems facing
the contemporary Left. They argue that the discursive
dominance of capitalism embeds the Left in paranoia,
melancholia, and moralism.
Gibson-Graham's view is a specifc instance of a
general assumption shared by leftists who embrace a
generic post-capitalism but eschew a more militant
anticapitalism. Instead of actively opposing capital
ism, this tendency redirects anticapitalist energies into
efforts to open up discussions and fd ethical spaces
for decision-and this in a world where one bond
trader can bring down a bank in a matter of minutes.
I take the opposite position. The dominance of capi
talism, the capitalist system, is material. Rather than
entrapping us in paranoid fantasy, an analysis that
treats capitalism as a global system of appropriation,
exploitation, and circulation that emiches the few as
it dispossesses the many aru that has to expend an
enormous amount of energy in doing so can anger,
incite, and galvanize. Historically, in theory and in
practice, critical analysis of capitalist exploitation has
been a powerful weapon in collective sbuggle. It per
sists as such today, in global acknowledgment of the
excesses of neoliberal capitalism. As recently became
clear in worldwide rioting, protest, and revolution,
linking multiple sites of exploitation to naiTow chan
nels of privilege can replace melancholic fatalism with
new assertions of will, desire, and collective strength.
The problem of the Left hasn't been our adherence to
a Marxist critique of capitalism. It's that we have lost
sight of the communist horizon, a glimpse of which new
political movements are starting to reveal.
Sometimes capitalists, conservatives, and liberal
democrats use a rhetoric that treats communism as a
lost hmizon. But usually they keep communism fmly
within their sight. They see communism as a threat,
twenty years after its ostensible demise. To them, com
munism is so threatening that they premise political
I NTRODUCTION 7
discussion on the repression of the communist alter
native. In response to left critiques of democrcy for
its failure to protect the interests of poor and working
class people, conservatives and liberals alike scold that
"everybody knows" and "history shows" that commn
nism doesn't work. Communism might be a nice ideal,
they concede, but it always leads to violent, authori
trian excesses of power. They shift the discussion to
communism, trying to establish the limits of reason
able debate. Their critique of communism establishes
the political space and condition of democracy. Before
the conversation even gets going, liberals, democrats,
capitalists, and conservatives unite to block commu
nism from consideration. It's off the table.
Those who suspect that the inclusion of liberals and
democrats in a set with capitalists and conservatives
is illegitimate are probably democrats themselves.
To determine whether they belong in the set of those
who fear communism, they should consider whether
they think any evocation of communism should come
with qualifcations, apologies, and condemnations of
past excesses. If the answer is "yes," then we have a
clear indication that liberal democrats, and probably
radical democrats as well, still consider communism
THE COMMUNIST HORIZON
a threat that must be suppressed-and so they belong
in a set with capitalists and conservatives. All are
anxious about the forces that communist desire risks
unleashing.
There are good reasons for liberals, democrats, capi
talists, and conservatives to be anxious. Over the last
decade a retum to communism has re-energized the
Left. Communism is again becoming a discouse and
vocabulary for the expression of universal, egalitarian,
and revolutionary ideals. In March 2009, the Birkbeck
Institute for the Humanities hosted a conference enti
tled "On the Idea of Communism." Initially planned for
about 20 people, the conference ultimately attracted
over 1,200, requiring a spillover room to accommodate
those who couldn't ft in the primary auditorium. Since
then, multiple conferences-in Paris, Berlin, and New
York-and publications have followed, with contri
butions from such leading scholars as Alain Badiou,
E
tienne Balibar, Bruno Bosteels, Susan Buck-Morss,
Costas Douzinas, Peter Hallward, Michael Hardt,
Antonio Neg1i, Jacques Ranciere, Alberto Toscano,
and Slavoj
Z
izek.
The conferences and publications consolidate dis
cussions that have been going on for decades. For over
I NTRODUCTION 9
thirty years, Antonio Negri has sought to build a new
approach to communism out of a Marxism reworked
via Spinoza and the Italian political experiments of the
1970s. The Empire trilogy that Negri coauthored with
Michael Hardt offers an affrmative, non-dialectical
reconceptualization of labor, power, and the State, a
new theory of communism from below. Alain Badiou
has been occupied with communism for over forty
years, from his philosophical and political engage
ment with Maoism, to his emphasis on the "communist
invariants"-egalitarian justice, disciplinary tenor,
political volunteerism, and trust in the people-to his
recent appeal to the communist Idea. Communism is
not a new interest for Slavoj
Z
izek either. In early 2001
he put together a conference and subsequent volume
rethinking Lenin. Where Negri and Badiou reject the
Party and the State,
Z
izek retains a certain fdelity to
Lenin. "The key 'Leninist' lesson today," he writes, is
that "politics without the organizational form of the
Party is politics without politics. "4 In sh01t, a vital area
of radical philosophy considers communism a contem
porary name for emancipatoi)', egalitarian politics and
4 Slavoj
Z
izek, Revolution at the Gates, London: Verso,
2002, 297.
has been actively rethinking many of the concepts that
form part of the communist legacy.
These ongoing theoretical discussions overlap with the
changing political sequences marked by 1968 and 1989.
They also overlap with the spread of neoliberal capital
ist domination, a domination accompanied by extemes
in economic inequality, ethnic hatred, and police vio
lence, as well a by widespread mlitancy, insurgency,
occupation, and revolution. The cuient emphasis on
communism thus exceeds the coincidence of academic
conerences calling specifcally for communism's retum
with the new millennium's debt crises, austerity meas
ures, increaed unemployment, and overall sacrifce
of the achievement of the moder welfe state to the
private interests of fancial institutons deemed too
big to fail. Already in an interview in 2002, p1ior to his
election to the Bolivian presidency, Evo Morales had
announced that "the neoliheral system was a failure,
and now it's the poor people's tur."' Communism is
reemerging as a manet of poltical energy because it
is and has been the altemative to capitalism.
5 Evo Moral es, "Intervi ew wi t h Evo Moral es, " Yvonne
Zi mmermann, The Commoner, July 7, 2002, commoner. org.
uk/morales l. ht m.
I NTRODUCTION 1 1
The communist horizon is not lost. It is Real. In
this book, I explore some of the ways the commu
nist horizon manifests itself to us today. As Bosteels
argues, to invoke the communist horizon is to produce
"a complete shift in perspective or a radical ideologi
cal turnabout, as a result of which capitalism no longer
appears as the only game in town and we no longer
have to be ashamed to set our expecting and desiring
eyes here and now on a different organization of social
relationships. "6 With communism as our horizon,
the feld of possibilities for revolutionary theory and
practice starts to change shape. Barriers to action fall
away. New potentials and challenges come to the fore.
Anything is possible.
Instead of a politics thought primarily in terms of
resistance, playful and momentary aesthetic disrup
tions, the immediate specifcity of local projects, and
struggles for hegemony within a capitalist parliamen
tary setting, the communist horizon impresses upon
us the necessity to abolish capitalism and to create
global practices and institutions of egalitarian cooper
ation. The shift in perspective the communist horizon
6 Bosteels, The Actuality of Communism, 228.
produces turns us away from the democratic milieu
that has been the fmm of the loss of communism as
a name for left aspiration and toward the reconfgura
tion of the components of political struggle-in other
words, away from general inclusion, momentary calls
for broad awareness, and lifestyle changes, and toward
militant opposition, tight organizational forms (pa1ty,
council, working group, cell), and the sovereignty of
the people over the economy through which we produce
and reproduce ourselves.
Some might object to my use of the second-person
plural "we" and "us"-what do you mean "we"?
This objection is symptomatic of the fragmentation
that has pervaded the Left in Europe, the Uh, and
North America. Reducing invocations of "we" and
"us" to sociological statements requiting a concrete,
delineable, empirical referent, it erases the division
necessary for politics a if interest and will were only
and automatically attributes of a fxed social position.
We-skepticism displaces the performative component
of the second-person plural as it treats collectivity
with suspicion and p1ivileges a fantasy of individual
singularity and autonomy. I write "we" hoping to
enhance a partisan sense of collectivity. My break with
I NTRODUCTION 13
conventions of w1iting that reinforce individualism by
admonishing attempts to think and speak as part of a
larger collective subject is deliberate.
The boundaries to what can be thought as politics in
certain segments of the post-structuralist and anarchist
Left only beneft capital. Some activists and theorists
think that micropolitical activities, whether practices
of sel-cultivation or individual consumer choices, are
more important loci of action than large-scale organized
movement-an assumption which adds to the diffculty
of building new types of organizations because it makes
thinking in terms of collectivity rarer, harder, and
seemingly less "fresh." Similarly, some activists and
theorists treat aesthetic objects and creative works as
displaying a political potentiality missing from classes,
parties, and unions. This aesthetic focus disconnects
politics from the organized stmggle of working people,
making politics into what spectators see. Artistic prod
ucts, whether actual commodities or commodifed
experiences, thereby buttress capital as they circulate
political affects while displacing political struggles
from the streets to the galleries. Spectators can pay
(or donate) to feel radical without having to get their
hands dirty. The dominant class retains its position
and the contradiction between this class and the rest
of us doesn't make itself felt as such. The celebration
of momentary actions and singular happenings-the
playful dismption, the temporarily controversial fm
or novel-works the same way. Some on the anarchist
and post-stmcturalist Left treat these fickers as the
only proper instances of a contemporary left politics. A
pointless action involving the momentary expenditure
of enormous effort-the a11istic equivalent of the 5k
and lOk runs to fght cancer, that is to say, to increase
awareness of cancer without actually doing much
else-the singular happening disconnects task from
goal. Any "sense" it makes, any meaning or relevance
it has, is up to the spectator (perhaps with a bit of
guidance from curators and theorists).
Occupation contrasts sharply with the singular hap
pening. Even as specifc occupations emerge from
below rather than through a coordinated strategy, their
common form-including its images, slogans, terms,
and practices-links them together in a mass struggle.
The power of the retur of communism stands or
falls on its capacity to inspire large-scale organized
collective struggle toward a goal. For over thirty years,
the Left has eschewed such a goal, accepting instead
I NTRODUCTION 15
liberal notions that goals are strictly individual life
style choices or social-democratic claims that history
already solved basic problems of distribution with the
compromise of regulated markets and welfare states
a solution the Right rejected and capitalism destroyed.
The Left failed to defend a vision of a better world, an
egalitruian world of common production by and for the
collective people. Instead, it accommodated capital,
succumbing to the lmes of individualism, consumer
ism, competition, and privilege, and proceeding as if
there really were no alternative to states that rule in the
interests of mrkets.
Marx expressed the basic principle of the altera
tive over a hundred years ago: from each according to
ability, to each according to need. This principle con
tains the urgency of the struggle for its own realization.
We don't have to continue to live in the wake of left
failure, stuck in the repetitions of crises and specta
cle. In light of the planetru-y climate disaster and the
ever-intensifying global class war as states redistrib
ute wealth to the rich in the name of austerity, the
absence of a common goal is the absence of a future
(other than the ones imagined in post-apocalyptic sce
narios like Mad Max). The premise of communism is
tha| cc||ec|ive determinaticn cf ccllecti ve ccndi ticns is
pcssib|e, if we wan| i|.
Tc help inci|e this desire, |c add tc i ts reawakening
fcrce and presence, l |rea| ccmmunism as a |ag Icr
six fea|ures c| cur curren| se||i ng.
1. A specihc image cf |he Scvie| Unicn and i|s ccllapse,
2. A presen|, increasing|y pcwet1u| fcrce,
3.
The scvereign|y cf |he pecp|e,
4. The ccmmcn and |he ccmmcns,
5. The ega|i |ari an and universa|is| desire |ha| cu|s
thrcugh the circui |s and prac|i ces in whi ch we are
|rapped,
6. The party.
The hrs| twc |ea|ures can be lccsely asscciated with |he
pcli|i cs |ha| ccnhgures i|se|f vi a a his|cry |inked |c |he
end cf the Scvi et Unicn as a s|a|e, as refracted |hrcugh
|he dcminance cf |he US as a s|a|e. Wha| ma||ers here
is |ess |he hi stcri ca| narra|ive |han |he expressicn cf
ccmmunism as |he Icrce cf an absence. Ny discussicn
cf |hese hrs| |wc fea|ures highligh|s hcw |he absence cf
ccmmunism shapes cur ccn|empcrary se||ing.
ln |he sequence naua|ed as |he |riumph cf capi|a|ism
I NTRODUCTION 17
and |ibera| demccracy, the ccmmunis| hcrizcn makes
i |se|I Iel| as a signiIying s|ress. This i s Eric L.
San|ner`s term fcr a way tha| reali |y expresses i ts ncn-
i den|i|y wi|h i|se|I. As San|ner explains, |he scci a|
Icrma|icn in whi ch we hnd curse|ves i mmersed
is hssured by lack and permea|ed by inccnsis|-
ency and i nccmple|eness . The lack ca||s cu| |c us .
lnccnsis|ency and inccmp|e|eness make |hemse|ves
Iel|. Wha| i s regis|ered, San|ner explai ns, are nc|
sc much Icrgc||en deeds bu| Icrgc||en Iai|ures |c ac|.
The frene|ic ac|i vi |y cI ccn|empcrary ccmmuni ca|ive
capi |a|i sm deUec|s us away frcm |hese gaps . hew en|er-
|ai nmen|s, unsheable burdens, and grcwing deb|
disp|ace cur a||en|icn |cward |he i mmedi a|e and |he
ccmi ng-up-nex| as |hey a||emp| |c drcwn cu| |he fcrce-
Iu| effec|s cf |he unrea|ized|he unrea|ized pc|en|ia|s
cI unicns and ccllec|ive s|ruggle, |he unrea|i zed c|ai ms
fcr equa|i|y di stcr|ed by a cu|ture that celebra|es |he
excesses cI |he vet ri ch, |he unrea|ized achievemen|s
cf cc||ecti ve sclidari |y in redressing pcverty and redi s-
|ribu|i ng risks and rewards. The ms| |wc chap|ers |hus
7 Eric L. Sant ner, "Mi racl es Happen," in The Neighbor,
Slavoj
Z
izek, Eric L. Sant ner, Kenneth Reinhard, Chicago:
Uni versi ty of Chi cago Press, 2005, 85-89.
trea| the gaps, hssures, and lack San|ner |hemizes as
signifying s|resses i n |erms cf a missing ccmmuni sm
tha| makes i|se|f fe|t i n |he se||ing ccnhgured by i|s
alleged failure and defea|.
The seccnd |wc fea|ures cf |he present |hat ccm-
munism |ags are pcsi |i ve ra|her |han presen| as |he
fcrce cf |he unrea|ized cr absen|) . |he pecp|e i n |heir
ccmmcn pc|i|i ca| and eccncmic ac|ivi|y. ln |hese chap-
|ers, l grapp|e wi|h |he ques|icn cf c|ass s|rugg|e |cday.
lf Hard| and hegri are righ| and l |hink |hey are) |c
argue |ha| ccmmuni ca|icn is |he fcrm cf capi |a|i s|
prcduc|icn in whi ch capi|al has succeeded in submi|-
|ing sccie|y en|irely and glcba||y |c i |s regi me l use
the |erm ccmmunicati ve capi |a|ism |c bring cu| |his
amp|ihed rc|e cf ccmmuni ca|icn i n prcduc|icn) , wha|
are the repercussicns fcr unders|anding class s|ruggle:
Dces i t make sense |c ccn|i nue |c emphasize |he prc-
letari a|: l argue |hat i| dces nct, nct if by prc|etana|
cne has in mind an empiri ca| sccial c|ass. Ncre usefu|
i s the idea cf prcle|ari aniza|icn as a prccess cf explci-
|a|icn, dispcssessicn, and immisera|icn |ha| prcduces
|he vep ri ch as |he privi leged class |ha| |ives cff |he
res| cf us . l cffer |he nc|icn cf |he pecp|e as |he res| cf
us, |he pecp|e as a di vi ded and divi si ve fcrce, as an
I NTRODUCTION 19
a|terna|ive |c scme cf the cther names fcr |he subec| cf
ccmmunismprcle|ari a|, mu||i |ude, par|-cf-nc-par|.
Hcw |he pecple divi de cr hcw |he ncn-ccincidence
cf |he pecp|e i s inhec|ed and quaihed i s a ma||er cf
pc|i|i cs. lcli |i cal crgani za|icns respcnd |c |his divi-
sicn, ccns|ruing and direc|ing i | i n cne way ra|her
|han anc|her. Acccrdingly, l end |hi s bcck by |aking
up |he ques|icn cf |he ccmmuni s| par|y. A||hcugh
ac|i ve|y ca||ing fcr |he rec|ama|icn cf ccmmunism as
|he name fcr a revc|u|icnary universa| ega|i|atianism,
Badicu insi s|s cn a ccmmunism disccnnec|ed frcm
|he cu|mcded fcrms cf lar|y and S|a|e. Hard| and
Negri likewi se reec| lar|y and S|a|e. "Being commu
nist means being against the State. "8 They emphasize
i ns|ead |he ccns|i|uen| pcwer cf desire and |he affec-
|i ve, crea|i ve pmduc|ivi|y cf |he mul|i|ude as |he
ccmmunism underpinning and exceeding capi |ali sm.
Thi s i s nc| my vi ew. l agree wi|h Bcs|ee|s and
izek
|ha| a pc|i|i cs wi|hcu| |he crganiza|icna| fcrm cf |he
par|y i s a pcli tics wi|hcu| pcli|ics.
Ccncep|ua|izing |he par|y cf ccmmunis|s i n cur
8 Antoni o Negri, "Communi sm: Some Thoughts on the
Concept and Pract i ce," i n The Idea oJ Commzmism, ed. Costas
Douzi nas and Slavoj
Z
izek, London: Verso, 201 0, 1 58.
ccn|empcrary se||i ng is and mus| be an cngcmg
prcec|. As Bcs|ee|s argues, par|y dces nc| name an
i ns|rumen| fcr carryi ng cu| |he i rcn laws cf his|cry bu|
|he hexible crganiza|i cn cf a hde|i |y |c even|s i n |he
mids| cf unfcreseeab|e circums|ances. ' l`m |emp|ed
|c use |erms frcm ccmp|exi|y |hecry here. |he pa1y i s a
ccmp|ex, adap|ive sys|em. l|s end i s prcle|ari an revc-
lu|icn, |ha| is, |he des|ruc|icn cf |he capi |alis| sys|em
cI exp|ci|a|icn and exprcpria|icn, cf proltarianization,
and |he crea|icn cf a mcde cf prcduc|icn and di s|ribu-
|icn where |he free develcpmen| cf each i s ccmpa|ible
wi|h |he free develcpmen| cf a|l . We dcn`| ye| kncw
hcw we will s|ruc|ure cur ccmmunis| par|yin pat1
because we s|cpped |hinking abcu| i t, giving way
i ns|ead |c |he |ransience cf i ssues, ease cf cne-c|i ck
ne|wcrked pcliti cs, and the illusicn |ha| cur indivi dua|
ac|i vi |ies wculd i mmanen|ly ccnverge in a p|ura|i|y cf
pcs|-capi|alis| practi ces c| crea|ing and shari ng. Bu|
we kncw |ha| we need |c md a mcde cf s|rugg|e |ha|
can sca|e, endure, and cultiva|e |he ccllective desire
fcr ccllec|ivi|y. And we kncw |ha| we can leam frcm
|he pas| and are learning frcm cngci ng experi men|s i n
9 Bosteels, The Actuality oJ Commzmism, 243.
I NTRODUCTION 2 1
crganiza|icn. I |hus ccnc|ude by ccnsi dering hcw cccu-
pa|icn is cr is beccming such an crganiza|icnal Icrm, a
pc|i|i ca| fcrm Icr the inccmpa|ibili|y be|ween capi |a|-
i sm and |he pecp|e.
The ccmmuni s| hcrizcn appears clcser than i| has
in a |cng |i me. The i||usicn |ha| capi|a|i sm wcrks has
been sha||ered by all manner cI eccncmic and hnan-
ci al disas|erand we see i | evetywhere. The Ian|asy
|ha| demccracy exer|s a Icrce Icr eccncmic us|i ce has
dissc|ved a |he US gcvemmen| Iunnels |ril|icns cI
dc||ars |c banks and |he Emcpean cen|ra| banks rig
na|icnal gcvemmen|s and cu| scci a| prcgrams in crder
|c keep |hemselves ahca|. Wi |h cur desiring eyes se|
cn the ccmmunis| hcrizcn, we can ncw ge| |c wcrk cn
ccllec|ively shaping a wcrld |ha| we already make i n
ccmmcn.
Chap|er Une
Our Soviets
F
cr pecple in |he Uni|ed S|a|es, |he mcs| ccnven-
ti cna| referen| cf ccmmunism is |he Scvi et Unicn.
Di sp|aced by fcur decades cf Cc|d War, a war |ha|
shaped US-Ameri can pc|i ci es and i den|i|i es, aspi -
ra|icns and fears, |he mu||iplici|y cf his|cri cal and
|hecre|i ca| ccmmunisms ccndense in|c cne|he
USSh. ha|her |han changi ng cver |ime, inc|uding
|he i n|erna|icna| range cf par|i es and mcvemen|s, cr
ackncw|edging ac|ive ccmmunis| mcvemen| i n |he US,
ccmmunism i s cne, and |his cne i s hxed as |he USSh.
Tc make |his referen| exp|i ci|, |hcugh, |eads |c
ccmp|i ca|icns.
The USSh was never hxed cr cne. The uni|y i mpcsed
cn i | by the Cc|d War binary i s fa|se, undermi ned by
Susan Buck- Morss demonstrates how the structuri ng
logic of the Cold War was already i n place by the end of World
War I. See her Dreamworld and Catastrophe, Cambridge, MA:
MIT Press, 2000.
the actual hi stmica| re|a|icnshi p be|ween the Scvi et
Uni cn and |he Uni|ed S|a|es. Thi s re|a|icnship di s-
turbs |he easy equa|icn cf ccmmunism wi |h |he USSh
i nscfar as ccmmunism beccmes an e|emen| cf US
se|f-iden|i|y. The |wc regi mes, scme|imes alli es and
scme|imes enemi es, were deep|y i n|erccnnec|ed. They
were symbclical|y i den|ihed i n |ha| each prcvi ded |he
c|her wi|h a s|andpcin| frcm which |c see and eva|u-
a|e i |seh. Lach reminded |he c|her cf i |s failure and
pc|en|ial. Seeing |hemse|ves frcm |he s|andpcin| cf |he
c|her, |hey made |he c|her a ccmpcnen| cf |heir under-
s|anding cf |hemselves.
lmagi ning i |seh i n |he eyes cf |he Scvie|s, |he US
never seemed equal encugh. Segrega|i cn, |im Ctow,
and severe pcver|y appeared all |he mcre shamefu|
when put in re|ief agai ns| |he Scvie| system`s pmec|
cf ccl|ec|ive cwnershi p and avcwal cf equa|i |y. Uur
bigges| ri val seemed |c be dcing be||er by i ts ci |izens
|han we were dcing by curs. A key i mpu|se |c prc-
gress in civi| righ|s and sccia| welfare, then, s|emmed
frcm |he US gcvemmen|`s desire nc| |c |cck bad when
ccmpared |c |he USSh.
The di s|cr|ed US |rea|men| cf ccnsumer i|ems as
markers cf equali|y resul|ed frcm |his same s|ruc|ure
OUR SOVIETS 25
capitali s| excess came tc be nct merely ustihed
in the name c| demccracy bu| |he very demi|icn c|
i t. Susan Buck-Ncrss describes the parable c| the
Demccracy c| Cccds |ha| adver|i sers prcffered and
|he US gcvernment suppcrted. She wri |es, The Uni ted
S|a|es gcvernmen| cined |he capi|a|is| c|ass in i|s ide-
clcgi ca| ccmmi|men| tc |he expansicn cf ccnsumpticn
wi|hcu| limi|s. Similari|ies c| ccnsumer s|y|es came
tc be vi ewed as syncnymcus with scci a| equa|ity, and
nc| merely as a ccmpensa|icn |cr i |s lack. Demccracy
was freedcm cf ccnsumer chci ce. Tc sugges| c|her-
wise was un-Ameri can. Whc was |he merging c|
ccnsumer gccds and demccracy fcr: hc| Ameri cans .
US-Ameri cans have lcng va|ued individual |reedcm
mcre |han demccracy. We didn`| need scme kind cf
ccmpensaticn |cr the inequi|y and inadequacy cf capi-
|alis| demccracy. Ccnsumer gccds are a||rac|ive and
p|easurab|e encugh cn their cwn wi |hcut the idec|cgi-
cal e|emen|, |hey dcn`| need a demccratic supplemen|.
The |reatmen| cf ccnsumer gccds as markers cf equa|-
i ty and indi ca|crs cf demccracy was fcr the Scvi e| c|her
be|cre whcse udging gaze |he US imagi ned i|seh.
2 Ibi d. , 204.
Whcse ci tizens were be||er cff: Symbc|ic iden|ihca-
|icn wi|h |he USSh made |he US ccnsider |his ques|icn
in |erms cf equali ty. Anxi ety cver equality animated
Ameri can ridi cu|e cf ccmmunis| |azi ness and |ack cf
private prcperty, cf |he unbearable unifcrmi |y cf Scvi et
ways cf |ife, and cf t he emptiness cf | he s|cre she|ves
and |he unending lines. Highligh|ing |he weal|h cf |he
few, |he US cbscured |he pcvet1y cf many cf i|s ci |i -
zens . At |he same |i me, i t a||empted |c evade its cwn
ccncerns wi|h i |s shallcwness as a scci e|y, i|s |enden-
cies |c a||cw ccnsumerism and pri va|e |ife |c substitute
fcr grand s|rugg|es and i dea|s. \i ewi ng itse|f frcm |he
Scvie| perspec|ive, |he US saw i|se|f as |acking, as
|ai |ing tc secure fcr i ts cwn ci tizens what ccmmuni sm
secured fcr Scvi e| ci |izens.
Ircm the US perspecti ve as i magi ned by the Scvi ets)
the measure cf ccmmunis| success depended cn prc-
ducti vi ty. Whc was a|| the heavy industry fcr: Befcre
which gaze i s i| imagined: hc| |he suhering Scvi et
pecp|e. hather, t he gaze was Ametican. Une need cnly
reca|| |he Scvie| gca| cf ca|ching up and cvet1aking
the Wes|. Buck-Ncrss nc|es hcw |he fan|asy cf prcduc-
|ivi|y, cpened up by symbc|ic i den|ihca|icn wi|h the
US as ber-prcducer, s|ruc|ured Scvie| ar| and cu||ure
OUR SOVIETS 27
as well as pcli |i cs and eccncmi cs. lce|s and ar|is|s
celebra|ed machinery. Iilms and ncve|s were devc|ed
tc s|ee| prcduc|icn and |he ccns tmcticn cf factcri es.
lrecisely because |he Scvie| Unicn adcp|ed |he
capi|a|is| heavy-i ndus|ry dehni|icn cf eccncmic mcd-
erniza|icn, sccialism remai ned caugh| wi|hi n a very
specihc capi |alis| mcde| cI eccncmic develcpmen|.
The Scvie|s did nc| reccns|mc| Ameri can capi|ali sm.
They g|crihed i |. lndeed, fcr scme Scvie|s, Henry Icrd
was as c|cse |c a sai n| as cne ccu|d ge|. 3)
The reciprccal) symbclic i den|ihca|icn cf |he US
and | he USSh shaped |heir senses cf whc and wha|
|hey were such |ha| demccracy cculd mcrph in|c ccm-
mcdi|y ccnsump|icn and prcducti cn cculd beccme
a u|cpia i n and fcr i|seh. The real divisicns cf c|ass
and race i n |he US as we|| as cf ethni ci |y and pri vi -
lege i n |he USSh ccu|d scme|imes be ccvered cver by
the i deals cf prcducti vi |y and equa|i ty fcr which each
was admi red. The US may nc| be equi|able, bu| i | i s
prcduc|ive. The USSh may nct have been prcduc|ive,
bu| i | was equi|able. lmagining |hemse|ves beIcre |he
gaze cf |he c|her, |hey securedfcr a |i mefan|asies
3 Ibi d. , llO.
cf uni|y |ha| depended cn the repressicn cf |heir
i den|ihca|icn wi|h |he ideclcgy cI |he c|her.
The place cf ccmmunism wi|hin |he se|f-
unders|andi ng cI |he US i s nc| |he cn|y ccmp|ica|icn
|ha| ari ses when we begi n |c ques|icn and specify |he
referen| cf ccmmunism. The diherences amcng pani es,
p|aces, fac|icns, and |imes |ha| |he unifying imaginary
cI Cc|d Var ccmmunism |ries |c suppress alsc s|ar|
|c leak back i n|c |he his|cry cf Scvie| ccmmuni sm.
Icr example, |he Scvie| Uni cn did nc| c|aim |c have
achieved ccmmunism, al|hcugh i |s ru|ing par|y ca||ed
i |se|I a ccmmunis| par|y. As is |he case wi|h any par|y
cr pc|i|i ca| sys|em, |he Ccmmunis| lar|y in |he Scvie|
Uni cn changed cver ti me, mcs| dras|i ca||y by mcving
frcm a revc|u|icnary par|y |c a gcverni ng bureaucra|i c
par|y. As a gcverning bcdy the larty experi enced
fur|her changes, changes |ha| were scme|imes viclen|,
scme|imes i ncremen|al, cften paid fcr wi |h the lives cf
lar|y members |hemse|ves. lnscfar as i| was a pc|i|i ca|
par|y, and fcr mcs| cf i|s his|cry |he cn|y reccgni zed
pcli|ica| par|y, |he Ccmmunis| lar|y i n |he fcrmer
Scvie| Unicn was a lccus cf s|ruggle and disagreemen|
cver a hcs| cI i ssues Imm ar|, li|era|ure, and sci ence
|c eccncmic develcpmen|, Icreign pc|icy, and i n|erna|
OUR SOVIETS 29
re|a|icns amcng |he varicus republi cs. Tc be sure,
effm1s were made |c presen| a unihed frcn|, |c dcwn-
p|ay |he presence cf di sagreemen|s wi|hin |he lar|y.
Ye| a signihcan| effec| cf |hese effcr|s was |he amp|i-
hca|icn cf cs|ensi b|y superhci a| differences. sma||
divergences became signs cf deeper ccnhic|. Scvi e|
ci|izens, a||ies, and enemi es ali ke |earned |c discern
in |he dis|i nc|icn be|ween a frank and a ccmrade|y
exchange cf cpinicns macr shif|s in pc|i|i cal direc|icn.
ln shm1, | he Scvie| Unicn i sn` | a very s|ab|e referen| cf
ccmmumsm.
US-Americans dcn`| wcrp abcu| |ha| very much.
US-Ameri cans are shel|ered frcm anxie|y cver
wcbb|y reference by the fantasti c) s|abili|y acccmpa-
nying |he prcper name S|ali n. A legacy cf |he Ccld
War mcre |han cf cri|i cal inquip i n|c Scvie| his|cry,
S|a|i ni s| |ags prac|i ces cf mcncpclizing and ccnsc|i-
da|i ng pcwer in |he Scvi e| party-state bureaucracy. ln
|his circumscribed i maginary, ccmmunism as S|a|ini sm
i s |i nked |c au|hcri |ariani sm, pri scn camps, and |he
i nadmissibi|i |y cf cri|i ci sm. |us| as ccmmunism as
|he Scvi e| Uni cn cvershadcws a wide array cf c|her
ccmmunismsfrcm China, |hrcugh Yugcslavi a, |c
Cuba and Nepal, |c |he US, Uh, and Lurcpe, and frcm
par|i es ccexis|ing withi n parliamen|ary s|ate fcrma-
|icns |c revclu|icnary hgh|ers cpera|ing under varicus
names and in vancus degrees cf legi timacysc dces
|he Scvie| Unicn as S|a|ini sm eclipse pcs|-S|a|ini s|
deve|cpmen|s i n |he Scvi e| Unicn, par|icularly wi |h
regard |c successes in mcdemizing inc|uding a highly
successful space prcgram) and i mprcving cveral|
s|andards cf |iving. Tariq Ali quc|es |he Scvie| dis-
si den| Zhcres Nedvedev wri|ing i n 1979: There i s
nc unemp|cymen|, bu| cn |he ccn|rary a shcr|age cI
labcurwhi ch crea|es a grea|er varie|y cf cb-chcice
Icr wcrkers . The average wcrking Iamily can easi ly
sa|isfy i|s immedi a|e ma|erial needs . apar|men|,
s|ab|e emplcymen|, educa|icn fcr chi ldren, heal|h
care, and sc cn. The pri ces cf essen|ia| gccdsbread,
mi|k, mea|, hsh, ren|have oc| changed since 1 96.
The ccs| cf |e|evi sicn cr radic se|s aod c|her durable
i |ems has ac|ually been reduced frcm unduly high
previcus levels) . The US didn` | and dcesn` | see |he
Scvie| Unicn |his way. B|i nkered by |he Cc|d W,
i | has remai ned ba|ed cn a s|a|i c i mage cI grey
cppression.
4 Tariq Ali , The Idea of Communism, London: Seagull
Books, 2009, 8l-82.
OUR SOVIETS 3 1
Agai ns| |he backgrcund cf ccmmunis| Scvi e|
S|a|inis|, |wc i n|er|ccki ng s|cries cf |he ccllapse cf
ccmmunism predcmina|e. The ms| is |ha| ccmmunism
cc||apsed under i|s cwn weigh|. i| was sc i neIhci en|,
pecp|e were sc miserab|e, |ife was sc s|agnan|, |ha|
|he sys|em came |c a gri nding ha||. l| fai|ed. linked
|c S|alini sm, |he s|cry cf fai lme fea|mes chap|ers cn
famine, purges, and |encr. Li ke mcs| ideclcgi ca| ccn-
s|ruc|icns, i |`s nc| qui|e ccheren|. i | neglec|s |he fac|
|ha| |he S|alin pericd was a|sc a pericd i n whi ch |he US
and USSh were al|i es. ln |he era mcs| exemp|ary cI |he
Scvie| Uni cn`s i nus|i ce and i ||egi|imacy, |he pericd
when |he USSh was presen| nc| as a fai |ed s|a|e bu| a
s|rcng cne, |he US was clcser |c |he regi me |han a| any
c|her |ime i n i |s his|cry. The seccnd, re|a|ed, s|cry cf
|he ccl|apse cf ccmmunism i s |ha| i| was defea|ed. We
bea| |hem. We wcn. Capi |ali sm and liberal demccracy
|he e|isicn i s necessa;) demcns|ra|ed |heir supericr-
i|y cn |he wcrld his|cri cal s|age. Ireedcm |riumphed
cver |yranny. The de|ai|s cf |his vi c|cry ma||er |ess
|han i|s cs|ensib|e undeniabi|i |y. Af|er a||, |here i s nc
Scvie| Unicn anymcre.
* * *
The chain ccmmunism-Scvi et U nicn-Sta|inism-cc||apse
se|s |he parame|ers fcr |he appeal |c his|cry |ha| i s
characteri stic cf |iberal, demccrati c, capi |a|is|, and ccn-
serva|ive a||emp|s |c repress |he ccmmunis| al|ema|ive.
hespcnding |c cha||enges regardi ng |he exc|usicn cf
class s|mgg|e, prc|e|arian revc|u|icn, cc||ec|ive cwner-
ship cf |he means cf prcduc|icn, and |he smashing cf |he
bcurgecis-demccra|i c s|a|e frcm pch|ical |hecry, |hey
invcke his|cry as |heir grcund and prccf. His|cry shcws
|ha| |he ccmmunis| prcec| is a dead end. Ye| as A|ai n
Badicu reminds us, a| bc||cm, i| is a|ways in |he in|er-
es|s cf |he pcwerfu| |ha| his|cry i s mi s|aken fcr pc|i|ics,
|ha| is, |he cbec|ive i s |aken fcr |he subec|ive.` Wha|,
then, are the features cf |his invcca|icn cf his|cp :
The hrs| i s cbec|ivi|y. The prcduc| cf a neu|ra|,
unbiased i nvesti gaticn, the histcry cf ccmmuni sm is
made |c s|and apar| frcm |he pcli|i cs and s|mgg|es |ha|
ccmprise this histcry, as if it were but a cc||ec|icn cf
fac|s, infcrma|icn |c be gccg|ed and accessed. These
fac|s are specihab|e pci nts cr cbects, immune |c i n|er-
pre|a|i cn, and i mpcssib|e |c dispu|e.
H we accep|, fcr a mcmen|, |he pcssibili |y cf such
5 Alain Badi ou, Theory of the Subject, trans. Bruno
Bosteels, London: Cont i nuum, 2009, 44.
OUR SOVIETS 33
fac ts, and agree tha| |hey are cruci a| tc cur capaci -
|i es t c leam frcm previcus s|ruggles fcr ccmmuni sm,
where wil| we hnd them: Ni chael E. Brcwn and handy
Nar|in argue persuasi ve|y |hat |here i s nc| ye| a cred-
i b|e and es|ab|i shed bcdy cf his|cri ca| |i tera|ure cn
ccmmuni sm, sccia|ism, cr |he Scviet Unicn. Ncs| cf
|he his|cri es we have were prcduced i n |he ccn|ex| cf a
hegemcnic anti ccmmunism. 6 Brcwn and Nar|i n pcin|
cu| that |he me|hcdclcgica| and ccncep|ua| defects i n
schc|arly s|udies cf |he Scvi e| Uni cn wcu|d have been
scanda|cus i n cther academic helds. Since the held
was primarily a prcpaganda apparatus fcr |he fcreign
pc|i cy es|abli shmen|, these defec|s seemed scmehcw
wi|hcut signihcance, wi th |he resul|, fcr example,
|ha| i| i s s|i|| impcssible tc say which aspec|s cf |he
Scvie| sys tem were intrinsic tc i | and which resu|ted
frcm extenal pressures, cr, tc |ake anc|her example,
whe|her |he Scvie| Unicn was a ccmp|e|e|y distinct
and unique s|ate fcrmaticn cr i ns|ead shared a||rib-
u|es wi|h |he Uni|ed States cr Nazi Cermany |ha| make
ccmmunism a subset cf a larger tcta|itari ani sm. ln
6 Thi s i s not to say that there are no seri ous and si gni f
cant works. One of the most i mpressi ve i s Lars T. Li h, lnin
Rediscovered, Chi cago, IL: Haymarket Books, 2008.
shcr|, the effec|s cf pervasi ve anticcmmunism ccntinue
|c cu|live the Scvi e| Uni cn. Brcwn and Nartin wri |e,
The Ccmmuni s| i ccn cf |he Cc|d War i s ncw |he nega-
|i ve i dea| |ype agains| whi ch an absc|u|ely idealized
capi |a|i s| marke| is bcth |aken |c be rea| and deemed
|he cnly sustainab|e paradigm fcr uni versal human
crganiza|icn. Ccns|i|u|ed cu| cf |he chain ccmmu-
ni sm-Scvi e| Unicn-S|ali nism-cc|lapse, |he i nvcca|icn
cI hi s|cry reinIcrces a Cc|d War bi nary i ns|ead cf high-
ligh|ing |he cha||enges Iaci ng an crganized scci e|y cI
prcducers.
A seccnd fea|ure cf |he hi s|cry invcked |c repress
|he ccmmuni s| a||erna|i ve is i|s ccn|inui |y and
de|erminacy. Iaced wi th an cppcnen| whc presen|s
ccmmunism as a sc|u|icn |c |he crises cf capi |ali sm,
|he i nvcker cf hi s|cry pcsi|s a necessary sequence, as if
revc|u|icns were shi e|ded frcm ccn|ingency. He star|s
wi|h a fac|, a unique, specihable cbec|, and bui|ds frcm
|he fac| a series cI ccnsequences and eIIec|s. These
ccnsequences and effec|s are necessary and unavcid-
able. i Lnin, then Stali n; i revolntion, then gnlag;
7 Mi chael E. Brown and Randy Mart i n, "Left Fut ures, "
i n Michael E. Brown, The Historiography of CommZLnism,
Phi ladelphia, PA: Temple Uni versi ty Press, 2009, 1 77.
OUR SOVIETS 35
i Party, thn purges. Sc even as scme whc appeal tc
his|cry reccgnize |he deIec|s and dilemmas |raversing
the academic held, |hey ncne|heless highlight specihc
Iac|s and mcmen|s, perhaps frcm |heir cwn experi-
ence cf be|rayal in the ccmprcmises made by specihc
ccmmunis| par|i es wcrking in parli amen|ary ccn|ex|s
as i n lrance and l|a|y), as iI |hese specihc Iac|s and
mcmen|s were |hemse|ves indi ca|icns cI sequences cI
eIIec|s i mpcssible |c avci d. lI i | happened cnce, i | wil|
happen again, and |here i s nc|hing we can dc abcu|
i|. The cddi|y cI |his pcsi |icn i s |ha| ccmmuni sm is
unique i n i|s de|ermi ni ng capaci|y, |he cne pc|i|i ca|
arrangemen| capable cI e|imina|ing ccn|ingency and
directing acticn alcng a singular vectcr. Ccmmunism
beccmes |he excep|icn |c |he dynami c cI prcduc|icn,
s|ruggle, and experi ence |hat gives tise |c i |. lns|ead cf
|he pc|i ti cs cf a mili |ant subec|, ccmmunism i s again
an i magi nary, i mmu|able cb ect , |his ti me a linear
prccess wi|h a cer|ain end.
As a ccnsequence, histcry lcses i ts cwn hi stcri c-
i |y. This i s |he |hird Iea|me cf |he his|cry i nvcked |c
repress |he ccmmuni st al|ema|i ve. ln this Icrma|i cn,
his|cry Iunc|icns as a s|ruc|me and a ccns|an| incapa-
b|e cI change and i mpene|rab|e by ex|emal Icrces.
Any parti cular mcment i s thus a ccn|ai ner fcr this
essen|i al whc|e|he leni ni s| par|y, |he S|alini s| shcw
tri als, |he hCB, |he Brezhnev-era s|agna|i cn. Each is
i n|erchangeable wi|h |he c|her as an example cI |he
errcr cf ccmmuni sm preci sely because ccmmuni sm
i s i nvari an|. ln ccn|ras| wi |h capi|ali sm`s permanen|
revc|u|icn, his|cri cal ccmmuni sm appears as i mpcs-
si bly s|a|i c. Un|y by suppcsing such an i mpcssible,
invarian|, ccns|an|, unchanging ccmmuni sm can |he
appea| |c his|cry |urn a si ng|e i ns|ance i n|c a damning
examp|e cf |he fai led and dangercus ccmmuni s| expe-
ri ence. And as i | dces, i| di sccnnec|s ccmmunism frcm
|he very his|cry |c whi ch i| appeals, erasi ng nc| cnly
ccmmunism as capi talism`s self-cri|i que but alsc ccm-
munism as capi|alism`s mirrcr, ally, enemy, and U|her.
Here, then, is |he inner |ru|h cf the |iberal, demc-
cra|i c, capi |alis|, and ccnserva|i ve appeal |c his|cry.
The i nten| is nct tc i nspire inquit cr s|imula|e new
schc|arly research. ha|her, i | i s |c preserve |he Ian|asy
tha| capi|a|i sm and demccracy are the bes| pcssible
eccncmic and pcli|i ca| arrangemen|s . Exci sing ccm-
munism frcm i |s hi s|cry as |he c|ass struggle wi |hi n
capi|a|ism, as |he cri|ique and revc|u|icn |c whi ch
capi|a|ism gives rise, |his hi s|cry wi|hcu| hi s|cnci |y
OUR SOVIETS 37
derides ccmmuni sm fcr a necessi |y tha| it effec|i vely
reins|a||s in a capi |a|ism wi|hcu| al|ema|ives.
The suppcsi|icn cf an e|erna| ccmmunism i s nc| cn|y
|he paradcxi cal effec| cf |he a||emp| |c derai l |he
re|urn cI ccmmunism by appea|ing |c a his|cry seem-
i ng|y i mmunized frcm change. Scme a| |he fcrefrcn| cf
ccmmuni sm`s re|urn |i kewise make reccurse |c a ccm-
munism tha| |ranscends his|otj. Badicu trea|s his|cry
as |he purvi ew cf |he S|a|e and ccmmuni sm as an
e|erna| pcli|i cal idea. Brunc Bcs|eels ackncwledges
|he |ac|i cal beneh| cf such a mcve. Civen |he depc-
li|i cizing effec|s cf |he ca|l ccns|an|ly |c his|cricize, nc|
|c men|icn |he even mcre damning eI|ec|s cf |he invc-
ca|icn cf scme hgure cr c|her cf the wcrld-his|cri ca|
|ri bunal, i| can indeed be argued |ha| his|cp in and
cf i |self nc lcnger pcssesses |he emancipa|ct pcwer
i| cnce had. Ncne|heless, Bcs|eels urges |ha| |ac|i-
ca| ahis|micism be dia|ec|i ca||y ccncined wi|h a new
wri|ing cf his|cry, a new his|cry cf pcpu|ar insmrec|icn
|ha| recalls |he wide range cf s|ruggles and mcve-
men|s ccmmuni sm names. hather than cining Badicu
8 Bruno Bosteels, The Actuality of Communism, London:
Verso, 201 1 , 277.
m sheltering ccmmuni sm i n a phi|cscphi cal ldea,
Bcs|ee|s hc|ds cu| |he ac|ua|i|y cf a ccmmuni s| pcli|ics
tha| dces nct hypcstasize pas| fai |ures i n|c permanent
|aniers |c |hecrizing, crganizing, and cccupying p|y
and s|ate.
The bes| respcnse |c |he appea| |c his|cry is |c
sha||er |he chain ccmmunism-Scvie| U nicn-S|a|inism-
ccllapse and make a new cne cu| cf |he rich varie|y cf
mcvemen|s and s|rugg|es. This i s a his|cp cf ccurage,
revc||, and sc|i dati|y. l| i s a|sc se| i n a ccmmunis|
presen|. lf | he end cf | he Scvie| Unicn were | he same
as |he end cf ccmmuni sm, if 191 marked a |empcra|
hcrizcn separa|ing |he va|idi |y cf |he Scvi e| experi-
men| frcm the capi |a|i s t, li beral, demccrati c presen|,
|hen ccmmunism wculd be pas|like |he Byzan|ine
Lmpi re. As a par|i cular par|y-s tate fcrma|i cn, i t wculd
be an ar|ifac| |c be analyzed and s|udi ed. Wha|ever
gave it breath, made it real, wculd be gcne. lt wcu|d be
a dead pcli|ical |anguage.
Yet ccmmunism persi s|s. lt i s frequen||y evcked as a
living presence cr pcssibi|i|y, par|icu|ar|y in cur curren|
se||i ng cf glcbal revc|u|icn and necliberal cri si s.
Chap|er 1wo
Present Force
W
hen |he Scvi e| Unicn is |he referen| cf ccmmu-
nism, ccmmunism i s |hcught as |he descri ptcr cf
a specihc pc|i|i ca|-eccncmic anangemen|. The adec-
|ive ccmmunis| qualihes |he ncun cf a par|y and/
cr a s|a|e. ln |he |wen|y-ms| cen|ury, hussia, lcland,
Hungary, |he Czech hepubli c and c|her ccun|ries pre-
vicus|y par| cf |he Scvie| b|cc |end |c be referred |c
as pcs|-Scvie| ra|her |han as new-capi|alis|. lcr
a while, par|i cul ar|y during |he early years cf fcrced
priva|iza|i cn, |he |erm Nahcsc capi|alism was heard
a lc|. Since |he |um cf |he mi ||enni um, i | has drcpped
frcm use. Nahcsc capi|alism hi|s |cc c|cse |c hcme,
mcre h||i ng as a designa|cr cf neclibera|ism`s bru|a|,
ex|reme, winner-|ake-a|| versicn cf capi|ali sm |han cf
|he |empcrary shcck |rea|men| invclved i n |he |ransi -
ticn cu| cf s|a|e scci alis m.
Icr a vari e|y cf grcups and ideclcgi cal persua-
sicns, ccmmunism s|ill names |he al|erna|i ve |c |he
extreme inequali ty, insecuri ty, and racis|, na|icnali s t
e|hnccen|ri ci sm acccmpanying g|cba|i zed nec|ibera|
capi |a|i sm. ln the ccn|empcrap Uni|ed S|a|es, ccm-
munis| exceeds |he specihci |y cf i|s adec|iva| ccmnes
|c serve as a term cf cpprcbri um. Une wculd |hink |he
Cc|d War never ended. Scme|i mes ccmmunism b|ends
i n wi|h scciali sm. U|her |imes i |`s ccncined |c Iascism.
Tcc few Ameri cans kncw |he diIIerence, a resul| cf
|he idec|cgi cal ehec|s cI |he nc|icn cI |c|a|i |ari aai sm
as much as i | is cf a mcre genera| educa|icna| dehci|. )
Wha| is ccmmunis|: ha|icna| hea||hcare. Lnvircn-
men|a|ism. Ieminism. lub|ic educa|icn. Ccllec|ive
bargaining. lrcgressive |axa|icn. laid vaca|icn days .
Cun ccntrc|. The mcvemen| arcund Uccupy Wa||
S|ree|. Bi cycles are a ga|eway drug |c ccmmuni sm.
Web 2.0 is ccmmunis| because i | hclds cu| the seduc-
|ive prcmise cf i ndividua| selI-realiza|icn |ha| har|
Narx evcked in The Cerman ldeclcgy. '
Whc i s ccmmunis|: Anycne whc prc|es|ed US
mi|i|ary aggressicn i n lraq and Afghanis|an. Anycne
cri|i ca| cf |he Bush adminis|ra|icn. Anycne whc wan|s
|c |ax |he ri ch, c|cse ccrpcra|e |ax |ccphc|es, aad
1 Andrew Keen, "Web 2. 0, " The Weekly Standard, February
1 4, 2006, weeklystandard. com.
PRESENT FORCE 41
regula|e | he deriva|ives market. Anycne whc suppm1s
unemp|cymen| insurance, fccd s|amps, public educa-
|icn, and public sec|cr wcrkers` righ|s tc ccllec|ive
bargai ning.
US lresiden| Barack Ubama is labeled a ccmmuni s|
nc| |c men|icn a Nus|i m, a henyan, and a |encri s|. ln
|anuary 2010, \i c|cria |ackscn, a fcrmer cas| member
cn |he |elevisicn shcw Satnrday Night Live, released a
vi dec cn YcuTube ca||ed There`s a Ccmmunis| Livi ng
i n |he Whi|e Hcuse. !n Apri|, |ackscn perfcrmed |he
scng a| a Tea la1y ra||y, where a||endees cined in
singi ng |he chcrus. There`s a ccmmuni s| living in |he
Whi|e Hcuse. Lx|ensive ccmmen|ary i n |he circui|
c| blcgs, |alk radi c, and cable news |cllcwed, ex|end-
i ng |he ccmmunis| lresi den| meme. Twc years la|er,
Ilcri da Ccngressman Allen Wes| alleged |ha| as many
as eigh|y members cf |he US Hcuse cI hepresen|a|ives
were ccmmunis|she was re|erri ng |c Demccra|i c
lar|y members cf |he lrcgressi ve Caucus .
lt`s cbvicus encugh |hat ccn|empcrary Demccra|s
are nc| ccmmunis|s. Ncs| suppcr| pcli ci es |c |he righ|
cf hcnald heagan`s. The Demccra|i c lar|y di d nc|
a||emp| |c pass a si ng|e-payer public hea||h insurance
prcgram ins|ead, pecp|e ae required |c purchase
msurance frcm a priva|e ccmpany) . The Ubama
adminis|ra|icn`s respcnse |c |he eccncmic cnsi s cf
2008 fccused cn |he hnance sec|cr when i | ccu|d have
prcvided a massive cbs prcgram) . lresi den| Ubama
himse|f in|rcduced |he pcssibili|y cf cu|s |c |he |as|
remaining ccmpcnen|s cf |he welfare s|a|eScci a|
Securi|y, Nedi care, and Nedi cai d all encrmcus|y
pcpu|ar prcgrams). Lvcca|icns cI an encrcaching ccm-
munis| |hrea| i n |he US cculd |hus seem |c be a nc|
very crea|ive re|urn |c |he language cf |he Ccld War
and |he hed Scare, a ccnserva|ive re|rea| |c a fcrmerly
effec|ive rhe|cric cf fear.
Ye| |here is mcre |c |hese evcca|icns cf ccmmuni sm
than si mply |he dus ting cff cf an cld ccnhi c t. Ces|ures
|c ccmmuni sm and scci alism make sense because |he
marke|s fai led. When |he US gcvemmen| bailed cut |he
hnance sec|cr, |he visibi|i |y cf |he s|a|e as an ins|rumen|
cf class pcwer became undeniable. Uf ccurse, s|a|es
have always been ins|rumen|s cf c|ass pcwer |ha|`s
wha| s|a|es are). And |he ccrpcrate and manci a| e|i|e
i n |he Uni|ed S|a|es have lcng used |he s|a|e |c secure
|heir parti cu|ar in|eres|s mcs| recen||y by subver|i ng
unicns, manipula|ing |he |ax ccde, avciding regula|icn,
and s|ruc|uring ccmpe|i |icn |c beneh| |hemselves) . Bu|
PRESENT FORCE 43
the bank bailcu|s shat|ered any remaining il|usicn |hat
|he demccra|ic s|a|e serves and represen|s |he pecple.
They demcns|rated in a spec|acular and irrefutable
fashicn |ha| |he gcvemmen| i n|ervenes i n |he eccncmy
and dces sc cn behalI cf a class.
The nex| mcve i s ccncep|ua||y easy. use | he s|a|e Icr
a differen| class, use i| |c des|rcy |he ccndi |icns |ha|
crea|e classes . Si nce |his is |he demi|icn cI |he dic|a-
|oship cI |he prcle|aria|, i |`s nc smpri se |ha| capi|alis|s
and ccnserva|ives evcke |he |hrea| cf ccmmunism. The
my|h |ha| |he s|a|e has nc rcle i n |he eccncmy dcesn`|
ccnvince anycne. The bailcu|s prcved |he pcssibi|-
i |y and necessi|y cf using |he s|a|e Icr |he ccmmcn
i n|eres| cf the ccl|ec|ive pecp|e.
Alsc ccn|ribu|ing |c |he clima|e wherein ccmmu-
nism is a presen| threa| is a meme tha| dcesn` | use |he
wcrd ccmmunis| bu| fccuses ins|ead cn |he pecple
as the scurce cf excesses that mus| be e|imi nated cr
ccn|rc||ed. Ccnserva|i ve and mains|ream media i n |he
US, Uh, and Eurcpe b|ame the pecple fcr |he debt and
eccncmic cri ses, and hence pcsi|icn cu|s and aus|en|y
measures as |he cnly viab|e sc|u|icns. ln the US, |he
ccllapse i n |he deri va|ives and mcr|gage bcnd marke|s
is a||ribu|ed |c pccr pecple whc |cck cu| mcr|gages
they cculdn`| affcrd, defaulted cn |hem, and |hereby
caused glcbal eccncmic chacs. Likewise, |he demands
cf public sec |cr wcrkerssuch as |eachers, civil
servan|s, pcli ce, and hrehgh|ersfcr cb secmi|y, pen-
sicns, beneh|s, decen| wages, and |he right |c bargain
cc||ec|ively are said |c be unaffcrdab|e. ln |he Uh, |he
righ|s cf wcrking c|ass s|uden|s |c an educa|icn are
presen|ed as beycnd |he ccun|p`s means . Anycne whc
wan|s an educa|icn shcu|d be wi||ing |c pay fcr i|. The
Creek s|cry is cf pecp|e whc refused |c wcrk encugh,
whc wan|ed |c re|ire ear|y. \aricus capi|a|i s| gcvem-
men|s |e|l |he same s|cry. |he pecp|e`s excesses are
|he prcb|em and |he sc|u|icn is |c bea| |hem back in|c
submissicn.
The |ru|h in |his s|cry cI |he pecp|e, a s|cp |ha|
erases i|s cwn |elli ng as a salvc in class war|ha| i s,
as a |ac|ic used by |he s|a|e as an ins|rumen| cf |he
very ri ch in their effcrts |c ex|rac| every crumb cf va|ue
frcm wcrking pecp|eis |ha| |he pecp|e are a pc|i|ica|
and an eccncmic cause. The we|fare sta|es cf Eurcpe
and |he heynesi an arrangemen|s i n |he US and |he Uh
resu||ed frcm pc|i|ical s |mggle. They were achieve-
men|s cf |he crganized ccllec|ive pcwer cf wcrking
pecp|e. Wcrkers Icugh| Icr wages, beneh|s, pensicns,
PRESENT FORCE 45
a measure cf ccn|rc| cver their ccndi|icns cf emp|cy-
men|. Wcrkers made demands and fcr cver |hi r|y years,
capi|a| had |c pay. Capi |a| didn` | res |rai n i|self. The
pecp|e discip|ined capi |al. The rhe|cric cf we can` |
affcrd i |, cf dehci|s and cu|s, cf aus|eri |y and unpay-
able deb|s and al| |he res|, i s |he way capi|a| expresses
i |s refusal |c pay anymcre. Defau||ing cn |cans i s a
prcb|em mcre fcr |enders |han Icr bcncwers a pcin|
|ha| |ends |c remain hidden) . Capi |al wan|s mcre and
i s demanding mcreaccumu|a|icn by dispcssessicn.
Une addi|icnal |ru|h i n |he s|cry |ha| b|ames |he
pecp|e and i n sc dcing |rea|s |hem as a pc|i|i ca| and
eccncmic cause cen|ers cn |he pecple`s demands. Ye|
because |hi s s|cry is capi |al`s s tcry, i| is inver|ed, back-
wards. The prcblem i s wi |h |he pecp|e`s demands, bu|
nc| tha| we`ve demanded |cc much. l|`s |he cppcsi te.
we` ve demanded |cc |i |||e. We haven` | been demand-
i ng encugh. We haven`| fcllcwed up, refused, smashed,
and |aken mcre. The capi |a|is| s|cry presen|s preci sely
such a demanding, refusing, taking pecple. These are
|he pecp|ea s|rcng, massi ve, mc|ley pecplewhc
|he ri ch and |hei r pc|i |i cal agen|s |a|k as i f |hey are
hgh|ing and whc |hey |arge| wi|h excessive Icrce a| |he
sligh|es| prcvcca|icn as |he lndcn ric|s i n Augus|
2011 made vivi dly c|ear, and as |he |ear gas and rubber
bu||e|s deplcyed by pcli ce i n US ci|ies agains| cccupi-
ers shcwed |he fc||cwi ng fal|) . These are |he pecple
|hey fear|he ccmmunis| |hrea|.
Slavc
izek argues |ha| |he ru|ing i dec|cgy wan|s

us |c |hink |ha| radica| change is impcssib|e. This ide-
clcgy, he says, |e||s us |ha| i|`s i mpcssib|e |c abc|i sh
capi|a|i sm. lerpe|ual|y repea|ing i | s message cI nc
al|ema|ive, |he dcminan| i dec|cgy a||emp|s |c render
i nvisib|e |he impcssib|e-rea| cf |he an|agcni sm |ha|
cu|s acrcss capi|ali s| sccie|ies .
izek`s descrip|icn
migh| have wcrked a decade cr sc agc, bu| nc| anymcre.
The end cI |he hrs| decade cf |he |wen|y-hrs| cen|ury
has brcugh| wi th i| massive uprisings, demcnstraticns,
s|rikes, cccupa|icns, and revclu|icns |hrcughcu| |he
Ni dd|e Las|, LU, Uh, and US. ln |he US, mains|ream
media remind vi ewers dai ly |ha| radi ca| change is pcs-
sible, and i nci |e us |c fear i|. The high|, even |he cen|er,
regu|ar|y invckes |he pcssibili|y cI radi cal change, and
i | asscci ates |ha| change wi|h ccmmunism.
Why ccmmuni sm: Because |he grcss inequa|i |y
ushered in by |he ex|reme capi|a|i sm cI necliberal s|a|e
2 Slavoj
Z
i zek, "A Permanent Economic Emergency, " New
Lf Review 65, July-August 201 0, 94.
PRESENT FORCE 47
pclicy and despera|e hnanci ali sm is visible, undeni-
able, and glcba|. lncreasing i n i ndus|rialized ccun|ri es
cver |he las| |hree decades, inccme inequa|i|y i s par|i c-
u|ar|y severe in Chi l e, Nexicc, Turkey, and |he US, |he
fcur indus|ri a|ized ccun|ri es wi|h |he |arges| inccme
gaps lcr|uga|, |he Uh, and l|aly alsc make |he |cp
|en) . ` lnequa|i|y in |he lS i s sc ex|reme |ha| i|s Cini
ccefhcien| (45) makes i | mcre ccmparable |c Camerccn
(44.6) and |amai ca (45.5) |han |c Cermany (30.4) and
|he Uh (34).4 The an|agcni sm |ha| cu|s acrcss capi|a|-
i s| ccun|nes i s sc apparen| |ha| dcminan| ideclcgi ca|
fcrces can`| cbscure i|.
The lS |ypi cally pcsi|icns ex|reme inequa|i|y,
i ndeb|edness, and decay e|sewhere, cffshcre. The
severe glcbal eccncmi c recessicn, cc||apse i n |he
hcusing and mcr|gage markets, increase i n penna-
nen| invclun|ary unemp|cymen|, |ri||icn-dcl|ar bank
bai|cu|s, and ex|ensive cu|s tc federa|, s|a|e, and lccal
3 Organization for Economi c Co-operation and Devel opment ,
Society at a Glance 201 1-0ECD Social Indicators, April
201 1 , oecd. org.
4 Cent ral Intel l igence Agency, "Count ry Compari son:
Di stri buti on of Fami ly Income-The Gi ni Index, " The World
F actbook, ci a. gov.
budgets, hcwever, have made what we thcught was the
third world in|c our world. Ccn|ra
izek, |he divisicn

cutting acrcss capi ta|i st scci eties is nwre visible, nwre
palpable in |he US and Uh now |han i |`s been since a|
least the !20s. We |earn tha| mcre cf cur chi|dren |ive
i n pcveny |han a| any |ime i n recent his|cry 20 percen|
cI chi|dren in |he US as cf 20!0) , |hat |he weal|h cf the
very, very ri ch|he |cp ! percen|has drama|i ca||y
i ncreased whi|e inccme fcr |he res| cI us has remained
s|agnant cr declined, that many cI the fcrec|csures the
banks fcrce cn hcmecwners are meaning|ess, i||ega|
ac|s cI exprcpriaticn the banks can` | dccumen| whc
cwns wha| sc |hey |ack |he paper necessary |c us|iIy
fcrec|csure prcceedings) . We read cf ccrpcraticns
si tting cn pi les cf cash instead cI hiring back their |aid-
cff wcrkfcrce. Under necli bera|i sm, |hey |avish|y ency
their prch|s rather than pu| them back in|c prcducticn
what Crard Dumnil and Dcminique Lvy call an
exp|i ci t s|rategy cI disaccumula|icn. `
ln fac|, we read |ha| |he midd|e c|ass is basi cally
hnished. Ad Age, |he primary |rade curna| fcr the
5 Gerard Dumeni l and Domi ni que Lvy, The Crisis of
Neoliberalism, Cambridge, MA: Harvard Uni versity Press,
201 1 , 64.
PRESENT FORCE 49
adver|ising indus|ry, publi shed a macr repcr| declar-
i ng |he end cf mass afhuence. As if i| were describing
an emerging ccnfrcn|a|icn be|ween |wc grea| hcs|ile
classes, |he repcr| nc|es |he s|agna|icn cf wcrking
class i nccme and |he expcnen|i al grcw|h cf upper c|ass
i nccme. mcs| ccnsumer spending ccmes frcm |he |cp
10 percen| cf hcusehclds. Icr adver|isers, |he cnly
ccnsumers wcr|h reaching are |he small plu|ccracy cf
weal|hy eli|es wi|h cu|size purchasing inhuence, an
i nhuence |ha| crea|es an i ncreasingly ccncen|ra|ed
marke| in luxmy gccds .
Admi||edly, pcpular media in |he US rarely refer |c
|he super ri ch as |he bcurgecisie and |he res| cf us as
the prc|e|ari a|. They are mcre likely |c use terms like
Wall S|ree| versus Nain S|ree|which i s cne cf
|he reascns Uccupy Wall S|reet |cck hc|d as a mcve-
men|, pecple were already accus|cmed |c hearing abcu|
all |ha| had been dcne |c save |he banks. Scme|i mes,
US pcpu|ar media avci ds a direc| ccn|ras| be|ween |he
1 percen| and |he percen|, i ns|ead ux|apcsi ng exec-
u|ive pay wi|h s|rapped ccnsumers lccking fcr bargai ns
6 Sam Pi zzigat i , "Madi son Avenue Declares ' Mass
Afuence' Over," Campaign for Americas Fntnre, May 30,
201 1 , ourfut ure. org.
cr cutting back cn spending. ln 2010, median pay Icr
|he |cp execu|ives increased 23 percen|, |he CLU
cI \i accm, lhi |i ppe l. Dauman, made 84.5 mi||icn
dcl|ars. CLUs Ircm |cp banks encyed a 36 percen|
i ncrease, wi|h |ami e Di mcn Ircm |l Ncrgan Chase and
L|cyd B|ankIein Ircm Ccldman Sachs |cpping |he |is|.
Lven CLUs cI ccmpanies experiencing macr lcsses and
dec|ines have been ge||i ng ex|reme bcnuses . Cenera|
Llec|ric`s CLU, )eIIrey h. lmmel|, recei ved an average
cI 12 mi||icn dcllars a year cver a six-year pericd while
|he ccmpany had a 7 percen| dec|ine i n re|urns, Cregg
L. Lngles, CLU cI Dean Iccds, tcck away an average
cI 20. 4 millicn dcllars a year cver six years while |he
ccmpany declined 11 percen|. ' Super high pay dcesn` t
reward perIcrmance. lt`s a Icrm cI theI| |hrcugh whi ch
|he very ri ch serve |hemselves, bes|cwing a |argesse
|ha| keeps mcney wi|hin |heir class.
ln a set|ing li ke |he US where |he man|ra Icr cver
m|y years has been wha|`s gccd Icr business i s gccd
7 Pradnya Joshi , "We Knew They Got Rai ses. But Thi s?"
New York Times, July 2, 201 1 , nyti mes . com.
8 Megan Murphy and Sharlene Gof, "Bank Chiefs Average
Pay Ri ses by 36 Percent, " Financial Times, June 1 5, 201 1 ,
cnbc . com.
9 "In Pi ct ures: Worst Bosses For The Buck, " forbes. com.
PRESENT FORCE 51
fcr America, the current undeniabi |i ty cf di visicn
i s signihcant. lnequality is appearing as a fac tcr, a
fcrce, even a cri me. Every sectcr cf US scci ety vi ews
c|ass ccnhi ct as the pnmap ccnhi ct in the ccunuy.

hc wcnder we are hearing t he name ccmmuni sm
againthe antagcnism cutting acrcss capitali st sccie-
ti es i s palpable, pressing.
The Kght pcsi|icns ccmmunism a a threat because
ccmmunism names me defea| cf and a|terna|ive |c
capitalism. l| reccgnizes the crisis in capi|alism. cver-
accumula|icn |eaves the rich sit|ing cn piles cf cash
they can`t invest, indusui a| capaci ty remains unused
and wcrkers remain unemplcyed, glcba| in|erccnnec-
ticns make unneeded skyscrapers, mer-cptic cab|es,
malls, and hcusing deve|cpments as much a pat1 cf
China as t he US. At t he same time, sccres cf signihcant
prcb|emswhether |inked tc fccd shcrtages resulting
frcm c|imate change, energy shcr1ages resu|ting frcm ci|
dependency, cr dmg shcnages resu|ting frcm the fai|me
cf private pharmaceutical ccmpani es tc risk their cwn
capitalremai n unmet because they require the ki nds
1 0 Ri ch Mori n, "Ri si ng Share of Ameri cans See Confi ct
Between Rich and Poor, " Pew Research Center, January ll,
201 2, pewsocialtrends. org.
cf large-sca|e planning and cccpera|icn |ha| capi|a|ism,
p1i cu|ar|y in i|s ccn|empcrary mance- and ccmmu-
nica|icns-dnven incarna|icn, subver|s. David Harvey
exp|ains |ha| capi|alis|s |hese days ccnsuue a heal|hy
eccncmy as cne |ha| grcws abcu| 3 percen| a year. The
likelihccd cf ccn|inued 3 percen| annua| grcw|h in
|he wcr|d eccncmy, hcwever, i s sma||. This is in par|
because cf |he dimcu||y cf reabscrbing surp|us capi|a|.
By 2030 i| wcu|d be necessary |c md inves|men| cppcr-
|uni|i es fcr |hree uilhcn dc||ars, rcugh|y |wice wha| wa
needed i n 2010. 1 1 The fu|ure cI capi|a|ism is |hus high|y
uncer|ai nand, fcr capi |ali s|s, grim.
Nec|ibera|s and necccnset\a|i ves evcke |he |hrea|
cf ccmmuni sm because |hey sense |he mcr|ali |y cf
capi|a|i sm. We shcu|dn`| |e| |he media screen decei ve
us. We shculdn'| |hi nk |ha| |he charge |ha| Ubama
is a ccmmunis| and peace is ccmmunis| fccl us in|c
|hinki ng |ha| ccmmunism is us| an i mage ccvering
up and dis|cr|ing |he mcre sericus pc|i |i cs cf glcba|
hnance, |rade, and cunency regula|icn. Tha| pcli|i cs
i s hcpe|ess, a fatce, |he a||emp| cf hnanci a| and ecc-
ncmi c e|i|es |c ccme |c scme |empcrary anangemen|s
1 1 David Harvey, The Enigma f Capital and the Crises f
Capitalism, New York: Oxford Uni versi ty Press, 2010, 21 6.
PRESENT FORCE 53
ccnducive |c |heir ccn|inued explci|a|icn cf |he wcrk
cI |he res| cf us .
l` ve Iccused |hus Iar cn |he high|`s rela|icn |c |he ccm-
munis| |hrea|, |ha| i s, cn |he assump|i cns underpinning
an|iccmmunis| rhe|cri c and a||acks cn |he pecple.
Wha| abcu| |he demccra|i c LeI|: Whereas |he high|
|rea|s ccmmunism as a presen| Icrce, |he LeI| i s ben|
amund |he Icrce cI |css, |ha| is, |he ccn|cr|ed shape i|
has Icund i|selI i n as i | has IcrIei|ed cr beuayed |he
ccmmunis| i dea|.
The ccn|empcrary Lef| clai ms nc| |c exis|. Whereas
|he high| sees leI|-wing |hrea|s everywhere, |hcse cn
the Lef| eschew any use cf |he |erm we, emphasizing
i ssue pc|i|i cs, i den|i|y pcli|i cs, and |heir cwn Irag-
men|a|i cn in|c a mul|i tude cf si ngulari|i es . Wri |ing
in |he wake cI |he anncuncemen| cf |he dea|h cI
ccmmunism, and challenging |he adequacy cf |ha|
descri p|icn cI |he cc||apse cI |he Scvi e| lar|y-S|a|e,
Badicu nc|es, There i s nc lcnger a 'we, ` |here hasn`|
been cne Icr a lcng |i me. The 'we` en|ered in|c i|s twi -
ligh| well befcre |he 'dea|h cf ccmmuni sm. '` ' Uver
12 Alain Badi ou, Of an Obscure Disaster-On the End of
State- Truth, trans. Barbara P. Fulks, Netherlands: Jan van
thir|y years cI unbrid|ed capi|alism made egci sm and
i ndividualism |he crder cI |he day such |ha| cc||ec|iv-
i |y was already vi ewed wi th suspicicn. The demise cI
|he USSh di dn`| ki || |he we.
The absence cI a ccmmcn prcgram cr visicn i s gen-
era||y |amen|ed, even as |his absence i s disccnnec|ed
Ircm |he se||i ng i n whi ch i | appears as an absence,
name|y, |he |css cI a LeI| |ha| says we and cur
and us in |he ms| p|ace. There are issues, even|s,
prcec|s, demcns|ra|i cns, and aIhni|y grcups, bu| |he
LeI| c|ai ms nc| |c exis|. LeI| me|anchc|i cs lamen|
|he |ack cI pcli |i cal a||erna|ives when |he rea| pcli|i-
cal a||ema|ive is |he cne whcse lcss de|ermines |heir
aim|essnessccmmuni sm.
Scme cn |he LeI| vi ew |he |ack cI a ccmmcn pc|i|i ca|
visicn cr prcgram as a s|reng|h. ' They applaud wha|
|hey ccns|rue as |he Ireedcm Ircm |he dic|a|es cI a par|y
line and |he cppm1unity tc make individua| chcices
Eyck Academi e and Arkzi n d. o. o. , 2009, 1 1 .
1 3 As I detai l i n chapter fve, the di agnosi s of "left
melanchol i a" comes from Wendy Brown, "Resi st i ng Left
Melancholi a, " boundary 2 26: 3, 1 999, 1 9-27.
1 4 For the defni t i ve di scussi on of the theoret i cal tendenci es
characteristic of t hi s "speculat ive left , " see Bruno Bosteels,
The Actuality of Communism, London: Verso, 201 1 .
PRESENT FORCE 55
wi th pc|entially radi ca| pcli |ical effects. The 20! !
cccupa|icns cI pub|ic squares i n Spain and Creece
are prime examples . ' ` Uppcsing high unemp|cyment
and |he i mpcsi|icn cI aus|eri|y measures, hundreds cf
|hcusands |cck |c |he s|ree|s in a massive mcbiliza|i cn.
Nu||ip|e vcicespar|i cipan|s as we|| as ccmmen|a|crs
emphasized |ha| nc ccmmcn line, pla|Icrm, cr crien-
|a|icn uni|ed |he prc|es|ers, |hey were nc| pc|i|i cal. lcr
many, |he in|ense, Ies|i ve a|mcsphere and break frcm
|he ccns|rai n|s cI |he usual pc|i|i cs inci |ed a new ccnh-
dence in sccial change. A| |he same |ime, |he reIusal cI
represen|a|icn and reluc|ance |c implemen| decisicn
mechanisms hampered ac|ual deba|e, enabling char-
i sma|i c individual speakers tc mcve |he crcwd and
acquire quasi-|eadership pcsi|icns nc ma||er wha|
pcsiticn |hey |cck), and ccns trai ning |he pcssibi|i-
|ies cf wcrking |hrcugh pc|i|ical divergences |cward a
ccllec|ive plan.
These same pa||erns reappeared in Uccupy Wal|
S|ree|. Un the cne hand, the cpenness cf |he mcvemen|,
i |s reec|icn cf par|y i den|ihca|icn, made i | ini|i a|ly
i nvi|ing |c a wide array cI |hcse whc were disccn|en|ed
1 5 C. G. , "Democracy i s born i n the Squares, " June 6, 201 1 ,
occupiedlondon. org.
wi th |he ccntinued unemplcymen|, increasing inequa|-
i |y, and pc|i|i ca| s|agna|icn in |he US. Un |he c|her,
when ccmbi ned wi|h |he ccnsensus-based prccess
charac|eri s|ic cf |he Cenera| Assemblies adcp|ed frcm
|he Spanish and Creek cccupa|icns), |his i nc|usiv-
i |y had de|rimen|a| effec|s, hinderi ng |he mcvemen|`s
abi |i|y |c |ake a s|rcng s|and agains| capi|alism and fcr
cc|lec|ive ccn|rc| cver ccmmcn rescmces.
The disavcwa| cf ccmmunism as a pcli|i ca| idea|
shapes |he Lef|. Iragmen|ed |ribu|aries and curren|s,
branches and ne|wcrks cf par|icular prcec|s and pat1ia|
cbec|s, ae |he lef| fcrm cf |he lcss cf ccmmunism. The
pc|i|i cs-cf-nc-pcli|ics line seeking |c |rump c|ass
and eccncmic s|rugg|e in |he Spani sh, Creek, and US
prc|es|s wasn`| new. Icr cver |hir|y years, many cn |he
Lef| have argued tha| |his par1ial, dispersed pcli|ics
i s an advance cver previcus emphases cn class and
mi |i |ancy indeed, |his is perhaps the s|rcnges| legacy
cf 1968). Avciding |he divisicn and an|agcnism |ha|
ccmes wi|h |aking a pcli|ica| pcsi|icn, they di sp|ace
|heir energi es cn|c prccedura| ccncerns wi|h inc|usicn
and par|i ci pa|icn, as if |he ccn|en| cf |he pcli|i cs were
ei|her givena ma||er cf i den|i|yr seccndary |c |he
fac| cf i nc|usicn, which makes |he cu|ccme cf pc|i|i ca|
PRESENT FORCE 57
s|rugg|e |ess si gnihcan| |han |he prccess cf s|ruggle.
These leI|is|s name |heir gcal demccracy. They envi-
sicn s|rugg|es cn |he Lef| specihca||y as s|rugg|es fcr
demccracy, ra|her |han as s|mggles Icr |he abc|i|icn
cf capi|alism, ccl|ec|ive cwnershi p cf |he means cf
prcduc|icn, and eccncmic equa|i|y wi |hin an a|ready
demccra|ic se||ing.
An emphasis cn demccracy i s radi ca| i n scme se|-
|ings, |ike i n |he Irench hevclu|icn, |he Hai|ian
hevc|u|icn, |he i ni |i a| hgh| fcr pcli|i ca| Ireedcm |ha|
led |c |he hussi an Iebruary hevc|u|icn, as we|| as i n
s|rugg|es agai ns| cc|cnia|ism and imperi ali sm, and
even i n cppcsi|icn |c |he au|hcri|ari ani sm cI |he par|y-
s|a|e bureaucracies cf |he fcrmer Las|. Tc s|and fcr
demccracy was |c s|and agains| an crder ccns|i |u|ed
|hrcugh |he exclusicn cf demccracy. ln ccn|empc-
rary parli amen|ary demccraci es, hcwever, fcr lef|i s|s
|c refer |c |heir gca|s as a s|rugg|e fcr demccracy is
s|range. l| i s a defense cf |he s|a|us quc, a ca|| fcr mcre
cf |he same. Demccracy is cur ambi en| mili eu, |he
hegemcnic fcrm cf ccn|empcrary pcli|i cs whi ch is ye|
anc|her reascn |ha| |he high| can use ccmmunism as
a name fcr wha| cppcses i |) . Lef| use cf |he language
cI demccracy now avci ds |he Iundamen|al an|qcnism
be|ween the ! percen| and the res| cf us by acting as if
|he cnly |hing really missing was par|i ci pa|icn.
ha|her than reccgnizi ng tha| fcr | he Lef| demcc-
racy is |he fcrm |ha| |he |css cf ccmmuni sm takes, |he
fcrm cf ccmmunism`s di splacemen|, radi cal demccra|s
|rea| demccracy as i|seh replacing ccmmunism. The
repercussicn cf |he sub|ima|icn cf ccmmuni sm in dem-
ccra|ic precccupa|icns wi|h prccess and par|icipa|icn
is acqui escence |c capi|a|i sm as |he bes| sys|em Icr
|he prcduc|icn and dis|ribu|icn cf rescurces, labcr, and
gccds.
A||hcugh |he ccn|empcrary Lef| migh| seem |c
agree wi|h |he mains|ream s|cry cf ccmmuni sm`s
fai |ure|t doesn't work, where i t hclds the place
fcr a wide vari e|y cf unspecihed pcli |ica| endeavcrs-
the language cf fai |ure ccvers cver a mcre dangercus,
anxi e|y-prcvcking i dea-omun|sm succeedd. The
Lef| isn` t afrai d cf fai|ure. lt is ahaid cf success,
|he successIul mcbi |iza|icn cI |he energy and rage cI
the pecple. Lef|i s|s really fear |he b|ccdy vic|ence cf
revc|u|icn, and hence |hey Iccus cn disp|acing anger
i n|c safer prccedura|, ccnsumeris|, and aes|he|ic chan-
nels. As le|er Hallward emphasizes, |he |egacy cI
an|i-|accbinism is a preIerence fcr |he ccndemna|icn
PRESENT FORCE 59
cf scme ki nds cf vic|ence bu| nc| c|hers. lef|i s|s cin
demccra|s, li bera|s, and ccnserva|ives i n dencunci ng
|he revc|u|icnary Terrcr whi|e |hey vir|ua||y igncre |he
far mcre b|ccdy repressicn cf |he 1871 Ccmmune. '
Even |hcse whc see |hemse|ves as pat1 cf scme cpen
and vari ed ccns|e||a|icn cf |he Lef| ccndemn |he vic-
lence cf |he pecple agains| |hcse whc wculd cppress
|hem. S|a|e viclence and |he fcrce cf ccun|errevclu-
|icn i s |aken fcr gran|ed, assumed, clcaked in a pricr
legi |imacy cr presumed |c be us|ihed i n |he in|er-
es| cf crder. Hal|ward wri|es, lrcm |he perspec|ive
cf wha| i s already es|ab|i shed, nc|es Sain|-|us|, ' |ha|
which prcduces |he genera| gccd is a|ways |errible. `
The |accbin |ertor was mcre defensive |han aggres-
sive, mcre a ma||er cf res|raini ng |han cf unleashing
pcpu|ar vic|ence. 'Le| us be |enible,` Dan|cn sai d, ' sc
|ha| |he pecp|e need nc| be.`` ' Wha| i s vciced cn |he
Lef| as cppcsi|icn |c |cp-dcwn crganizing, vanguards,
and e|i|es, |hen, may well be |he fcrm |aken by cppcsi -
|icn |c |he un|eashed fup cf |he pecp|e.
1 6 Peter Hallward, "Communi sm of the I ntell ec t ,
Communi sm of the Wi ll," i n The Idea of Communism, eel .
Costas Douzinas and Slavoj
Z
i zek, London: Verso, 201 0, 1 28.
1 7 Ibi d.
Why wculd le||i s|s |ear a par|y in whi ch we par|i ci -
pa|e, ra|her |han, say, unders|anding cur par|i ci pa|icn
as i nhuenci ng |he shape, prcgram, and ac|icns cf such
a par|y: Dc we fear cur cwn capaci |y fcr vi clence: Ur
dc we fear |he unccn|rc||able |crce cf |he pecple mcbi-
li zed agains| |he sys|em |ha| explci|s |hem, a fcrce |ha|
universi |y ga|es are incapab|e cf b|ccking: lerhaps
by reccgnizing |his fear, |ef|i s|s can ccncen|ra|e i| i n|c
s|reng|h, |ha| i s, |cward a ccnhdence in |he ccl|ec|i ve
pcwer cf | he pecple | c wi pe cu| and remake.
The re|a|icn | c cc||ec|ive pcwer i s | he fundamen|a|
difference be|ween high| and Lef|. The Kgh| empha-
sizes |he individua|, indivi dua| surviva|, individua|
capaci |y, individual righ|s. The Lef| shculd be ccmmi|-
|ed |c |he ccllec|ive pcwer cf |he pecp|e. As lcng as i |
res|ri c|s i |self |c |he ccncep|ual vccabulary c| individ-
ua|i sm and demccracy inhabi |ed by |he high|, as |cng
as i| disperses ccllec|ive energy in|c hee|ing aes|he|ic
experiences and prccedura| acccmp|ishmen|s, |he Lf|
will ccn|inue |c lcse |he ba||le fcr equa|i |y.
The mis|ake |ef|i s|s make when we |urn i n|c |iber-
als and demccra|s is |hinking |ha| we are beycnd |he
ccmmunis| hcrizcn, |ha| demccracy rep|aced ccm-
munism when i | serves as |he ccn|empcrary fotu
PRESENT FORCE 61
cf ccmmunism`s displacemen|. We dcn` | see, can`|
ackncw|edge, cur cwn ccmplici|y in c|ass s|rugg|e, in
capi |a|`s advances cver |he res| cf us as wcrking pecple.
l|`s as if we` ve fcrgc||en |ha| pcli|i cal s|ruggle i s an
i rreducib|e di mensicn cf capi|a|i smcapi|al dcesn`|
cease pursui| cf i|s cwn in|eres|s cu| cf |he gccdness
cf i|s ccld and ncnexis|en| heat1. Capi|a|i sm a|ways
and necessily i n|erlinks wi|h ccnhic|, resis|ance,
acccmmcda|icn, and demands . hefusal |c engage i n
|hese s|mgg|es, reec|icn cf |he |erms cf |hese s|mg-
gles, affec|s |he fcrm |ha| capi |ali sm |akes. Absen| |he
disci p|ine cf unicnized wcrkers and an crganized Lef|,
capi|a|par|icularly i|s s|rcnges| and mcs| vi cicus
ccrpcra|e and hnance sec|crssubsumes, apprcpri-
a|es, and explci|s every|hing i| can.
Ccnsi der Luc Bcl|anski and Eve Chiapellc`s analy-
sis cf changes in managemen| language frcm |he six|ies
|c |he nine|ies. ' They dccumen| |he dis man|ling cf a
c|ass-baed appmach |c wcrk and |he assembling cf
a new visicn cf wcrk i n |erms cf individua| crea|i vi|y,
au|cncmy, and hexibi|i |y. lerscna| beneh|s came |c
cutweigh cc||ec|ive ac|icn, |hereby s|reng|hening |he
18 Luc Boltanski and Eve Chiapello, The New Spirit of
Capitalism, trans. Gregory Elliott, London: Verso, 2007.
pcsi|icn cf emplcyers. The resul|ing shif| cf respcnsi-
bi |i|i es frcm crganiza|icns cn|c i ndi vi dua|s undermi ned
previcus guaran|ees cf securi|y. The ac|ua|i |y cf hexib|e
emp|cymen| was precari |y|empcrary wcrk, subccn-
|rac|ing, prcec|-based emplcymen|, mul|i -|asking,
and cppcr|uni|i es ccn|ingen| cn perscnal ne|wcrks.
Wha| ma||ers here i s |he change i n |he unders|and-
i ng cf wcrk, a change frcm an emphasi s cn i|s class,
grcup, and cc|lec|i ve dimensicn |c a vi ew cf wcrk as a
perscna| chci ce, endeavcr, and lccus cf meaning. An
i dea cf indivi dual wcrk disp|aced |he sense cf wcrk as
a ccmmcn ccndi |icn, |hereby ccn|ribu|ing |c |he lib-
era|icn cf capi|al frcm |he ccns|rai n|s i | enccun|ered
when i | had |c deal wi |h wcrkers as a ccllec|ive fcrce.
Evidence frcm |he US ccnhrms |he shif| frcm a class-
based |c an individuali s| ccncep|icn cf wcrk as we|| as
|he nega|i ve i mpac| cf |his shif| cn |he eccncmic wel|-
being cf |he macri |y cf |he pecple. His|crian |efferscn
Ccwi e describes |he i ndi vi duali s| apprcach |c wcrk as
i| appears a| |he ccnunc|ure cf ccnhi c|ing fcrces in |he
seven|i es. A| |he beginni ng cf |he decade, i ndus|ria|
wcrkers rebelled agai ns| |heir ccn|ai nmen| wi|hin |he
pcs|-war |abcr-|iberal ccnsensus. he|a|i ve|y quickly,
hcwever, |abcr unres| b|urred i n|c |he backgrcund cf
PRESENT FORCE 63
a wider vari e|y cf cul|ural ccnhi c|s arcund abcr|icn,
pcrncgraphy, busi ng, crime, afmma|ive ac|icn, and
gay righ|s. Ccwie exp|ai ns, Wi |h c|ass dissclving
i n|c e|hni ci |y and resen|men|, i nequa|i|y began |c be
percei ved as a perscnal fa|e ra|her |han a ccllec|ive
respcnsibili|y.' ' Acccmpanying |he i n|ernaliza|icn
cf class s|ruggle was an aggressive an|i -unicn s|ra|egy
cn |he par| cf ccrpcra|icns . This i ncluded a drama|i c
i ncrease i n prc-business |cbbying, |he |egis|a|i ve
defea| cf a macr labcr |aw refcrm bi||, |he migra|icn
cf manmac|ming frcm |he Ncr|h |c |he Scu|h and cff-
shcre) , and an upsurge i n direc| and aggressive unfair
labcr prac|i ces, |ha| is, ac|s |ha| impeded wcrkers`
capaci |y |c exerci se |hei r righ| |c crganize. By |he
end cf |he decade, wcrkers were vc|ing cu| unicns .
li na|ly, as |he aggressive effcr|s cf busi ness crganized
as a c|ass weakened |abcr as a ccllec|ive fcrce, |he
legal reccgni|icn cf sex- and race-based discrimina-
|icn i|self had i ndi vi duali zi ng effec|s. lrc|ec|icns frcm
discrimina|icn and sexual harassmen| were secured
|hrcugh individual clai ms |c vic|a|icn and i nury. The
1 9 Jefferson Cowi e, Starin' Alive: The 1 970s and the Last
Days of the Working Class, New York: The New Press, 2010,
21 6-21 7.
s|rugg|e fcr wcrkplace equali|y |hus invc|ved a shif|
away frcm brcad eccncmic us|i ce and |c a mcre i ndi-
vi dua|is|i c |errai n cf 'cccupaticna| us|ice`equa|
emp|cymen| cppcr|uni |y, diversi|y, afhrma|i ve ac|icn,
and an|i-harassmen|." Wcrkers had individua| ri gh|s
|c be free frcm discrimina|icn even as |hey were cc|-
lec|ive|y beccming ever mcre expcsed and vu|nerable
|c a bru|a| capi |alis| eccncmy.
A wi dely pub|icized s|udy frcm Bruce Wes|em and
|ake hcsenfe|d demcns|ra|es |ha| de unicniza|icn
direc||y acccun|s fcr a| |eas| a |hird cf |he i ncrease in
inccme inequali |y experienced by US men wcrki ng in
|he priva|e sec|cr. The i ndi rec| effec|s cf |he dec|ine
cf unicns are even mcre prcncunced. Unicns ben-
eh||ed wcrkers acrcss |he labcr marke| i nscfar as
they estab|i shed a mcral eccncmy, a se| cf expec-
|a|icns cf equi|y, sc|i dari|y, and fairness wi|h brcad
sccia|, cultural, and pc|i ti cal rescnance. Wes|em and
hcsenfeld wti|e, The dec|ine cf Ameri can |abcr and
the assccia|ed i ncrease i n wage inequali |y signa|ed |he
de|ericra|icn cf |he |abcr marke| as a pcli|i cal ins|i|u-
|i cn. Wcrkers became less ccnnec|ed |c each c|her in
20 Ibi d. , 239.
PRESENT FORCE 65
|heir crganiza|icnal lives and |ess ccnnec|ed i n |heir
eccncmic fcr|unes. ' When wcrk was unders|ccd
in |erms cf c|ass, cc||ec|ive expec|a|icns prcvi ded a
pc|en| ccun|et1crce |c capi |al . The shif| |c an i ndi vi du-
ali s| ccncep|icn cf wcrk undermi ned |ha| fcrce.
lcr |he Lef|, demccracy i s |he fcrm |he |css cf ccmmu-
nism |akes . ha|her |han hgh|ing fcr a cc|lec|ive i dea|,
engaging i n a s|rugg|e cn behah cf |he res| cf us, |he
Lef| repe|i|ively i nvckes demccracy, ca||i ng fcr wha| is
already |here. These invcca|icns cf demccracy |ake cn
a pa||em |ha| Lacan describes via |he psychcanaly|i c
nc|icn cf dri ve. Li ke desire, drive refers |c a way |ha|
|he subec| arranges her encymen| (ouissance) . Wi|h
respec| |c desire, encymen| is wha| |he subec| can
never reach, wha| |he sub ec| wan|s bu| never ge|s-
oh, that' not it. Drive dihers i n |ha| encymen| ccmes
frcm missing cne`s gcal, i |`s wha| |he sub ec| ge|s, even
if she dcesn` | wan| i|. Encymen| i s |ha| li||le ex|ra
21 Bruce Western and Jake Rosenfel d, "Uni ons, Norms, and
the Ri se in Ameri can Wage Inequal i ty," American Sociological
Review 76: 4, 201 1 , 51 3-537.
22 See Slavoj
Z
izek, The Ticklish Subject, London: Verso,
2000.
charge whi ch keeps |he subec| keepi ng cn. The sub-
ec|`s repea|ed ye| ever fai|ing ehcr|s |c reach her gca|
beccme satisfying cn |heir cwn.
Lef| appea|s |c demccracy |ake cn |he s|ruc|ure cf
|he dtive i nscf as |hey ci rc|e arcund and arcund. We
perpe|ua||y miss cur gca| and ge| sa|isfac|icn |hrcugh
|his very missing. Ur we dcn` | even have an ac|ua| gca|,
and we |ake |he absence cf a gca| |c be a s|reng|h.
We |a|k, ccmp|ai n, and prc|es|. We make grcups cn
l acebcck. We si gn pe|i|icns and fotard |hem |c
everycne i n cur ccn|ac| |is|. Ac|ivi|y beccmes passiv-
i |y, cur s|uckness in a circui |, which i s |hen mcurned
as |he absence cf i deas cr even |he lcss cf |he pc|i|i-
ca| i |self and then rcu|ed ye| agai n |hmugh a plea fcr
demccracy, al|hcugh i| dcesn`| |ake a genius |c kncw
|ha| |he real prcb| em is capi ta|i sm. Wha| lef|i s|s cal|
|he |css cf |he pc|i|i ca| i s |he fcg |hey wander |hrcugh
because |hey` ve |cst sigh| cf the ccmmunist hcrizcn.
Scme ccn|empcrary |hecris|s ccmmend drive`s sub-
|i ma|icn, i|s subs|i|u|icn cf par|ia| cbec|s and the bi|s
cf encymen| acccmpanying repe|i|icns cf a prccess
fcr |he impcssi b|e cbec| cf desire. Nu||i ple vcices
in netwcrked and digi|a| medi a circui|s, fcr examp|e,
ce|ebra|e ccmmuni ca|ive capi |alism fcr i|s prcvisicn
PRESENT FORCE 67
cf cppm1uni|ies fcr small vi c|cri es and mcmen|ary
p|easures. Ni llicns di e in war and pcver|y, bu| a| |eas|
we have |he in|eme|. U|hers admire drive`s crea|ive
des|ruc|icn, |he way i|s dissc|u|icn cf |he cld i s |he
cpening |c |he new. Admi ||edly, repea|ing |he same ac|
cver and cver can shif| frcm crder |c chacsi|`s cne
|hing |c scra|ch an i|ch a ccuple cf |imes, i|`s scme-
|hing else en|ire|y |c claw |hrcugh |c |he bcne. The
rei|era|icns |ha| fai | |c respcnd |c changes i n |heir
se||ing |hemselves change |he se||ing. Bu| |he embrace
cf drive as des|ruc|icn, |ike |he vi ew cf drive as sub|i-
ma|icn, |rea|s a fea|me cf cm se||ing as an a||erna|ive
wi|hcu| drawing |he necessary separa|i cn. wha| makes
i| a fea|ure cf a differen| fcrma|icn, a differen| pcli|i cs,
cr even a cri|i que:
ln |he ccn|empcrary ne|wcrks cf ccmmuni ca|i ve
capi|a|i sm, drive is a feedback circui| |ha| cap|ures cur
bes| energi es. lnvigcra|i ng ccmmunism as a pc|i |ica|
al|ema|ive requires amplifying |he cc|lec|ive desire
|ha| can cu| |hrcugh |hese affec|ive ne|wcrks.
Chap|er 1hree
Sovereignty of the People
I
` ve discussed ccmmuni sm a a |ag fcr |wc fea|ures cf
cur cuven| se||ing, |he pas| Scvie| experi men| and a
presen| fcrce. l` ve described |he presen| fcrce cf ccm-
munism via a righ|-lef| dis|inc|icn be|ween |hrea| and
lcss, a dis|i nc|icn whi ch res|s cn a ccmmcn suppcsi-
|icn cf demccracy. The high| pcsi|icns ccmmuni sm
as a ccn|inued |hrea| |c demccracy. The Lef| i s s|uck
i n demccra|i c dri ve as |he ac|uali|y cf i |s suppressicn
cf ccmmunis| desi re. ln each i ns|ance, ccmmunism
names |ha| i n cppcsi|icn |c whi ch cur curren| se||ing
is ccnIgured, |he se||ing wi|hin whi ch ccn|empcrary
capi|a|ism unfc|ds.
Why i s ccmmunism |ha| name: Because i | desig-
na|es |he scvereign|y cf |he pecple, and nc| |he pecp|e
as a whcle cr a uni|y bu| |he pecple as |he rest of ns,
|hcse cf us whcse wcrk, lives, and fu|ures are exprcpri-
a|ed, mcne|ized, and specula|ed cn fcr |he hnanci al
encymen| cf |he few. Cecrg Lukcs invckes |he pecp|e
in us| |his sense when he exp|ains |he dialec|ica|
|ransfcrma|icn cf |he ccncep| cf |he pecp|e i n Leni n`s
charac|eriza|icn cf |he hussi an hevclu|i cn. The
vague and abs|rac| ccncep| cf '|he pecple` had |c be
reec|ed, bu| cn|y sc |ha| a revc|u|icnary, discrimina|-
i ng, ccncep| cf '|he pecp|e`the revolntionar alliance
of the oppressedcculd develcp frcm a ccncre|e under-
s|anding cf |he ccndi|icns cf prc|e|arian revclu|icn. '
ln |his chap|er, l presen| |he idea cf |he pecp|e as |he
res| cf us as a mcdu|a|icn cf |he idea cf |he prc|e|aria|
as |he subec| cf ccmmunism.
When |he pecple are |he subec| cf ccmmuni sm, |heir
scvereign|y i s nc| |ha| cf |he dispersed individua|s cf
libera| demccracy. ha|her, |he scvereign|y cf |he pecple
ccrrespcnds |c |he pc|i|i ca| fcrm Narxis| |hecry refers
|c a |he dic|a|crshi p cf |he prcle|ari a|, |he direc| and
fearscme rule cf |he cc||ec|i ve pecp|e cver |hcse whc
wculd cppress and exp|ci| |hem, cver |hcse whc wculd
|ake fcr |hemse|ves wha| be|cngs |c a|| in ccmmcn. As
Georg Lukacs, lnin: A Study on the Unity of His Thought,
trans. Ni cholas Jacobs, London: Verso, 2009, 22-23.
2 For an account of the idea of dictatorshi p and i t s associat i on
with popular soverei gnty in the set t i ng i n whi ch Marx and
Engels were writing, see Hal Draper, The Dictatorship of the
SOVEREIGNTY OF THE PEOPLE 71
Leni n describes i | in State and Revolution, |he dic|a|cr-
shi p cf |he prc|e|aria| is an crganiza|icn cf |he cppressed
fcr |he purpcse cf suppressing |he cppresscr. Ncre |han
a mere expansicn cf demccracy, mcre |han |he i nclu-
sicn cf mcre pecp|e wi|hin demccracy`s purvi ew, |he
di c|a|crshi p cf |he prc|e|aria| pu|s i n|c prac|i ce |he
purpcse and end cf demccracy, maki ng i | serve |he
many and nc| |he mcney-bags . Ccnsequen|ly and
necessari|y, |he di c|a|crship cf |he prc|e|ari a| i mpcses
res|ri c|icns. i | res|ri c|s |he freedcm cf capi|alis|s,
exp|ci|ers, and cppresscrs. They are nc| free |c dc as
|hey wi|| bu| are gcvemed, ccn|rclled, and |imi|ed by
|he res| cf us. ln |ime, |his gcvemance, ccn|rc|, and
limi |a|icn effec|ive|y e|imina|e |he capi |a|i s| class. Bu|
un|i l |he inequali|y |ha| enab|es capi |a|ism has been
elimina|ed, |he crganized pcwer cf a s|a|e serves as |he
i ns|rumen| |hrcugh which |he pecple nc| cn|y gcvern,
bu| insure |ha| gcvemance is carri ed cu| fcr |he beneh|
cf |he cc||ec|ive ra|her |han |he few.
Proletariat from Marx to Lnin, New York: Monthl y Revi ew
Press, 1 987, esp. ch. l . For a contemporary defense of the
i dea of the di ctatorshi p of the proletari at, see
E
t i enne Bal i bar,
On the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, trans. Grahame Locke,
London: Verso, 1 977.
An advan|age cf |he Narxis| vi ew cf |he prc|e|ar-
ia| as |he subec| cf ccmmunism i s i |s |inkage cf an
essen|i a| rc|e in prcduc|icn |c an essen|i a| rc|e i n pc|i-
|i cs. The prc|e|aria| has been a name fcr |he universa|
c|ass, |he subec|-cbec| cf his|cry, because i |s eman-
cipa|icn emanci pa|es us a||, dissc|ving |he c|ass and
prcper|y re|a|icns a| |he basis cf capi|a|is| pcwer. The
prc|e|arian i s nc| us| |he wcrker, |he prc|e|ari an is |he
wcrker radicalized, |he wcrker pc|i|icized. Lenin, fcr
examp|e, embraced |he merger narra|ive, |he idea
crigi na||y e|abcra|ed by har| hau|sky) |ha| Narx`s
unique achievemen| was merging twc previcus|y
separa|e pc|i|i ca| e|emen|swcrki ng class s|ruggle
and sccia|i smi n|c a sing|e narra|i ve |ha| makes
es|ab|ishing sccia|i sm i n|c |he goal cf |he wcrkers`
s|rugg|e, in fac|, in|c |he historical mission cf |he
wcrki ng c|ass. `
The merger narra|i ve has crganiza|icna| and pc|i |i-
ca| repercussicns. l| es|ab|ishes |he respcnsibili|y cf
|he sccia|is| par|y |c bring |c |he wcrkers |he gccd
news cf |heir pc|i|ica| pcsi|icn. The |ask cf sccia|i s|s
is |c crganize |he prc|e|ari a| pc|i|ica||y, |c h|| i | wi|h
3 See Lars T. Li h, Lnin Rediscovered, Chicago, IL:
Haymarket Books, 2008.
|he awareness cf i|s pcsi |icn and i|s |ask, and |c make
and keep i | spiri |ual|y and physi cally h| fcr s|mggle.
The merger narra|i ve generally, as we|| as Lenin`s
specihc ex|ensicn cf i | i n|c |he hussi an ccn|ex|, pre-
suppcses |he ac|ive mili|ancy cf wcrkers` s|mgg|es, an
assump|icn |ha| h| empiri cally wi |h |he ri sing cppc-
si|icna| fcrce cf fac|cry wcrkers i n |he ni ne|een|h
cen|ury. A spiri| cf resis|ance i s a|ready presen| i n |he
wcrkers, pushing |hem |cward crganized s|mgg|e. The
par|y channels and crien|s |hese ac|i ve wcrkers` s|mg-
gles |cward scci ali sm. l| prcvides pc|i|i ca| direc|icn |c
an a|ready ac|ive fcrce.
Dces |hi s narra|ive make sense fcr us : Dces i|
make sense fcr |ef|i s|s |iving in |he US, Uh, and EU
|c ccn|inue |c |hi nk i n |erms cf |he leading rcle cf |he
prc|e|ari a|: Tha| |he wcrds prcle|ari a| and bcur-
gecisie feel s|range in cur mcu|hs li ke|y indica|es
|he dep|h cf capi |ali s| i dec|cgy, |he ex|en| cf |he c|ass
pcwer cf an e|i|e |ha| has gc||en us |c |hink i n |erms
cf ccmpe|i|icn, efhciency, s|cck marke|s, bcnuses,
and manci a| success. Tmly cbscene i s |he spread
cf |he |erm brandi ng such |ha| cne can speak cf
4 Ibi d. , 48.
rebrandi ng Narxism, feminism, and |he Left wi|hcut
i rcny. The pcwer cf crganized capi|al may well acccun|
fcr why few i n the US |hink i n |erms cf prcle|atia|
and bcurgeci sie. Bu| i| dces nc| preven| us frcm
reccgnizing c|ass, wcrk, divi sicn, i nequa|i |y, and
privi|ege a||hcugh i | cer|ainly |ri es), a|| cf whi ch are
visi b|e, |angible, unavcidable. Ny wager, |hen, is |ha|
an emphasis cn |he pecple as |he res| cf us can dc |he
wcrk fcrmer|y dcne by prcle|atia|.
Anc|her reascn |c endcrse |he idea cf |he pecp|e as
|he res| cf us i nvclves |he |imi|a|icns cf |he hgura|icn
cf |he prc|e|ati a| as |he i ndus|rial wcrking class. Tc be
sure, Nax and Narxis|s dcn`| reduce prc|e|atia| |c an
empiri cal designa|cr cf cne specihc type cf wcrker. ln
his nc|e |c |he I888 Eng|i sh edi|icn cf |he Ccmmuni s|
Nanifes|c, Engels says |ha| prcle|ari a| refers tc |he
class cf mcdem wage-labcrers whc, having nc means
cf pmduc|icn cf their cwn, are reduced |c se||ing |heir
labcr-pcwer i n crder |c li ve. ln a si mi|ar vein,
|i enne
Ba|ibar wri|es, The prc|e|ari a| is nc| a hcmcgenecus
unchanging grcup, whi ch bears i|s name and i|s fa|e
clear|y inscribed cnce and fcr all, fcr a|| |c see. l| i s
|he his|cri cal resul| cf |he permanen| pmcess by whi ch
i | i s ccns|i|u|ed, whi ch i s |he c|her si de cf |he prccess
SOVEREIGNTY OF THF PEOPLE 75
cf accumula|icn cf capi|al.` Engels and Balibar make
clear |ha| |he prcle|ari a| is nc| a pure cr hxed class.
ha|her |han a s|a|i c scci a| grcup, proletarianization i s
a dynamic, |he prccess |hrcugh which capi |ali sm prc-
duces, uses up, and di scards |he wcrkers i | needs a
prccess faci|i|a|ed by capi |ali s| use cf |he s|a|e). This
prccess impac|s |he macri |y cf pecple i n |he US, lh,
and EU, nc| | c men|icn China, Brazi |, and c|her ccun-
|ri es experi enci ng rapi d and drama|ic urbaniza|icn as
peasan|s leave |he |and and mcve |c ci|ies lccki ng fcr
wcrk. Embraci ng |he idea cf |he pecp|e as |he res| cf
us ackncwledges |ha| |he merger nana|ive respcnded
|c a specihc ccmpcsi |icn cf scci al, pc|i|ical, and |ech-
nclcgi cal fcrces. Thi s ccmpcsi |icn has changed even
as prc|e|ari aniza|icn as a brcad prccess wi|h a range cf
effec|s persi s|s.
ln |he lS, |he pc|i |i ca| pcwer cf crganized |abcr
has diminished |cge|her wi|h |he subs|an|ial dec|ine
i n priva|e sec|cr unicn membership, |he spread cf
an individualis| ccncep|icn cf wcrk, and |he rea|ign-
men|s wi|hin |he Demccra|i c lar|y. The i mpcr|ance
5 Bal i bar, On the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, 83-84.
6 Michael Hardt , "The Common in Communi sm, " Rethinking
Marxism 22: 3, 2010, 346-356.
cf manufac|uring and indus|ria| prcduc|icn has |ike-
wise decreased as |he US eccncmy has shif|ed away
frcm |he prcduc|icn cf gccds and |cward |he pmvisicn
cf services . Acccrding |c his|crian |udi|h S|ein, |he
US |raded fac|cries fcr hnance, a prccess gener-
a||y linked |c a shif| |c neclibera| eccncmic pc|i ci es.
Dcug Henwccd nc|es |ha| i n !! , mance, i nsur-
ance, and real es|a|e, ccllec|i ve|y ni cknamed 'llhE,`
surpassed manufac|uring`s ccn|ri bu|icn |c CDl, and
widened |heir |ead i n subsequen| years . As cf Nay
20I0, |he cccupa|icns wi|h |he highes| percen|age cf
US emplcyees were re|ai | salesperscns, cashi ers, cfhce
c|erks, fccd prepara|icn and fccd servi ce wcrkers,
nurses, wai |ers and wai |resses, and cus|cmer servi ce
represen|a|ives. ln !, cne-|hird cf cbs i n |he US
were in gccds-prcducing indus|ri es, in 2007, cn|y !
percen| cf cbs were. lf prcle|arianiza|icn i ni |i a||y
7 Judi th Stei n, Pivotal Decade, New Haven, CT: Yale
Uni versi ty Press, 201 0, xi i .
8 Doug Henwood, Wall Street, London: Verso, 1 998, 76.
9 Bureau of Labor Stati sti cs, "Retail salespersons: occupa
tion wi t h hi ghest employment in 201 0, " May 20, 201 1 , US
Department of Labor, hl s. gov.
1 0 Lawrence Mi shel, Jared Bernstei n, and Hei di Shi erholz,
The State of Working America, Ithaca, NY: ILR and Cornell
designa|ed |he prccess by whi ch |hcse wi|h land were
disapprcpria|ed cf i|, ccn|empcraj prc|e|arianiza|icn
i s |he exprcpria|icn cf secure, decen|ly waged, ski||ed
cbs and |he crea|icn cf servan|s whc are required |c
smi|e, care, ccmmuni ca|e, and be fri endly) .
The shi f| frcm manufac|uring |c servi ce is nc| unique
|c |he US. Between ! 70 and 20! 0, Cermany, l|a|y,
lrance, |apan, Sweden, |he Ne|her|ands, Canada,
Aus|rali a, |he US, and |he Uh experi enced decl i nes i n
| he percen|age cf pecple emp|cyed i n manmac|uring
and i ncreases in |he percen|age cf pecp|e emplcyed
in servi ces. The drcp i n |he Uh was highes| a| 2B.
percen|.
l
The changes i n capi |ali sm |hese s|a|is|i cs
mark, changes usually di scussed under |he headi ngs
cf deindus|ri a|i za|icn, pcs|-lcrdism, and |he ri se cf a
kncwledge- cr i nfcrma|icn-based eccncmy, sugges| |he
i napp|i cabi|i|y cf |he hgure cf |he i ndus|ria| prc|e|ari a|
as |he ccn|empcrary subec| cf ccmmuni sm a pcin|
|ha| a|ready has a legacy i n ccmmunis| mcvemen|s
|ha| re|ied cn a mcbi|ized peasan|ry) . Yes, |here is s|ill
Uni versi ty Press, 2009, 232.
l l Bureau of Labor Stat i st i cs, "Charti ng Annual Compari sons
of Internat i onal Labor Force Stat i st i cs, 201 0, " US Department
of Labor, bl s.gov.
i ndus|ry and |here i s s|ill manufac|uri ng. Bu| changes
in bc|h assccia|ed wi|h |he diffusicn and applica|icn cf
i nfcrma|icn and ccmmuni ca|icn |echnc|cgi es, as wel|
as wi|h |he pc|i |i cal assaul| cn wcrking pecple idec|cg-
i cally crganized as nec|ibera|ism, sugges| |he |i mi|s cf
an cppcsi|icn i magined as crganized pri marily in |erms
cf fac|ctj |abcr.
Ni chae| Hard| and An|cnic Negri view |he changes
brcugh| abcu| by deindus|ri aliza|icn, |he rise cf
servi ce sec|cr wcrk, and |he expansicn cf |echnc|cgies
as i ndi ca|ive cf |he need fcr a ccncep| mcre hexible
and inclusive |han prcle|ari a|. They cffer mul|i-
|ude as an a||erna|ive. The mu||i |ude is a genera|ive
and crea|ive fcrce, |he prcduc|ive pcwer |ha| capi |a|-
i sm depends cn, mcbilizes, and |ri es |c ccn|rcl. Ye|
|he ccncep| includes |cc mucheverycne in fac|-
and |he ccs| cf |his i nclusicn is an|agcni sm. ha|her
|han labcr agai ns| capi |al, haves agai ns| have-nc|s,
| he percen| agains| | he 1 percen|, we have a mu|-
|i|ude cf si ngulari |i es ccmbining and reccmbining in
mcbi|e, huid, ccmmunica|ive, and affec|ive ne|wcrks.
Nul|i|ude h|s be||er wi |h prcduc|icn under ccm-
munica|ive capi|alism |han prcle|arian, par|i cu|arly
i nscfar as Hard| and N egti emphasize |he crucial rc|e
cf g|cba| infcrma|icn and ccmmunica|icn ne|wcrks.
Under ccmmuni ca|ive capi|alism, |he idea cf a subec|-
cbec| cf his|cp rescna|es less wi|h a sccic|cgica| c|ass
|han wi|h feedback lccps, crganized netwcrks, and
emergen| fcrma|i cns wherei n we bring curselves i n|c
being as scme|hing new, where we are |he cb ec|s cf
cur ac|ivi|y, making cur cwn se||ing and ccnhguring
cur wcr|d. Bu| |he prcblem cf mul|i |ude`s i nabi li|y |c
express divisicn remai ns.
|acques hanci re`s nc|icn cf |he par|-cf-nc-pat1
helps sc|ve |he prcb|ems cf |he inclusi ve mu||i|ude. He
deve|cps |he ccncep| i n |he ccn|ex| cf a reading cf lla|c
and Ari s|c|le, a reading where he shcws |he cpera|icn
cf a misccun| in |he ccun|ing cf |he par|i es |c pcl i-
|ics. A||hcugh |he anci en|s |rea| |he pecp|e as a par| cf
|he polis, as a grcup wi|h prcper|i es ccmparable |c |he
wea||h cf |he cligarchs and |he vir|ue cf ari s|ccra|s, |he
pecp|e ac|ually have nc|hing. Thei r vaun|ed freedcm
is mcre prcper|y unders|ccd as a hc|icn s|anding in
fcr |he absence cf wea||h and vir|ue. l| is a hc|icn |c
say |ha| freedcm is exc|usive|y a prcper|y cf |he pecple
since freedcm i s wha| |he pecp|e have i n ccmmcn wi|h
|he rich and ncble. This hc|icn exer|s a pcwenu| fcrce.
|rea|ing as specihc wha| is i n fac| ccmmcn, i | a|lcws
|he dnws |c i den|ify wi|h |he whc|e c| |he ccmmuni|y
|hrcugh hcmcnymy. The freedcm |ha| is ccmmcn |c
all , |he pecp|e c|ai m as |heir cwn. Even as |hey have
nc par| cf any|hing, nc wea||h and nc vir|ue, |hi s par|-
cf-nc-par| iden|ihes i|seh as |he ccmmuni|y. hanci re
wri|es, Vhcever has nc par||he pccr cf ancien|
|imes, |he |hird es|a|e, |he mcdern prc|e|aria|cannc|
in fac| have any pat1 c|her |han a|| cr nc|hi ng. ' The
par|-cf-nc-par| |hus dces nc| designa|e |he cbec|iv-
i |y cf an empirical grcup exc|uded fmm |he pc|i|ica|
dcmai n. l|`s nc| anc|her way cf referri ng |c a pcli|i cs
cf iden|i |y by lcca|ing a margi nalized c|her. hcr i s i | a
syncnym fcr |he prcle|aria|. ha|her, |he par|-cf-nc-par|
designa|es |he interruption cf a given crder by |hcse
whc have nc par|.
hancire`s ccncep| cf |he par|-cf-nc-par| prcvides
a way |c |hink abcu| |he pecp|e as |he res| cf us, cf
|he pecple as a dividing and divisive fcrce. When |he
pecp|e are ccnceived as |he par| cf |hcse whc have nc
par|, we are preven|ed frcm reducing |he pecple |c an
empiri ca| given cr |rea|ing |he pecple as |he |c|a|i |y
cf |he ccmmuni|y. lns|ead, |he pecple mark and are
1 2 Jacques Ranci ere, Disagreement, trans. Juli e Rose,
Mi nneapol i s, MN: Uni versity of Mi nnesota Press, 2004, 9.
marked by a gap. They are qua|ihed, pc|i|i cized by |he
crime and i n us|i ce |ha| has depri ved |hem cf a par| cf
wea||h and cf vir|ue in |he ancien| tex|s).
The par|-|ha|-i s-nc|-a-par| designa|es a gap i n an
exis|ing crder be|ween |ha| crder and c|her pcssible
arrangemen|s. The Lacanian syncnym fcr |he par|-cf-
nc-par| is objet petit a, an i mpcssible, fcrma| cb ec|
prcduced as |he excess cf a prccess cr re|a|icn, a ki nd
cf gap |ha| i nci |es cr anncys, |he missingness cr nc|-
qui|e-ngh|ness |ha| cal|s cu| |c us, San|ner`s signifying
s|ress. ln|rcducing a Lacanian syncnym accen|ua|es
|he fac| |ha| |his par| i s nc| a subs|an|ia| par|, nc| an
empiri cal designa|cr such |ha| exc|usicn is |he exclu-
sicn cf pecple and |heir i nc|usicn necessari |y a pc|i|i ca|
gccd. lcr examp|e, re|igicus fundamen|alis| migh|
be a name fcr |he par| wi|h nc par| in a liberal crder.
Tc i nclude |ha| par| wcu|d dis|cr| and di srup| |he crder
predica|ed cn |he exc|usicn cf fundamen|a|i s| religicn.
Capi |a|is| names cne wi|h nc par| i n a ccmmunis|
crder. Tc i nc|ude |he capi |a|i s| wcu|d undermine an
crder based cn |he abcli|icn cf priva|e prcper|y and
exp|ci |a|icn. ln sum, |he beneh| cf hancire`s par|-cf-
nc-par| i s nc| |ha| i | |akes |he place cf |he universa|
class cr names a new hi s|cucal subec|-cb ec|. l|`s
|ha| i| indica|es an inhec|icn and qua|ihca|icn cf |he
pecp|e, i|s ncn-cci ncidence wi|h i|self.
Whi|e |he pecple as |he res| cf us, as |he par|-cf-
nc-par|, is be||er |han prc|e|aria| and mu||i|ude
as a designa|cr fcr |he ccn|empcrary subec| cf ccm-
munism, c|ass s|rugg|e remains essen|ia| as |he name
fcr |he fundamen|al an|agcnism |hrcugh whi ch sccie|y
emerges|he divisicn be|ween |he rich and |he res| cf
us. Class s|rugg|e marks |he fac| |ha| |here i s nc se|
cf crdered re|a|icns ccns|i|u|ive cf sccia|i|y as such. '
There is nc scci e|y i n whi ch every e|emen| fu||y cccu-
pies a p|ace. lns|ead, scci e|y ari ses |hrcugh fai |ures
and sclu|icns, ccmbina|icns, repressicns, divisicns,
and exc|usicns. Scci e|y is inccmp|e|e, rup|ured, and
ccn|es|ed. Class s|rugg|e designa|es |his inccm-
p|e|eness, rup|ure, and ccn|es|a|icn ra|her |han |he
pcsi|ivi|y cf a ccnhi c| be|ween empitica||y gi ven and
demcgraphically ccnceived sccial grcups . Capi |ali sm,
as Narx makes c|ear in his famcus acccun| cf primi|i ve
accumu|a|icn, i s an efect cf clas s|rugg|e
We can alsc say |ha| capi|alism is anc|her |erm fcr
c|ass s|rugg|e as i| manifes|s i|se|f i n a given mcde
13 For further di scussi on see my
Z
itek' Politics, New York:
Routledge, 2006, 55-60.
cf prcduc|i cn.
izek wri |es, class s|rugg|e cannc|

be reduced |c a ccnhi c| be|ween pani cu|ar agen|s
wi|hi n sccial rea|i |y, i | i s nc| a difference be|ween
agen|s which can be described by means cf a de|ai|ed
sccia| analysis), bu| an an|agcnism 's|rugg|e`) whi ch
ccns|i |u|es |hese agen|s. ' Classes dcn`| preexis| |he
s|rugg|es |ha| prcduce |hem, s|ruggles fcugh| cn mu||i-
p|e |errainscul|ural, legal, |echnc|cgi cal, na|icna|
and c|her such ins|an|ia|icns cf pas| s|rugg|es. And
because c|asses dcn` | preexis| |hese s|ruggles, |heir
pcli|ics i s nc| given i n advance a a necessary cu|grcw|h
cf i nevi|ab|e cr na|urali s|i ca||y ccnceived in|eres|s.
The cppcsi|icn |ha| c|ass s|ruggle designa|es is
cpen |c pc|i|i ca| de|ermina|icn. l| can be ccnhgured
i n religicus, na|icna|is|, pcpulis|, liber|ari an, and c|her
direc|icns. The cha||enge fcr ccmmunis|s is |hus nc| |c
i den|ify a par|i cu|ar c|ass vanguard bu| |c c|arify why
ccmmunism is |he bes| a||erna|ive |c capi |a|i sm and
|c par|i ci pa|e i n crganizing and fur|hering |he s|rugg|e
|cward i |.
izek`s reading cf Lacan prcvides a fur|her argumen|

agains| |he relevance fcr us cf |he merger narra|ive
14 Slavoj
Z
i zek, Living i n the End Times, London: Verso
201 1 , 201 .
and i |s crdina|icn cf |he prc|e|ari a| in|c i |s hi s|cri ca|
missicn. |he big U|her dcesn`| exis|. There is nc big
U|her cf His|cry, nc s|cry cf inevi |able prcgress cr |he
rea|iza|icn cf freedcm i n |he wcr|d |ha| can gcund cr
guaran|ee cur ac|icns . Ccn|ingency and |he mu||iplic-
i |y cf de|ermina|icns acccmpany sys|ems, pa||erns,
and pa|h dependencies. Human ac|icns, whe|her
p|anned cr unplanned, crganized cr individua|as
we|| as unpredic|able even|s and |he ccmplex, in|er-
ccnnec|ed, and unIcreseen ehec|s cf human and
ncn-human ac|icnsimpac| |he prccesses and hcws
re|rcac|ive|y unders|ccd as hi s|cry. ha|her |han given
by |he |cgi c cf his|cry, pcli|i cal chcices ae unavcid-
ab|y cpen and uncer|ai n. Scme|hing can always gc
hcrri b|y wrcng. Wi|h respec| |c |he merger narra|ive,
lef|i s|s have had |c grapple wi|h |he fac| |ha| his|cry
hasn`| unfclded acccrding |c sccia|i s| predi c|icns.
Scci a|i sm did nc| |ead |c ccmmuni sm. The wcrkers
cf |he wcrld did nc| uni|e. Capi|a|ism has been rela-
|ive|y successful in adap|ing in respcnse |c |he crises
i| genera|es, i n le par| |hrcugh |he ru|ing c|asses`
use cf s|a|e pcwer. We nc |cnger have reccurse |c |he
his|cri cal nana|ive |ha| made bui|ding ccmmunism |he
missicn cf |he prc|e|ari a|.
The unraveling c| |he merger narra|i ve dces nc|
mean |ha| wcrkers dc nc| s|ruggle agains| capi|al-
is| explci |a|icn. Ncr dces i| mean |ha| wcrkers dc nc|
ri se up agains| s|a|es |ha| gcvem cn behah cf a ru|ing
capi|alis| class. l| means |ha| |here i s nc|hing given
cr inevi |able abcu| |he pcli|i cal shape cf unavcidab|e
class s|mggle, a s|rugg|e |ha| Na and Engels under-
s|ccd i n |he brcad |enns cf |he an|agcni sm between
|hcse whc are fcrced |c se|l |hei r labcr pcwer |c survi ve
and |hcse whc are nc|. Vhile |hey descri bed |hi s as
a s|ruggle be|ween |he bcurgeci si e as cwners cf |he
means cf prcduc|icn and |he prc|e|aria| as wage-
labcrers, i n |he ccn|empcrary US, Uh, and EU, |his
cppcsi |icn makes mcre sense as cne be|ween |he ri ch
and |he res| cf us .
A subs|an|ia| pcr|icn c| |he super-ri ch dces nc| cwn
|he means cf prcduc|icn, |hey are CEUs cf ccrpcra|icns
|ha| are publicly held. They are emp|cyees, al|hcugh
|heir as|rcncmi cal annual salari es and bcnuses exceed
wha| mcs| cf |he res| c| us wi ll be pai d in a life|i me.
Af|er a year cr sc cf |ha|, bankers and hedge fund man-
agers cannc| be said |c be fcrced |c se|| |heir |abcr
pcwer |c survive. As wi |h |he capi |a|i sm cf |he Ci|ded
Age, necliberal capi |ali sm reli es cn |he hegemcny cf
hnance, the ccncen|ra|icn cf pcwer in hnanci al i nsti tu-
|icns . Dumnil and Lvy explain |ha| neclibera|ism
i s a sccia| crder ai med at the genera|icn cf i nccme fcr
|he upper inccme bracke|s, nc| inves|men| i n prcduc-
|icn ncr, even less, scci al prcgress. ln ccun|ri es cf |he
cen|er, dcmes|i c capi|a| accumula|icn was sacrihced
i n favcr cI inccme dis|ri bu|icn beneh||ing |he upper
classes. ' ` Ccn|empcrary capi|a|ism is less cri en|ed
|cward prcducing |hi ngs |han i| is |cward hnanci al and
ccmmerci a| prac|ices |ha| beneh| |he l percen|, sup-
pcr|ing |hei r ccn|inued and i ncreasi ng ccnsump|icn.
Scme cf the res| cf us are emplcyed i n |he servi ce cf
|his hnancia| and ccrpcra|e e|i|e, perhaps as acccun|-
an|s and ccnsul|ants, maybe as culture, fccd, heal|h,
and |ranspot1a|icn prcvi ders, a few as |rai ners cf |heir
ycung. An even larger percentage cf the res| cf us are
unemplcyed, underemplcyed, re|ired, disabled, and
unremunerated fcr much cf |he wcrk tha| we dc par-
|icularly caregiving wcrk) . Wcrldwi de, a| |eas| a billicn
cf us hnd curselves dcing wcrk fcr free |ha| ccrpcra-
|icns claim |c cwn. lerhaps |he bes| kncwn example
1 5 Gerard Dumeni l and Domi ni que Levy, The Crisis of
Neoliberalism, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press,
201 1 , 22.
cf this capi taliza|icn cf unpai d labcr is Iacebcck, the
CEU cf which is |he ycunges| bi||icnaire i n |he wcr|d.
hear|y evep time we gc cn|ine cr use a mcbi|e phcne
we prcduce fcr scmecne else, crea|ing |he da|a and
|races |hat this scmecne e|se claims tc cwn. Uur ccl|ec-
|i ve ac|icns crea|e |he ri ch. They can alsc des|rcy |hem.
The pecple as | he res| cf us designa|es |hcse cf
us whc are prcle|ari anized by capi|ali sm, |he pecple
prcduced |hrcugh |he exp|ci |a|icn, ex|rac|icn, and
exprcpria|icn cf cur prac|ical and ccmmuni ca|ive
ac|i vi |ies fcr |he encymen| cf |he vep, very ri ch.
When ccmmuni sm i s cm hcrizcn cf pc|i|i cal pcssi bi |-
i |y, |he scvereign|y cf |he pecp|e pcin|s |c a view cf |he
s|a|e as wha| we use tc gcvern fcr lt as a ccllectivi |y. lt
i s cur cc||ec|ive s|eeri ng cf cm ccmmcn fu|ure fcr cur
ccmmcn gccd.
Ni che| Icucault`s insight i ntc |he |imi taticn cf scv-
ereign kncw|edge cmci al |c eccncmic libera|ism
prcvides an cpening fcr thecri zi ng ccmmuni sm as the
scvereign|y cf |he pecp|e. ln hi s 1 978-1979 |ec|ures
pub|i shed as Th Birth of Biopolitics, Icucaul| pre-
sen|s |he s hif| frcm absc|u|ism |c li beralism in Eurcpe
primarily Eng|and, lrance, and Cermany) a| |he end
cf the eigh|een|h century as a change in gcvemmen-
|al reascn. Icucaul| argues |ha| |he change |ums cn
the emergence cf a new dcmai n cf tru|h, a dcmain that
prcvides new cri |eri a by whi ch |c assess gcvernance as
well as a new mcdel cf the subec|. The emergence cf
|his new dcmai n cf |ru|h hcllcws cu| scvereign pcwer,
redirec|ing |he au|hcri|y and reascn previcusly assem-
bled i n |he s|a|e i n|c a ci vi l scci e|y |ha| i |self ccmes
i n|c being |hrcugh |his redirec|icn.
The new dcmain was pcli|ical eccncmy. lcli|i cal
eccncmy prcvides |he ma|erial fcr assessi ng gcv-
ernmen| as i| disccvers a se| cf na|ural prccesses
wi|h |heir cwn laws cf supply and demand, lcgi cs
cf causes and effec|s, and de|erminaticns cf incen-
|ives and ccnsequences. Icr pcli ti cal eccncmy, |hese
prccesses, parti cularly as t hey seem t c cbey spcn|ane-
cus mechanisms, are a si|e cf |ru|h, the |ru|h cf |he
na|ural limi|a|icns cf gcvernmen|. The scvereign may
have a right |c levy |axes, bu| i s |hat good govem
ment? Icucault explai ns that tc ask this ques|icn is |c
i ns|all a limi|a|icn cn scvereign pcwer, fundamen|ally
changi ng the lcgi c cf gcvemance. H |ruth is lcca|ed
i n |he marke|, i | is displaced frcm uri di cally de|er-
mined principles cf righ|, |he princi ples champicned
by natural law thecri sts as well as by the Irench
hevclu|icn. The reascn fcr and measure cf gcvemance
i s |hus absen| frcm |he state. Unce truth is invested
in |he marke|, cnce |he market emerges as a si |e cf
veri di cti cn, |he task cf gcvernmen| beccmes securi ng,
circumscri bi ng, and supervi si ng |his si |e. '
Homo ecormicu s, eccncmic man, i s |he sub ec|
apprcpri a|e |c |he new held cf pcli|i cal eccncmy.
Bcund up in a wcrld he can nei |her predi c| ncr ccn|rcl,
eccncmic man`s i n|eres|s depend cn a series cf acci -
dent s, cn acticns and c|hers whi ch he cannc| and
dces nct kncw. Eccncmic man`s si tuati cn, Icucault
exp|ai ns, i s |herefcre dcub|y i nvc|untary, i ndehni|e,
and ncn-tc|alizable. ' Yetand here i s the mystery
cf |he i nvi si ble handin |hese ccnditicns cf ccllective
blindness, each is said tc be able tc beneht. ln fac|,
|hese ccndi|icns cf ccll ecti ve blindness are pcsi|ed as
necessary ccndi|icns fcr each tc beneht. Any attempt
tc ensure scme|hing like |he publi c gccd mus| fai l
because ccllective beneht can only be secured thrcugh
|he pursui | cf i ndi vidual self-i n|eres|.
16 Mi chel Foucaul t , The Birth of Biopolitic., t rans. Graham
Burchell, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008, 1 1 6.
17 Ibi d. , 278.
|us| as i ndi vi dual eccncmic actcrs cannc| see |he
whc|e, nei|her can |he scvereign. a visib|e hand wculd
be nc hand a| all. l| wcu|d be par|i a|, dis tcrted. l|
wcu|d Iail |c ccmbine |he mul|i|ude cI eccncmic in|er-
es|s. lcli |i cal eccncmy prcclai ms |ha| |here is nc
scvereign i n eccncmi cs. There i s nc eccncmic scver-
eign. As lcucau|| wri|es, homo economicus |e||s |he
scvereign. Ycu mus| nc| . Bu| why mus| he nc|: Ycu
mus| nc| because ycu cannc|. And ycu cannc| i n |he
sense |ha| 'ycu are pcwerless. ` And why are ycu pcw-
er|ess, why can` | ycu: Ycu cannc| because ycu dc nc|
kncw, and ycu nc| kncw because ycu cannc| kncw. ` `
Eccncmic man |hus dces nc| si mp|y |imi | scvereign
pcwer. ha|her, he strips |he scvereign cI pcwer i nas-
much as he revea|s an essen|i al, Iundamen|a|, and
macr i ncapaci |y cI |he scvereign, |ha| is |c say, an
i nabi |i|y |c mas|er |he |c|a|i|y cf |he eccncmic held. ` ` '
Libera|ism`s embrace cf pc|i|i ca| eccncmy hc||cws cu|
uri di ca| scvereign|y by pcsi|ing an ensemble cI mu|u-
ally ccndi|icning chcices and decisicns, kncwledge cI
whi ch necessari|y eludes |he scvereign.
The hc||cwing cu| cI scvereign pcwer a||cws Icr
1 8 Ibi d. , 283, 292.
vancus resclu|icns . Une wcu|d be a ki nd cf zcning
cf scvereign|y |ha| exc|udes |he scvereign Imm |he
marke|. Anc|her wcu|d hcld |he scvereign respcnsi -
b|e Icr supervi sing and verifying marke| prccesses.
ln |hi s seccnd versicn, |he very prac|i ces cf gcvem-
men|a| ac|i vi|ies assccia|ed wi|h supervisicn wculd
subcrdina|e scvereign reascn |c a scien|ihc and spec-
u|a|ive ra|icnali|y. ' ' Wha| ac|ual|y happens, Icucau||
exp|ai ns, i s a |hi rd ccurse, cne |ha| ex|ends gcvem-
men| in|c a new dcmai nci vi l sccie|y. As a new held
fcr |he exercise cf gcvernmen|al pcwer, civil sccie|y
prcvides a |cca|icn fcr |he managemen| cf eccncmi c
men. l|`s a plane cf reference where individua|s are
gcverned nc| as subec|s cf righ| cr as eccncmic ac|crs
|u| |hrcugh a new ensemble |ha| merges uridi ca| and
marke| ccncems as i| bri ngs c|her e|emen|s heal|h,
educa|icn, reprcduc|icn) in|c re|a|icn wi|h |hem.
The scvereign|y |ha| li bera|i sm and, later, nec-
li bera|ism) hcllcws cu| is |he scvereign|y cf |he pecp|e
nc| |he pecp|e as i ndivi dua|s , whc are i nc|uded
as agen|s i n ci vi l sccie|y whc buy, sell, and ccn|rac|,
|u| |he pecple as a collctive bcdy wi|h |he capaci|y
19 Ibi d. , 292.
fcr dcmina|icn. Benami n Ccns|an|`s |ibera| embrace
cf priva|e weal|h cver hcusseau`s genera| wi|l, fcr
examp|e, relies cn |he idea |ha| indivi dua|izi ng ecc-
ncmic fcrces are u||i ma|ely mcre pcwerfu| |han
ccllec|ivizing pc|i |i ca| cnes. Ccns|an| wri|es.
Money i s the most effecti ve curb on despoti sm . . .
Force i s useless agai nst i t: money conceals itself cr
fees . . . Among the anci ents, credit did not have the
i mpm1ance it has for us today. Thei r goverments
were mcre pcwerful than private i ndi vi duals. Tcday,
by contrast, private i ndi viduas are everywhere
stronger than poli ti cal power. Wealth i s a force that
is more readily exerted cn a i nterests, and conse
quently it i s far more real and more readily obeyed. 20
Ccns|an| merges |he pcwer cf mcney wi|h |he pcwer cf
|he indivi dua|. Avciding |he fac| |ha| cn|y very, very
ri ch indivi duals have encugh mcney |c be s|rcnger
|han gcvernmen|s, his s|cry cf curbing despc|ism i s
alsc cne cf |he ri se cf a rea| and pcwerful fcrce exer|-
i ng i|self cn |he pecp|e.
20 Quoted i n Luciano Canfora, Democracy in Europe, t rans.
Si mon Jones, Malden, MA: Blackwell Publ i shing, 2006, 64.
ln Icucaul|`s expcsi |icn, |he |hecre|i ca| prcblem |ha|
emerges a| |he end cf |he eigh|een|h and |he begin-
ni ng c| |he nine|een|h cen|ury is |he inccmpa|ibi|i |y
between gcvemance ccnceived vi a |he subec| cf righ|
and wi|l and gcvernance ccnceived vi a |he subec| cf
i n|eres|. Whereas |he fcnner requires a spli||ing and
renuncia|icn, |radi |icnally expressed as a scci al ccn-
|rac| |hrcugh whi ch i ndivi dua|s ccme |cge|her as a
uni|y by agreei ng |c a se| cf self-i mpcsed ccns|rain|s,
|he |a||er requires, even encins, |he subec| |c pursue
his se|f-i n|eres|. As pc|i |i cal eccncmy, mcrecver, |his
la||er libera| ccncep|icn es|ablishes a held and Irame
fcr |his pursui| cI self-i n|eres|, a held and frame |ha|
beccmes |he si|e cf |reedcm as wel| as a new dcmain
cf |ru|h. Icucaul| w:i|es, Liberali sm acquired i|s
mcdem shape preci sely wi|h |he fcrmu|a|i cn cf |hi s
essen|ial i nccmpa|i bi|i|y be|ween |he ncn-|c|alizable
mu||ip|ici|y cf eccncmic subec|s cf in|eres| and |he
|c|a|izing uni|y cf |he uri di ca| scvereign. ' A cer|ai n
versi cn cf |he eccncmy, cne hrs| fccused cn |he marke|
and |hen cn a nancw, cdd nc|icn cf ccmpe|i|icn, i s pre-
sen|ed as a barrier |c gcvernance, as a limi| cn wha|
21 Foucault, The Birth of Biopolitics, 282.
gcvemmen| can kncw and dc. The emergence cf |his
limi| acccmpanies |he spread cf demccracy in Eurcpe,
unders|ccd bc|h i n |erms cf i deas cf na|ural righ|, |he
sccia| ccn|rac|, and |he mi di ca| wi ll and in |erms
cf |he ins|an|i a|i cn cf |hese ideas vi a ex|ensicns cf
suffrage and |he i ns|i|u|icnaliza|icn cf mass par|i es.
Libera| pc|i |i ca| eccncmy i s a limi|ing cf |he pecp|e
as a ccllec|i ve fcrce wi|h |he wi|| |c cversee, guide,
direc|, and crganize eccncmic ma||ers. l|`s an i nca-
paci|a|ing cf cc||ec|ive s|reng|h, a fragmen|ing cf i |
i n|c suppcsi|icns cf individuals already ccmpe|ing
and cppcsed a pcin| Na exp|ains i n Un |he |ewi sh
Ques|icn) . As Icucau|| makes clear i n his discussicn
cf civil scci e|y, |he limi|ing cf |he ccllec|ive pcwer cf
|he pecp|e |urns |hem frcm ac|i ve agen|s i n|c a passi ve
pcpula|i cn. They are ac|i ve cnly as individuals, |i ||le
en|repreneurs cr en|erpri ses. Wha| appears as |he
|reedcm cf |he marke| |hus depends cn |he fcreclc-
sure cf |he cc||ec|ive pcwer cf |he pecp|e cver wha|
|hey share and prcduce i n ccmmcn. The pcwer |ha|
ma||ers|ha| cf |he pecple |c affec| |he basi c ccndi-
|icns i n which |hey livea pcwer cnly ac|ual if i | i s
ccllec|ive, i s displaced cn|c an eccncmy |ha| |hey are
|cld |hey cannc| gcvern because |hey cannc| kncw. The
eccncmy acts because the pecp|e cannc|. As they are
li mi|ed |c |heir i ndivi dua| si ngu|ari|y, |he eccncmy
gai ns |he fcrce and pcwer cf cc||ec|i ve energi es and
engagemen|s.
The libera| hc||cwi ng cu| cf scvereign|y depends cn
|he clai m |ha| scvereign|y requires |c|al kncwledge,
scvereign|y cver |he eccncmy is cs|ensi b|y i mpcssible
because eccncmi c prccesses cannc| be kncwn. Ve dcn` |
need |c accep| |his c|ai m. Nei |her scvereign pcwer ncr
scvereign kncw|edge i s ever whc|e cr ccmple|e. They
are par|i a|, changi ng, and mu|ual|y de|ermining. They
are cpen |c revisicn, reccmbioaticn, and ccntestatico.
The scvereign|y cf |he pecple dcesn`| s|em frcm wha|
we kncw, i t arises frcm wha| we dc. we crea|e |he wcrld
|ha| crea|es us .
lf Icucaul| prcvides a nega|ive apprcach |c |he scv-
ereignty cf the pecple as |hat ccllective fcrce capab|e
cf gui ding prcduc|icn and dis|ri bu|icn acccrdi ng
tc a ccmmcn wi ll|hat i s, if his acccunt cf libera|-
i sm and necli|erali sm enables |his fcrce |c appear as
wha| pc|i ti ca| eccncmy fcrec|cses|hen Susan Buck-
Ncrss cffers a mcre direc| rcu|e |c |he same pcin|. She
exp|ains |ha| Scvie| |egal |hecry res|s |he scci alis| s|a|e
cn |he pcli|i cal scvereign|y cf |he wcrking pecple, |he
di c|a|crship cf |he prc|e|aria| is exp|i ci||y and |i|era|ly
the name fcr |he scverei gn|y cf |he pecp|e. 22 Drawing
frcm Irench his|mian Irancis Iure|, Buck-Ncrss
pcsi|icns |he dic|a|crship cf |he prc|e|ari a| i n |he pc|i |-
i ca| |raec|cry ex|ending cu| cf |he Irench hevclu|icn.
The dic|a|crship cf |he prcle|ari a| realizes |he pcwer
cf |he pecp|e by es|ab|ishing an i mpcssible i den|i |y
be|ween gcvernmen| and |he gcvemed. As
izek pu|s
i |, "'the dictatorship of the proltariat ' is arwther name
for the violence of th dnwcratic explosion itsel"23
Buck-Ncrss cri|i cizes |hi s rendi|icn cf the scver-
eign|y cf |he pecple fcr re|ying cn a |ri ck. |he uni|y cf
the pecple dces nc| preexis| |he vic|ence and exc|u-
sicn |ha| calls i | i n|c bei ng. Such vic|ence, |ypica||y
exercised via |he naming and e|i mina|icn cf an enemy,
cannc| be us|ihed. Thcse whc wculd us|ify i| are nc|
yet ccns|i |u|ed as a cc||ec|i ve. The excess cf pcwer
|hus marks |he pcin| cf ncni den|i|y be|ween |he pecple
and |heir scvereign|y, |ha| is |c say, |he gap be|ween
22 Susan Buek- Morss, Dreamworld and Catastrophe,
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2002, 1 9.
23 Slavoj
Z
izek, In Defense of Lost Causes, London: Verso,
2008, 41 6.
gcvernmen| and |he gcvemed. Buck-Ncrss wri|es,
When demccra|i c scverei gn|y confronts |he pecple
wi|h all |he vic|ence |ha| i | mcncpc|izes as |he legi|i-
ma|e embcdimen| of |he pecple, i | i s in fac| a||es|ing
|c i|s tai den|i|y wi|h |he pecple. Icr Buck-Ncrss,
|he repercussicn cf |hi s ncni den|i|y i s a vi cicus circle
cr wi|d zcne where lega|i|y and illega|i |y beccme
i ndis|inguishable. Where i | wculd cs|ensibly guatan-
|ee |egi|imacy cn |he basi s cf whc|eness, cf |he uni|y
cf |he denws, |he scvereign|y cf |he pecple mcbi |izes
divisicn ins|ead.
izek`s acccun| cf re|rcac|i ve de|ermi na|icn

sc|ves |he prcblem cf |he wi ld zcne. Nc decisicn is
|u||y ccvered in advance cf i|s being made. Nc| cn|y
can i | a|ways ccme i n|c ques|icn, bu| |he decisicn i|seh
ccn|ri bu|es |c |he se||i ng i n which i| ccmes i n|c ques-
|icn. The pc|i|i ca| ccrre|a|e i s ca||ing in|c being |hcse
whc wculd us |i|y |he call. ) Expcsure, |hen, is nc| a
prcb|em specihc |c scvereign|y. l|`s an aspec| cf |he
s|ruc|ure cf |aw in a|| i |s ccmp|exi|y, inde|ermi nacy,
and ccmmand. A| any given pcin|, |he |ega| s|a|us cf a
ru|ing may be uncer|ain, dependen| cn enfcrcemen| cr
24 Buck-Morss, Dreamworld and Catastrophe, 7.
i n|erpre|a|i cn, wai|ing in |he ccur|s, subec| |c appea|,
in |he prccess cf bei ng ccn|es|ed, amended, and rein-
|erpre|ed. A preceden| i s cn|y a preceden| af|er i | i s
uphe|d as suchand |hen i | can s|i|| be brcken and
disavcwed. The i ns|abi |i|y be|ween lega| and i|lega|
i nheres |c law. l| i s nc| specihc |c a demccra|i c i ns|an-
|ia|icn cf scvereign|y.
Ncre impcr|an| i s Buck-Ncrss`s emphasi s cn |he
ncniden|i |y cf |he pecp|e wi|h i |s scvereign|y, cn |he
missing |ink be|ween |he pecp|e and gcvemmen|.
A||hcugh she |rea|s |he mcbi|iza|i cn cf |hi s divi sicn
as |he prcblem, l see i | as |he crucia| ma|eri alis| ccm-
pcnen| cf |he nc|icn cf |he pecple as |he sub ec| cf
ccmmunism. Di visicn separa|es |he pecp|e c| ccm-
munism frcm |he imagi ned |c|a|i |y cf |he pecple cf
pcpu|i sm. ha|her |han |here being a smcc|h na|ura|-
ized) hcw frcm ac|ua| pecp|e |c |he cc||ec|ive pcwer cf
|he scvereign pecple, a gap di srup|s |he whcle, be|ying
|he fan|asy cf |he whc|e |hing cr crder. Nc ma||er hcw
pcpu|ar |he scvereign, |he pecp|e and |he gcvemmen|
are nc| presen| a| |he same |i me. Where |he pecp|e are
presen|, |here is chacs, disrup|icn. Where gcvemmen|
i s presen|, |hen |he pecp|e are nc|. lnscfar as |he pecp|e
can never be fu||y presen|scme dcn` | shcw up, di dn`|
hear wha| was gcing cn, were mis|ead by a pcwer|u|
speaker, were misccun|ed frcm |he cu|se|, ccmp|e|ely
disagreed and sc wan|ed |c ccun| |hemselves cu|, were
barred frcm a||ending|heir necessary absence i s
|he gap cf pcli|i cs. ln hancire`s wcrds, |he rea|i|y
denc|ed by |he |etus 'wcrker,` 'pecp|e` cr 'prcle|ar-
i an` ccu|d never |e reduced ei|her |c |he pcsi|ivi|y cf
a ma|eria| ccndi|icn ncr |c |he superhci a| ccncei | cf
an imaginary, bu| always designa|ed a pat1ial in bc|h
senses) linkage, pmvisicnal and pc|emi ca|, cf frag-
men|s cf experience and fcrms cf symbcliza|icn. `
Sp|i|, divided, i mpcssi b|e, |he pecp|e cannc| be pc|i |i-
cally. They are cnly pcli|i cal |hrcugh and as cne, few,
cr scme never as a direc| embcdimen|, cn|y as limi|) .
cne represen|s us |c curselves as many, few make pcs-
si ble and crganize, prcvide |hemes and i deas, scme
dc a|l |he wcrk. The pecp|e are a|ways ncn-a||, nc|
si mp|y because |he many is cpen and inccmp|e|e bu|
because i | cannc| |c|a|ize i |se|f. The ru|e cf a leader,
par|y, cr ccns|i |u|icn ccmpensa|es fcr cr cccupies |he
hc|e cf |he missing ccnunc|i cn be|ween pecp|e and
25 Jacques Ranc iere, Staging the People: The Proletarian
and His Double, trans. Davi d Fernbach, London: Verso,
201 1 , 1 4.
gcvernmen|. Ncne|heless, |his rule cannc| cverccme
|he divisicn |ha| |he scvereign|y cf |he pecple mcbi-
lizes, divisicn gces a|| |he way dcwnan|agcnism is
fundamen|al, irreducib|e.
Cicrgic Agamben a|sc nc|es |he ncniden|i |y cf |he
pecp|e. ha|her |han ccns|ruing |his ncniden|i|y in
|erms cf |he gap cf scvereign|y, Agamben ccnsiders hcw
|he referen| cf |he pecple shif|s frcm a|| |c scme, frcm
a my|hi c, i mpcssib|e, all of us |c |he divisicn between
|he privileged and |he res| cf us . He wri|es, l| is as
if wha| we call 'pecple` were in rea|i|y nc| a uni|ary
subec| bu| a di alec|i cal csci||a|icn be|ween |wc cppc-
si|e pcles. cn |he cne hand, |he se| cf |he lecple as a
whcle pcli|i cal bcdy, and, cn |he c|her, |he subse| cf
|he pecple as a fragmen|ary mu||ip|i ci|y cf needy and
exc|uded bcdi es . The ccns|i|u|ive divisicn wi|hin
|he pecp|e expresses i|seh i n language. The |etu can
refer |c an imagi ned uni|y cf everycne, as i| seems |c
dc in |he expressicn |he scvereign|y cf |he pecple. l|
can a|sc refer |c |he |ess we|| cff, |he pccr, |he wcrkers,
|he explci|ed, |he macri|y whcse lives and labcr are
exprcpria|ed |c beneh| |he few. Tc appea| |c |he pecple
26 Gi orgio Agamben, Homo Sacer, trans. Daniel Heller
Roazen, Stanford, CA: Stanford Uni versi ty Press, 1 998, 1 77.
i n |hi s seccnd sense is |c express and pc|i|i ci ze a divi-
sicn be|ween |he few and |he many, |c make |he many
appear in |heir need and i n |heir pcwer.
Agamben`s dialec|i cal csci lla|icn ncne|he|ess
s|cps |cc sccn. l| csci ||a|es be|ween |wc pcsi |icns,
al|hcugh |here i s a |hird, where |he needy, prcduci ng
bcdies are |he pcli|i ca| bcdy scvereign), and even a
fcur|h, where the fact |ha| |he needy, prcducing bcdies
ae |he pc|i |i cal bcdy makes the impossibility of total
izing or enclosing the political as a body appear. Even
wi|hcu| |hese addi|icna| mcves, |hcugh, Agamben`s
language ccnfcunds |he reading cf |he divisicn i n
|he pecp|e |ha| l sugges|. He spli ces |cge|her differ-
en| i mages cf divisicn. Tha| is, Agamben refers |c
|wc cppcsi|e pcles and |c a unihed whcle and wha| i s
exc|uded frcm i |. A di vi si cn be|ween cppcsi |e pc|es
is a divisicn wi|hin a held we ccu|d even say a held
charac|erized by ex|ensicn and wi|hcu| necessary
bcundari es). A di vi sicn be|ween a whcle and wha|`s
cu|si de i| di splaces |hi s i n|ema| divisicn, |hereby ren-
dering |he cpen held in|c a uni|ary bcdy. The pc|i|i ca|
prcb|em |hereby shif|s frcm an cppcsi |icn wi|hin |he
pecp|e, be|ween exp|ci|ers and |he explci|ed, |c cne
cf bei ng exc|uded frcm |he pecple |he prcb|em |ha|
precccupies Buck-Ncrss). The ccrrespcnding pc|i |i-
cal sc|u|icn |hen appears as inclusicn and |he i ni |ia|
ma|ter cf divisicn and cppcsi|icn wi|hin |he pecple i s
effaced.
A be||er way |c ccncei ve |he divisicn wi|hin |he
pecp|e, cne capab|e cf expressing |he pcwer cf |he
pecp|e i n and as a ccllec|ivi|y bu| nc| as a whcle and
nc| as a uni|y, makes use cf |he psychcanaly|ic dis-
|inc|i cn be|ween desire and dri ve. Whi|e Ireud`s
vi ci ssi|udes cf |he drive are generally kncwn rever-
sa| i n|c i |s cppcsi|e, |urning rcund upcn |he subec|`s
cwn se|f, repressicn, and subli ma|icn) , |wc fea|ures
cf |he perhaps less famili ar Lacani an nc|icn cf dri ve
bear emphasizing. The ms| ccncems |he difference
be|ween dri ve and desire as re|a|i cns cf jouissance, i n
c|her wcrds, as eccncmies |hrcugh whi ch |he sub ec|
s|ruc|ures her encymen|. Desire i s always a desire |c
desire, a desire |ha| can never be h||ed, a desire fcr a
jouissance cr encymen| |ha| can never be a||ained.
ln ccn|ras|, dri ve a||ains jouissance i n |he repe|i|i ve
27 See Jodi Dean, "Dri ve as t he St ruct ure of Bi opol i t i cs, "
Krisis 2, 201 0.
28 Slavoj
Z
izek, The Ticklish Subject, London: Verso, 2000,
291 .
prccess cf nc| reaching i|. Une dcesn` | have |c reach
|he gcal |c ency. Encymen| a||aches |c |he prccess,
|hereby cap|uri ng |he subec|. Encymen|, nc ma||er
hcw small, hee|ing, cr par|ial, i s why cne persis|s i n
|he lccp cf dri ve. The seccnd fea|ure ccncerns |he dif-
feren| s|a|us cI objet petit a in desire and dri ve.
i zek
wri|es.
Although, i n both cases, the l i nk between object
and loss i s cruci al , i n the case of the objet a as the
object of dsire, we have an object whi ch was ori gi
nally lost, whi ch coi nci des wi th i ts own loss, whi ch
emerges as lost, whi le, i n the case of the objet a as
the object of drive, the "object" is directly the loss
itsel-i n the shi ft from desi re to dri ve, we pass
from the lost object to loss itsel as an object . That
is to say, the weird movement called "dri ve" is not
dri ven by the "i mpossi ble" quest for the lost object;
i t is a push to directly enact the "loss "-the gap, cut,
distance-itsel 29
Drive is a fcrce |ha| is shaped frcm lcss. l| is |css as a
fcrce, cr |he Icrce |css exer|s cn |he he|d cI desire.
29
Z
izek, In Defense of Lost Causes, 328.
The pecple as desiring have needs, needs |hey
can cnly address |cge|her, cc||ec|ively, ac|i ve and i n
ccmmcn. Thei r scvereign|y can be reduced nei ther |c
|heir macri|y ncr |c |hei r prccedures. ha|her, i | names
|he cause and reascn fcr gcvernmen|. |he ccllec|ive
pecp|e i n |heir desire fcr a ccmmcn gccd. The pecple
as caugh| i n drive are fragmen|ed, dispersed in|c ne|-
wcrks and |tibu|aries. S|uck i n dri ve`s repe|i |ive lccps,
|hey pmsue |heir separa|e en|erprises even as |hey are
gcvernmen|a|ized cbec|s, a pcpu|a|icn.
l engage Buck- Ncrss and Agamben nc| cnly |c ge| a|
a view cI ccmmunism as |he fcrce cf |he pecple as scv-
ereign i n |he eccncmy. l alsc wan| |c emphasize |ha| fcr
ccmmuni s|s, |he bi nary i nc|usicn/exclusicn dces nc|
indica|e |he pri mary axis cf us|i ce. The ccncep|ua|
beneh| cf |he nc|icn cf |he scvereign|y cf |he pecple
i s |ha| i| i s 1wt a|| i nclusive, i | i s divisive. Icr |ibera|
demccra|s, hcwever, whc i nsi s| |ha| |he |rue pcli |i-
cal issue i s making sme |ha| nc cne is excluded frcm
cppcr|uni|ies |c par|i ci pa|e i n the demccra|i c prccess
cr frcm |he pcssibili|y cI s|riking i | ri ch in |he capi -
|alis| marke|, |he i nclusicivexclusicn binary func|icns
qui|e nicely.) Icr example, a pressing ccn|empcrary
issue ccncerns undccumen|ed wcrkers. The remedy
tc |he prcb|em cf thcse wi thcut papers i s |c ge| them
papersand |hus membership in |he s|a|e. This isn` |
a bad gcal, but i | is a gcal |ha| extends rather |han
|akes cr changes s|a|e pcwer. Simi|arly, scme argue
|ha| |he sc|u|icn |c |he di lemma pcsed by increas-
i ng mi||icns cf slum dwellers is a righ| |c prcper|y, a
remedy |ha| inccrpcra|es |he cwner i n|c |he cfhci a|
marke| eccncmy, in effec| elimina|ing |he |hrea| |c |he
marke| |ha| unccun|ed use and exchange pcse. This
i s nc| a ccmmuni s| pcsi|icn because capi|alism i s a
sys|em |ha| ccns|i|u|ive|y explci|s pecp|e, nc| cne |ha|
ccns|i |u|i ve|y excludes |hem.
Building frcm Badicu and hanci re,
izek c|aims
tha| the an|agcni sm be|ween |he i ncluded and |he
exc|uded is |he fundamen|a| an|agcni sm rup|uring
capi|a|ism |cday and hence cruci a| |c |he idea cf ccm-
munism) .
i zek reccgnizes |ha| |he fccus cn exclusicn

easi|y e|ides wi|h the libera|-tcleran|-mu||i cu||ura|
|cpic cf ' cpenness` . . . a| |he expense cf a prcperly
Narxi s| nc|icn cf sccia| an|agcnism. `" Ye| he argues
|ha| |he i nclusicn cf |he prcle|aria| is an i nc|usicn cf
a differen| scr|, an i nc|usicn cf capi|a|ism`s pcin| cf
30 Slavoj
Z
i zek, First as Traged;; Then as Farce, London,
Verso: 2009, 1 00.
symp|cmal exclusicn par| c| nc par|) |ha| e||ec|i vely
disman||es i|.
A lc| ri des cn |he nc|icn cf prcle|ari a| here, as my
di scussicn cf |he changes in capi|a|i sm a||es|s. Un |he
cne hand,
izek ri gh|ly de|aches prcle|ari an frcm

|he fac|cry, |rea|ing proletarianization as a prccess
|ha| depnves humans cf |heir subs|ance and reduces
|hem |c pure subec|s. Un |he c|her, he iden|ihes exc|u-
sicn as a par|i cular kind cf prcle|ari aniza|icn, cne by
which scme are made direc|ly |c embcdy subs|ance-
less subec|ivi |y. They are |he ma|erial remai nders cf
|he sys|em, i |s unavci dable and necessary byprcduc|s.
Because |he en|ire sys|em reli es cn |heir exclusicn cr
|heir i nclusicn as remai nders)because |hey embcdy
|he |ru|h |ha| capi |ali sm prcduces human refuse,
surplus pcpula|icns wi|h nc rcle cr func|icn|c
i nclude |hem wculd des|rcy |he sys|em i|self.
izek`s argumen| is mcs| ccmpelling when i| ccn-

ceives prcle|ari aniza|i cn as a prccess. Ye| his rendering
c| prcle|arianiza|icn as a fcrm cf exclusicn ra|her
|han explci |a|icn) cbscures |he necessary and prc-
duc|ive rcle cf prcle|arianiza|i cn fcr capi|al, |he way
|ha| prcle|ari aniza|icn is a fotu cf capi|alism`s cap|ure
and i nclusicn cf human labcr. As Narx describes i n
Capital, |he vic|en| prccess cf primi|ive accumula|icn
prcvides capi|al wi|h |he wcrkers i | needs.
hecliberali sm wi |h i|s decli ning i nves|men| i n
prcduc|icn and diversi cn cf capi|al i n|c mance) amp|i-
hes |he prccess cf prc|e|ari aniza|icn. Icr example,
eccncmis|s Davi d Au|cr and David Dcrn describe
a pc|ariza|icn cf emplcymen| i n sc-cal|ed advanced
eccncmies cver |he |as| |hi t1y years. The numbers cf
high|y-ski lled cbs have increased Au|cr and Dcrn dc
nc| di scuss where |hese cbs are) . Nidd|e-skil|, mi ddle-
class cbs have s|eadily dec|i ned, as have lcw-skil|,
ncn-servi ce sec|cr cbs. A| |he same |ime, lcw-ski||,
lcw-wage servi ce sec|cr cbs have bal|ccned. Sc |here
are decreasing numbers c| cbs i n mining, assembling,
cpera|ing, and |ranspcr|ing and subs|an|ia|ly i ncreas-
i ng 5B percen| be|ween I 80 and 205) numbers cf
cbs in childcare, hai rdressing, fccd servi ce, hcme
heal|h care, cleaning, and gardeni ng. Au|cr and Dcm
a||ribu|e |he rise cf |his servi ce sec|cr |c |he widespread
adcp|icn cf ccmpu|ing |echnc|cgi es. They wi |e, As
|he dec|ining pri ce cf ccmpu|er |echnc|cgy has dri ven
dcwn |he wage pai d |c rcu|i ne |asks, |cw ski ll wcrkers
have rea||cca|ed |heir labcr supp|y |c servi ce cccupa-
|icns, whi ch are difhcul| |c au|cma|e because |hey re|y
heavi|y cn dexteri|y, hexib|e interperscna| ccmmuni-
ca|i cn and direc| physi cal prcximi|y. ` ' hea||cca|icn
pcin|s |c prc|e|ari aniza|icn, |ha| is, |c capi|a|ism`s
prcduc|icn and ccnsump|icn cI |he wcrkers i| needs.
izek`s merger cf prc|e|ari aniza|icn wi|h |he par|-

cI-nc-par| is cne-si ded in i|s res|nc|ed Iccus cn |he
discarded prcle|arian and cmissicn cI |he prcduc|ive
cI servi ces as well as gccds) prc|e|aria|. Like |he
anci en| demos hanci re describes,
izek`s prc|e|ari a|
i s charac|erized by Ireedcm. ln
i zek`s versicn, |he

prc|e|aria|, as par|-cI-nc-par|, lacks |he par|i cular
fea|ures |ha| wcu|d |egi |ima|e |heir p|ace wi |hi o |he
sccia| bcdy|hey be|cng |c |he se| cI sccie|y wi|hcu|
be|cnging |c aoy cf i ts subse|s . ` This prc|e|ari a| is
Iree i n |he sense cI Iree-hca|i ng, nc| ccns|rai ned wi|hi n
a gi ven p|ace, unde|ermi ned by Iea|ures tha| si |ua|e
i |. Ye| as Nar exp|ains in Capital, |he Ireedcm cI |he
wcrker is |he fcrm cf dependence cn capi ta|, |he wcrker`s
i nc|usicn wi|hi n |he capi|a|is| sys|em. The bcurgecis
s|a|e reccgnizes this inc|usicn. frcm the s|andpci nt cI
31 Dav id Autor and Davi d Dorn, "The Growth of Low Ski l l
Servi ce Jobs and the Polari zat i on of the U . S. Labor Market, "
Apri l 201 2, econ-www. mi t . edu/fles/1 474.
32 Slavoj
Z
i zek, In Defense of Lost Causes, 41 3.
the state, the individual wcrker is equa| |c the i ndi-
vidua| capi|a|is|, bc|h are free |c chccse whe|her |c
ccn|ract cne with |he cther.
An addi|icna| difhcu||y s|ems frcm |rea|i ng ccn-
|empcrary ccmmuni ca|i ve capi |a|i sm as if i| were a
whc|e marked by a ccns|i|u|i ve exclusicn where |ha|
exc|usicn designa|es perscns as a pat1-cf-nc-par|.
As Bcl|anski and Chiape|lc cu|line, |he i nc|usicn
exc|usicn binary |cday designa|es a re|a|icn nc| |c a
whc|e bu| |c a netwcrk. The exc|uded are |hcse whc
ate vu|nerable because |hey ate disccnnec|ed, |hey
lack links |c ne|wcrks cf cppo1uni |y, securi |y, and
sus|enance. ln a nencrk mcdel, |here are nc symp-
tcmal pcin|s, nc pci n|s |he i nclusicn cf whi ch des|rcys
|he en|ire sys|em. There are us| mcre li nks. Li nks can
be added cr drcpped wi th li ||le i mpac| cn the ne|wcrk
fcrm. Admi ||edly, ne|wcrks can experi ence cverlcad,
i ns|ances cf seh-crganized cri ti ca|i|y where |hey disin-
|egra|e and ccllapse. Bu| an image cf ne|wcrk cver|cad
i s nc| |he same as tha| cf a whcle and i ts ccns|i tu|ive
exc|usicn, par|icu|ar|y inscfat as ne|wcrks can cf|en
rcu|e amund breakdcwns.
33 Luc Boltanski and Eve Chiapello, The New Spirit of
Capitalism, trans. Gregory Elli ott, London: Verso, 2007.
1 10 THE COMMUNIST HORIZON
Ne|wcrks, par|i cu|ar|y |he mass, rapid, affec|ive
ne|wcrks cf ccn|empcrary ccmmuni ca|ive capi|al-
i sm, presen| |he par|i cu|ar prcblem cf hclding cn|c,
keepi ng cpen, |he gap cf desire. lmmedia|e demands |c
uplcad, share, and search, as we|| as |he easy abscrp-
|i cn cI pcli|i ca| ac|ivi|y i n|c |he circui|s cI par|i ci pa|cry
media, Icrma| lack as lcss, subli ma|i ng i| and dispets-
ing i | back i n|c |he everyday. The displacemen| cI
pc|i|i cal ccnic| |c |he |errain cI ne|wcrked media has
|he perverse repercussicn cI perpe|ually expanding
|he |cpcgraphy cf s|ruggle even as i| ccns|an|ly signals
|he lcca|icns, in|en|icns, and asscci a|icns cI |hcse whc
ate hgh|ing. Thus Iat, |hi s expansicn has s|reng|hened
ccmmuni ca|i ve capi|a|ism as i| feeds cn acce|era|ing
cri ses and emergencies. l| a|sc increases |he expcsure
and vulnerabi li|y cf |hcse engaged i n ac|i ve prc|es|
and resi s|ance cn |he grcund.
lf |he pecple as |he res| cI us are |he subec| cI ccm-
munism and scvereign|y i s cur ccllec|ive s|eering cI
cur ccmmcn rescurces and ccndi|icns, hcw shculd |his
ccn|rcl be unders|ccd: ln |he Icllcwing chap|ets, l |ake
34 See my di scussi on i n Blog Theory , Cambri dge: Polity,
201 0.
SOVEREIGNTY OF THF PEOPLE 1 1 1
up |his ques |icn i n ccnnec|icn wi|h |he prcduc|i vi |y cf
|he ccmmuni ca|i ve ccmmcn and |he crganiza|icnal rcle
cf |he par|y. ln |he remai nder cf |his chap|er, l ccnsider
le|er Ha||ward`s prcvcca|ive defense cf vclun|ari sm.
Unce |he his|cri cal de|erminism cf |he merger narra-
|ive is nc lcnger ccnvincing and nei |her |he uni|y ncr
|he i n|eres| cf |he brcad class cf wcrking pecp|e can be
|aken as given, i s vc|un|arism |he bes| avai|ab|e way |c
ccncei ve ccllec|ive pc|i |i ca| will:
Deve|cping a line cf |hcugh| chered by Badicu,
Ha||ward argues agai ns| ccn|empcrary |hecry`s
widespread reec|icn cf vclun|ari sm |c afmn |he dia-
lec|ica| vclun|ari sm cf |he wi|| cf |he pecple. Contra
|hcse whc wculd devalue self-de|ermina|icn and seh-
emanci pa|icn as |hey pri vi |ege varicus fcrms cf ei|her
i nde|ermi na|i cn |he i n|ers|i|i al, |he hybnd, |he ambiv-
alen|, |he si mula|ed, |he undecidab|e, |he chac|i c . . . )
cr hyperde|ermina|icn 'inhni |e` e|hi cal cbliga|icn,
di vi ne |ranscendence, unccnscicus dri ve, |rauma|i c
repressicn, machinic au|cma|icn), he advcca|es a
brcad|y hcusseauian cr |accbin acccun| cf |he genera|
will as |he pc|i|i cal will cf a mcbilized pecp|e. By
wi||, Hallward means |he excess cf prac|i ca| freedcm
cver |he given cr Ieasi b|e. Tc afhrm |he pri macy cf |he
prescrip|ive wi|| i s |c i nsi s| |ha| i n pcli|ics all ex|ema|
fcrms cf de|ermina|icn . . . are ncne|he|ess seccndary.
By pecp|e he means |hcse whc, in any given si|ua-
|icn, fcrmula|e, asser|, and sus|ain a fu||y ccmmcn and
|hus fully inc|usive and ega|i|arian) i n|eres|, cver and
abcve any divisive cr exc|usive in|eres|. Will cf |he
pecp|e |hus desi gna|es a delibera|e, emanci pa|cp,
and inc|usive prccess cf ccllec|ive se|f-de|ermina|icn.
Like any kind cf wi||, i|s exerci se i s vc|un|ary and
au|cncmcus, a ma||er cf prac|ical freedcm, like any
fcrm cf cc||ec|ive ac|icn, i| invclves assemb|y and
crganiza|icn. "3'
The di alec|i cal ccmpcnen| cf Hallwd`s vclun|ari sm
appears i n |he re|a|icnship be|ween pecp|e and wi||.
Hal|ward dces nc| |rea| |he pecple as an empiri cal des-
i gna|icn fcr |he inhabi |an|s cf a par|i cu|ar |erri |cry, |he
ci |izens cf a par|i cu|ar na|icn, cr |he cccupan|s cf a par-
|icu|ar scci a| class. ha|her, he ccnceives |hem |hrcugh
|heir ac|ive willing, |ha| is, |heir ac|ive iden|ihca|icn
wi|h an emergen| genera| in|eres|. Li ke hcusseau,
Hal|ward differen|ia|es be|ween |he wi|| |ha| i s genera|
35 Peter Hal lward, "The Will of The Peopl e: Notes Toward
a Dialect ical Voluntari sm, " Radical Philosophy 1 55, 2009,
1 7-30.
SOVEREIGNTY OF THF PEOPLE 1 13
in |erms cf i|s ccmmcn, ega|i |ari an in|erest and a wi||
|ha| i s par|ial cr par|i cu|ar ncn-genera|izable) . Wi||
and pecple, |hen, are mu|ua||y de|ermi ning.
lnscfar as |he pecp|e are |hcse whc fmuu|a|e, asser|,
and sus|ain a ful|y ccmmcn in|eres|, |hey exceed any
i mmedia|e assemb|age cf pecp|e, any given mcvemen|
cr even|. Icrmu|a|icn, asser|icn, and sus|enance, i n
c|her wcrds, pcin| |c |he brcader |radi|icns and prac-
|ices Hegel assccia|es wi|h e|hi cal life and Nar |rea|s
as ma|eria| fac|crs in his|cries cf s|ruggle. H |he pecp|e
are |hcse whc fcrmu|a|e, asser|, and sus|ain a fu|ly
ccmmcn in|eres|, |hen included amcng |hem are |hcse
whc have |hcugh| and crea|ed, fcugh| and di ed i n |he
servi ce cf |his in|eres|. They are |he pecp|e whc cculd
be and whc we ccu|d have been. The pecple manifes|
|hemse|ves i n signifying s|resses , gaps, and rup|ures,
i n |he fcrce cf an absence, as much as t hey dc in |heir
presence.
The pecple |ikewi se manifes| |hemse|ves i n ccn-
cre|e pcli|i ca| asscci a|icn, which i s why i ns|i|u|icns
and prac|i ces ate si|es cf s|ruggle. Since ins|i |u|i cns
and prac|i ces are and can be manifes|a|icns cf |he
will cf |he pecple, vehi c|es fcr i|s de|ermina|icn and
expressicn, such a wil| cannc| be unders|ccd as fu||y
1 1 4 THE COMMUNIST HORIZON
transparent, kncwn, cr even vclun|ary. lrreducible
|c |he ccnscicus chci ce cf i ndi vi duals, i| ani ma|es a
brcader subec|ivi|y tha| is alsc a lccus cf struggle. We
can say, |hen, |ha| |he genera| wi|| desi gna|es a s|ruc-
|ure cf desire. a necessary gap i n |he pecple mcbi lized
in and Icr |he ccllec|ive. The ccnhi c| between ccmmcn
and par|i cu|ar i n|eres| dcesn` | end, i| isn`| resc|ved
cnce and fcr a||. l| i s a mcvemen| and prccess |ha|
requires |he cngci ng wcrk cf c|arihca|icn, ccncen|ra-
|icn, and crganiza|icn.
The pecp|e as a divisive pcli |i ca| subec| prcduces
i |seh |hrcugh i |s prac|i ces. l|s wi || precedes nc| cnly i|s
kncw|edge cf wha| i s wi||ed, bu| |he pecp|e i |seh. The
pecple are willing even if |he ccn|en| cI tha| will cannc|
be unders|ccd i n |erms cf a specihc demand. lnscfar
as |he general will is inseparable frcm al|hcugh nc|
reducible |c) |he prac|i ces tha| sustai n i|, |he new prac-
tices cf cccupa|icn and assemb|y, |heir break wi|h |he
everyday, sugges| a pecp|e i n |he prccess cf refcrma||ing
i |se|I, |rying tc make i tse|f |hi nk, dc, and desire cther-
wi se. Bani cades, cccupa|icns, s|ri kes, hacks, bcycc||s,
and demcns|ra|icns wcrk cn |he pecple whc will |hem
perhaps even mcre |han cn |heir cppcnen|s . Ye| |he
recessicn cI |hese enac|men|s cI pcpular wil| back i n|c
SOVEREIGNTY OF THF PEOPLE 1 1 5
habi|s |ha| afhrm and reinfcrce ccmmunica|ive capi-
|alism sugges|s |he ccn|inued wi||ing cf |he previcus
ac|ua|iza|icn cf |he ccnhi c| be|ween general and par-
|icu|ar, |ha| is, |he cngcing and persis|en| challenge cf
|he general wi||. Ia||i ng back i n|c |he given and fami|-
i ar is easy, scme|imes ca|ching us unawares. we s|ar| |c
|hink we are dcing scme|hing new cnly |c realize |ha|
capi |a|ism shares cur fasci na|icn wi|h ncvel|y. Desire
can be sub|ima|ed i n|c dri ve. Ncmen|ary s|rugg|es
ate ncne|heless nc| pcin|less . |heir signifying s|resses
remain and |he prac|i ce cf insctibing, remembering,
and i n|erpre|ing |hem he|ps fcrmu|a|e, asser|, and
sus|ain a ccmmcn egali|aian i n|eres|. The challenge,
i nscfar as we ccns|i |u|e |he prac|i ces |ha| ccns|i|u|e
us, i s in |he develcpmen| cf enduring fcrms cf ega|i|ar-
i an asscci a|icn |hrcugh whi ch we can make curse|ves
i n|c |he pecple we wan| |c be.
Ha||ward`s dialec|i cal vclun|ari sm sugges|s an
unders|andi ng cf |he scvereign|y cf |he pecple i n
|erms cf a ccllec|i ve ega|i |ari an uni versa|is| desire.
Because |he ac|ive, willing pecple ate nc| i den|i ca| |c
|he passi ve, i ndi vi dua|i zed pcpula|i cn, and because
|he desire fcr |he cc||ec|ive and egali|arian necessar-
i ly exceeds any given se| cf i ns|i |u|icns and prac|i ces,
scvereign|y prcvides a be||er name fcr |he rule cf |he
pecp|e |han dic|a|crship. His|crica||y, dic|a|crship
has denc|ed a |empcrary arrangemen|. Whe|her as a
prcvisicn i n |he hcman ccns|i |u|icn cr a s|ep |cward
|he wi|hering away cf |he s|a|e, di c|a|crshi p marks |he
excep|icnal ccnvergence cf legali|y and i ||ega|i|y, fcrce
and righ|. l|s limi|ed |empcra|i |y, sugges|ive cf emer-
gency measures and s|a|es cI excep|icn, allcws fcr ac|s
ccmmi ||ed cu|si de cf re|a|icns cf acccun|abi|i|y, ac|s
us|ihed by revclu|icnary fervcr alcne. As excep|icns,
|hey ccn|ri bu|e |c excessive ra|her |han unavcidable
viclence. Excess merges wi|h si |ua|i cn. l| i s be||er fcr
|he vic|ence cf rule |c remai n excep|icnal, wrcng, and
ncne|he|ess in need cf us|ihca|icn. was i| necessary cr
was i| driven by vengeance, encymen|, par|i cu|ari |y:
Di d i| serve | he ccmmcn gccd: And even i f i | di d, can
i |s us|ihca|icn be generally willed: The revclu|icnary
fury cf |he pecp|e is wi |hcu| limi| cr ccn|rc|. Bu| |his
cannc| and shculd nc| be i nccrpcra|ed in a gcverning
cr ccns |i |u|icnal fcrm whe|her dic|a|crshi p cf |he prc-
le|aria| cr scvereign|y cf |he pecple) . Dci ng sc i nvi |es
and permi |s excessive measures i n |he name cf revc-
l u|icnary change, as if |ransfcrming |he pecple were a
prccess |ha| ccu|d end.
SOVEREIGNTY OF THF PEOPLE 1 17
The ru|e cf |he pecp|e is unsurpassab|e. The fcrms i |
|akes necessari|y vary|he scvereign|y cf |he pecp|e
dces nc| have |c be cn|y cr exclusive|y i n |he fcrm cf
s|a|e scverei gn|y. S|a|e scvereign|y i s likewise limi|ed,
prcvisicnal, and inccmple|e i nscfar as |he pecple
exceed s|a|e fcrms. Bu| cnly in a wcr|d wi|hcu| pecp|e
wcu|d |here be nc need fcr |he rule cf |he pecpl e.
Thi s ru|e can be |hcugh| i n |erms cf seh-gcvernance,
seh-ccn|rc|, seh-s|eering. Then i | can and mus| be
ccmbined and |hcugh| wi|h |he |rans-sub ec|ive, mu|u-
ally de|ermining ccndi|icns cf se|ves, such |ha| |here
i s nc seh-gcvernance absen| cc||ec|ive seh-gcveming.
Narx`s descrip|icn cf ccmmunism as |he free deve|cp-
men| cf each ccmpa|ib|e wi|h |he free develcpmen| cf
all expresses |hi s mu|ual de|ermina|i cn cr di alec|i ca|
vclun|ari sm. Absen| |he cc||ec|ive de|ermina|icn cf |he
pecp|e cver |heir ccndi |icns, each remains unfree.
Thi s is |he sense designa|ed by | he scvereign|y cf |he
pecp|e as |he res| cf us. lnscfar as ccmmunism names
|his scvereign|y, ccmmuni s| mcvemen| s|ri ves |c bri ng
|he ccndi|icns fcr i | i n|c bei ng, grasping |ha| |hese ccn-
di|icns are ma|eria| and |ha| |he pcli|i cal scvereign|y
cf |he pecp|e i s i mpcssible when |he basic ccndi|icns
cf cur lives are cu|side cf cur ccllec|ive de|ermina|icn.
Tc rei |era|e, |his scvereign|y i s unavci dab|y par1ial and
i nccmple|e. lmpcr|an| de|euinan|s cf cur |iveswhen
we are bcrn, when we di e, whc cur paren|s are, whc we
lcve, cur mc|her |cngue, |he wea|herremain cu|side
cur de|ermi na|icn. We dc well |c remain minchul cf
scvereign|y`s li mi|s. Ye| |hese |i mi|s dc nc| mean |ha|
c|her de|erminan|s are si mi |ar|y cu|si de cur a||emp|s
|c s|eer |hem. We can and already dc make decisicns
abcu| whc ge|s wha|, whc has wha|, wha| i s rewarded,
wha| i s punished, wha| i s amp|ihed, wha| i s |hwar|ed.
Tc |his ex|en|, securing |he ccndi|icns cf pcssibi|i|y
fcr cm scvereign|y cver curse|ves as |he pecple, |he
ccndi|icns |ha| keep ccmmuni s| desire a|i ve, neces-
sari |y brings abcu| addi |icna| |imi|s |c scvereign|yi |
cannc| dissclve i|s cwn ccndi|icns cf pcssibi|i|y and
. .
remam scvereign.
Chap|er lcur
Common and Commons
C
cmmuni sm |ags a Icur|h Iea|ure cI cur ccn|em-
pcrary se||ing. |he ideas cI |he ccmmcn and |he
ccmmcns. Ni chae| Hard| uses |he nc|icn cI |he common
|c draw cu| |he specihci|y cI |he nec|i beral assaul| cn
|he pecple. Icr Hard|, necliberali sm i s mcre |han a
pc|icy en|ailing |he priva|iza|i cn cI public prcper|y
and servi ces. l| i s a seizure cI wha| is ccmmcn
kncw|edge, |anguage, i mages, and aIIec|s. ' S|avc
izek emphasizes |he commons inscIar as reIerence |c

|he ccmmcns us|ihes |he resusci |a|icn cI |he nc|icn
cI ccmmunism. i| enables us |c see |he prcgressing
' enc|csure` cI |he ccmmcns as a prccess cI prc|e|ari-
aniza|icn cf |hcse whc are |hereby excluded fmm |heir
cwn subs|ance. As l explained in chap|er |hree, a
Mi chael Hardt, "The Common in Communi sm, " in The
Iea of Communism, ed. Costas Douzi nas and Slavoj
Z
i zek,
London: Verso, 201 0, 1 36.
2 Slavoj
Z
i zek "How to Begi n from t he Begi nni ng, " i n The
Idea of Communism, 21 3. In contrast, Nick Dyer-Witheford
beneh| cf |he ccncep| cf prcle|ari aniza|icn is |ha| i|
|urns cur a||en|icn away frcm empiri ca| classes and
|cward |he prccesses cf dispcssessicn acccmpanying
capi|a| accumu|a|icn. Here l ccnsider |he prccesses cf
exp|ci|a|icn and exprcpri a|i cn specihc |c ccmmuni ca-
|ive capi|a|i sm. The ccncep|s cf |he ccmmcn and |he
ccmmcns ccnuibu|e |c |hi s acccun| as |hey high|igh|
nc| cnly new experiences cf cc||ec|ivi|y bu| alsc bani-
ers |c |he pcli|i ciza|icn cf |hese experi ences.
Hard|`s ccncep|icn cf language, i deas, kncwledge,
and affec|s as |hemse|ves already ccmmcn ccc|udes
an|agcnism. l| prcceeds as if we did nc| speak mu|-
|ip|e, inccmmensurable languages, as if referen|s and
sys|ems cf meaning didn`| clash wi |h cne anc|her, as
i f kncwledges did nc| emerge i n and |hrcugh ccnhic|.
Bu| if an|agcnism i s a ccns|i|u|ive fea|ure cf human
experi ence, shculd we deny i|: Ur shcu|d we c|aim
i |, cccupy i|, and fcrce i| in cne direc|icn ra|her |han
anc|her: Whi ch i s |he be||er apprcach fcr ccmmunis|s
|cday. repea|ing i n cur ccn|empcrary se||ing |he epi c
posi ti ons the common as an alternat ive t o a communi sm
reduced to a "centralized command economy and a repressi ve
state." See hi s "Commoni sm," i n What Would It Mean to Win?,
ed. Turbulence Collect i ve, Oakland, CA: PM Press, 201 0, 1 06.
COMMON AND COMMONS 12 1
and never-ending s|rugg|e cf wcrkers agai ns| cwners,
many agains| few, cr appealing |c |he pc|en|ia|i|y cf
capaci|ies we all share, capaci|ies cf language, ccm-
muni ca|icn, and |hcugh|:
H an|agcnism is an irreduci b|e fea|ure cf cur se||i ng,
|hen divisicn i s ccmmcn |c ccmmunica|icn. Divisicn
gces all |he way dcwn, separa|i ng speaker frcm u||er-
ance, u||erance frcm meaning, and meaning frcm
hearer, audi ence, reci pi en|. Wha| rescna|es |c cne,
wha| i s avai|able as a rescurce fcr |hinki ng and re|a|ing
|c c|hers, i s always already dis|anced, dissipa|ed, cr
bracke|edwhe|her |empcra||y, |ri bally, |cpi cally, cr
|cpcgraphica||y. Ccmmuni ca|icn i s necessari |y pat1ia|,
h||ed wi|h hc|es, inseparab|e frcm pcwer and hierarchy,
re|i an| cn exclusicn. Ccmmuni ca|ive capi|a|ism mcbi-
lizes these par|s and hc|es, |hese fragments in mc|i cn,
h||i ng |hem i n wi|h i mages and fee|ings and bi|s cf
encymen|. Iree-hca|ing wcrds and i mages are mashed
up and reccmbined, recircu|a|ed and redeplcyed, |he
fac| cf |heir |ransmissicn di splacing previcus mcde|s
cf message and respcnse. Hcw many page vi ews :
Hcw many ccpi es sc|d: The magni|ude, |he surplus
cf ccn|ribu|icns, accumu|a|es i n da|a banks cn server
fms, pc|en|ial infcrma|icn fcr spies and ad-men as
sccn as |he quan|s and geeks hgure cu| hcw |c va|ue
i | and pu| i| |c use. lerpe|ua||y engaged, we search
and |i nk, making |he pa|hs we fcllcweven as Cccgle
c|ai ms |he |races a i|s cwn. We ccns|i |u|e |he prac-
|ices |ha| ccns|i|u|e us. We cc||ec|ive|y de|ermine cur
ccllec|ive ccndi |icns , bu| nc| ye| a |he pecp|e, s|i|l as
pcpu|a|i cns.
l begin wi|h a brief ske|ch cf |he rela|icnship between
nec|ibera|ism and ccmmuni ca|ive capi|a|ism. Under-
s|ccd mcs| brcad|y, nec|ibera|i sm designa|es a
par|icu|ar s|ra|egy cf c|ass dcmi na|icn |ha| uses |he
s|a|e |c prcmc|e cer|ain ccmpe|i|i ve dynamics fcr
the beneht cf |he very ri ch. ln Dumni|`s and Lvy`s
wcrds, Nec|iberali sm is a new s|age cf capi |a|i sm
|ha| emerged in the wake cf | he s|ruc|ural crisi s cf
|he !70s. l| expresses |he s|ra|egy cf |he capi|a|is|
classes i n alliance wi|h upper managemen|, specih-
cally hnanci a| managers, in|endi ng |c s|reng|hen |heir
hegemcny and expand i| glcba||y.` Less a s|ra|egy fcr
prcduc|icn |han fcr |he |ransfer cf wea||h |c |he very
3 Gerard Dumeni l and Domi ni que Levy, The Crisis of
Neoliberalism, Cambridge, MA: Harvard Uni versi ty Press,
201 1 , 1 .
COMMON AND COMMONS 123
rich, neoliberali sm places the "needs of money . . . over
those of producti on. "4 Pursued through pol i ci es of
privatization, deregulati on, and fnanci alization, and
buttressed by an ideology of private property, free
markets, and free trade, neoliberal i sm has entailed
cuts in taxes for the ri ch and cuts i n protections and
benefts for workers and the poor, resulti ng in an expo
nential i ncrease i n inequality.
Communicati ve capitali sm is an i deologi cal for
mation wherei n capitali sm and democracy converge
in networked communi cati on technol ogi es. Ideal s of
access, i ncl usi on, di scussi on, and part i ci pati on take
material form in the expansi on and intensifcation of
gl obal telecommuni cat i ons. Changes in i nformati on
networks associated with digitalizati on, speed, and
storage capacity accelerate and i ntensi fy elements of
capi tal i sm and democracy, consoli dat i ng t he two i nto a
si ngle i deol ogi cal formati on:'
4 Doug Henwood. Wall Street. London: Verso. 1 998. 237.
5 For more on communicative capitalism. see my Publicity
Secret. Ithaca. NY: Cornell University Press. 2002; Blog
Theory. Cambridge. UK: Polity. 2010; and the frst chapter
of Democracy and Other Neoliberal Fantasies. Durham. NC:
Duke Uni versi ty Press. 209.
The rela|icn be|ween necliberali sm and ccmmu-
ni ca|ive capi|ali sm i s his|cri cal and ccn|i ngen|. ln
princi p|e, a ccnvergence be|ween capi |alis| and demc-
cra|i c i deals i n ne|wcrked ccmmuni ca|icns cculd have
acccmpani ed heynesian eccncmi c pcli ci es . ln ac|u-
ali |y, nec|iberalism and ccmmuni ca|ive capi |a|ism
have been mu|ually rei nIrcing. Ne|wcrked infcrma-
|icn |echnclcgi es have been |he means |hrcugh whi ch
pecple have been subec|ed |c |he ccmpe|i|i ve i n|ensi|y
cf necliberal capi|ali sm. En|husias|i cally par|ici pa|ing
i n perscnal and scci al media| have broadbaru at
home! My new tablet lets me work anywhere! With my
smartphone, I alvays know what ' going on!we build
|he |rap |ha| cap|ures us, a |rap whi ch ex|ends beycnd
glcbal use cf mcbi |e phcnes and par|i ci pa|icn i n scci al
ne|wcrks |c enccmpass |he pmduc|icn cf |hese phcnes
and |he hardware necessary |c run |hese ne|wcrks.
lnves|men| i n infcrma|icn |echnclcgies drcve |he
nine|i es dc|-ccm bubble, feeding New Eccncmy hype,
genera|ing excess capaci |y, and leading |c nc discen:-
ible i ncrease i n prcduc|i vi |y apar| frcm |ha| in |he
high-|ech i ndus|p. Even af|er |he bubble burs|, New
Eccncmy rhe|cric ccn|inued |c ex|c| digi|aliza|icn fcr
enabling capi|alism |c cverccme i|s ccn|radi c|icns .
Doug Henwood indicts this di scourse for appeal
ing to utopian i mpul ses in anti -utopi an ti mes: "Fi nd
capitali sm too controlli ng'? No, it's spontaneous! Too
i negal itari an and exploitative? No, it overturns hierar
chi es! Vulgar, brutal, de-skilling, and mercenary? Au
contraire, it's creative and fun! Unstable? Nah, that's
just i ts mi racul ous dynami sm at work! "6
Widely celebrated for maki ng work fun, inspiri ng cre
ati vi ty, and openi ng up entrepreneurial oppmtuni ti es,
networked i nformat i on and communi cati on technology
contiibuted to the producti on of new knowledge-based
enterpri ses. Its more pronounced l egacy, however, has
been widespread de-skilli ng, surveillance, and the
accel erati on and i ntensi fcati on of work and cul ture:
the freedom of "telecommuti ng" qui ckly morphed
i nto the tether of 24/7 avai l abi l i ty, permanent work.
Descri bi ng a key contradi cti on of communi cati ve capi
tali sm, Franco Berardi writes, "If you want to survive
you have to be competi ti ve and i f you want to be com
petitive you must be connected, recei ve and process
cont i nuousl y an i mmense and growi ng mass of data,"
and hence under constant soul -destroyi ng pressure to
6 Doug Henwood. After the New Economy. New York: The
New Press. 2005. 37.
keep up, stay alert, remain motivated. 7 Communicati on
technol ogies made capi tal i sm acceptabl e, exci ti ng, and
cool, i mmunizi ng it from critique by rendering critics
into outmoded technophobes . At the same time, these
technologies provided the basic components neces
sary for neoliberal ism's acceleration of capitali sm, not
to menti on a bunch of super-fun di versi ons enabl i ng
people to feel radi cal and connected while playing on
thei r l aptops.
Communicati on technologi es contribute to the di s
pl acement and di spersi on of cri ti cal energy such
that even as i nequal i ty has i ntensi fed, formi ng and
organizi ng a coherent opposition has remained a per
si stent probl em-and t hi s in a setting lauded for the
way it provides everyday people with new capacities
for i nvolvement. Patti ci patory media i s personalizi ng
media, not only i n the sense of surveillance and track
ing but also i n the sense of the i njuncti on to fnd out for
onesel f and share one's opi ni on. Ubi qui tous personal
communi cati ons medi a turn our activity into passivity,
capturi ng it and putti ng it i nto the servi ce of capi tal
i sm. Angry, engaged, desperate t o do something, we
7 Franco Berardi . Precarious Rhapsody. New York: Mi nor
Compositi ons. 2009. 42.
lcck fcr evidence, ask ques|icns, and make demands .
Ye| |he infcrma|icn we need |c ac| seems perpe|ua||y
cu| cf reach, |here is a|ways scme|hing we misunder-
s|and cr dc nc| kncw.
The as|rcncmi ca| i ncreases in in!rma|icn |ha| cur
searching, ccmmen|ing, and par|i ci pa|ing genera|e
en|rap us in a se||ing cf ccmmuni ca|icn wi|hcu| ccm-
municabi|i|y. As ccn|ribu|icns |c ci rcui|s cf infcrma|icn
and affec|, cur u||erances are ccmmuni ca|ive|y equiva-
len|, |heir ccn|en|, |heir meani ng, is unimpcr|an|. Un a
b|cg, fcr example, gibberish wri||en by an au|cma|ed
bc| is as much a ccmmen| as any |hcugh|ful rehec|icn.
The specihc ccn|ribu|icn has nc symbcli c efhciency,
ra|her, i| marks cn|y |he fac| cf i|s having been made.
Thi s dec|ine in a capaci|y |c |ransmi| meaning, |c sym-
bc|ize beycnd a limi|ed disccurse cr i mmedia|e, |cca|
ccn|ex|, charac|erizes ccmmunica|icn`s reccnhgura|icn
in|c a primari |y eccncmi c fcrm. l| prcduces fcr circu-
la|icn, nc| use. As Hard| and Negri argue i n Empire,
ccmmunica|icn is |he fcrm cf capi|a|is| prcduc|icn
in whi ch capi |al has succeeded i n submi||ing scci e|y
en|ire|y and glcbally |c i|s regime. Having beccme
8 Michael Hardt and Antoni o Negri , Empire, Cambridge,
MA: Harvard Uni versi ty Press, 2000, 347.
production, communicati on fows and ci rculates wi th
li ttle to no regard for transmi tt i ng meani ng. Channeled
through cellular networks and fber-optic cables, onto
screens and i nto si tes for access, storage, retri eval , and
counti ng, communi cati on merges wi th the capital i st
ci rcuits it produces and ampl i fes.
Capital i st producti vity derives from its expropria
tion and exploitation of communicative processes.
Thi s does not mean that i nformat i on technologies have
replaced manufacturing; in fact, they drive a wide
variety of mi ni ng, chemi cal , and bi otechnologi cal
i ndustries. Nor does it mean that networked comput
i ng has enhanced producti vi ty outside the producti on
of networked computi ng itself. Rather, it means that
capi tali sm has subsumed communi cati on such that
communicat i on does not provi de a critical outsi de.
Communi cati on serves capi tal , whether i n affective
forms of care for producers and consumers, the mobi
l ization of sharing and expressi on as i nstruments for
"human rel ati ons" i n the workpl ace, or contributi ons
to medi a circui ts. 9
Mar's analysi s of value i n Ca
p
ital helps explain
how communi cation can be a vehi cle for capital i st
9 Eva Illouz. Cold Intimacies. Cambri dge. LK: Pol i ty. 2007.
subsump|icn. \a|ue, |cr Narx, derives |rcm |he scci a|
charac|er cf | abcr. Wha| is ccmmcn |c differen| ki nds
c| human |abcr is |ha| |hey are all |abcr in |he abs|rac|,
ccmpcnen|s cf |he |arger hcmcgenecus mass cf human
labcr. lrcduc|s cf labcr are crys|a|s cf |his scci a| sub-
s|ance, ccmmcn |c |hem all, |ha| is |c say, va|ues.

Ccmmunica|ive capi|a|ism seizes, priva|izes, and
a||emp|s |c mcne|ize |he sccial subs|ance. l| dcesn` |
depend cn |he ccmmcdi|y-|hing. l| direc||y explci|s |he
sccia| re|a|icn a| |he hear| cf value. Sccia| re|a|icns
dcn`| have |c |ake |he fan|as|ic fou cf |he ccmmcd-
i|y |c genera|e va|ue fcr capi |ali sm. \i a ne|wcrked,
perscna|ized ccmmunica|icn and infcrma|icn |echnc|-
cgi es, capi |ali sm has fcund a mcre s|raigh||oard way
|c apprcpri a|e va|ue.
Une c| |he cleares| expressicns c| ccmmuni ca|ive
capi|a|ism`s direc| exp|ci |a|icn cf |he sccial subs|ance
is Ne|calfe`s Law. The value cf a ccmmunica|icns
ne|wcrk i s prcpcr|icna| |c |he square cf |he number
c| i |s users. ' ' The basic idea is |ha| |he mcre pecple
10 Karl Marx, Capital (abridged) , ed. David Mc Lel l an, New
York: Oxford Uni versity Press, 2008, 1 5.
ll Bob Bri scoe, Andrew Odlyzko, and Benj ami n Tilly,
" ' Metcalfe's Law is Wrong, " July 2006, spectrum. ieee. org.
using a ne|wcrk, |he mcre valuable i| i s. Al|hcugh nc|
an accura|e rendi |icn cI hcber| Ne|ca|Ie`s i nven|cr
cI E|heme|) ac|ua| argumen|, |he law named Icr him
became Siliccn \a||ey gcspe|, i n pat1 because i | was
wide|y and en|husias|i ca||y preached by hepub|i can
en|repreneur Cecrge Cilder, beccming cne cI |he
ccre beli eIs anchcring claims Icr |he New Eccncmy.
During |he dc|-ccm bccm, ven|ure capi |alis|s and
i n|erne| en|repreneurs invcked Ne|cahe`s law |ike
a man|ra because i | seemed |c reveal |he secre| |c
success expressed in |heir vemacular cI 'ne|wcrk
eIIec|s, ` 'ms|-mcver advan|age, ` 'ln|erne| |ime,` and,
mcs| pcignan| cI a||, 'bui |d i| and |hey ccme. ` ' There
are mul|i p|e prcblems with Ne|calIe`s Law, i nc|uding
|hcse cf sca|e larger ne|wcrks may be mcre prcne |c
crashes and delays) and |he suppcsi|icns regarding
|he re|a|i cns between |he links |ha| a|| are ac|i ve,
say). Ncre i mpcr|an| i s |he Iac| |ha| sc many dc|-ccm
s|ar|ups Iailed. |here i s a gap be|ween |he va|ue cf a
ne|wcrk and |he mcne|iza|i cn cI |ha| value. The capi -
|alis|s didn` | kncw hcw |c |urn va|ue i n|c prch|.
Ncne|he|ess, |he |ru|h i n Ne|cahe`s Law is i |s assc-
ci a|icn cI va|ue wi|h |he ccmmuni ca|ive ne|wcrk i|seh.
1 2 Ibi d.
COMMON AND COMMONS 13 1
lf |he Web were us| a bunch cf pages, i| wculd nc| have
|he value i | has |cday. l| is precise|y because every
Web page can, i n principle, |ink tc any c|her page |ha|
|he Web has grcwn as i| has. ' \alue is a prcper|y cf |he
rela|icns, |he |inks , be|ween and wi |hi n pages . Cccgle`s
lagehank algcri|hm, fcr example, is cne cf |he mcs|
successful i nfcrma|icn re|neva| a|gcri|hms because i|
|akes linking i n|c acccun|. |chn Narkcff, i n |he busi-
ness sec|icn cf |he New York Times, exp|ains |ha| |he
basic |echnc|cgy |ha| made Cccg|e pcssible, kncwn
as 'lagehank,` sys|ema|i cally explci|s human kncw|-
edge and decisicns abcu| wha| is signihcan| |c crder
search resul|s . ' Icr Narkcff, wha|`s i n|eres|ing abcu|
lagehank and c|her such algcri|hms is |heir ex|racr-
di nary pc|en|i al fcr prch||hey mine and ex|rac|
ccmmcn kncw|edge. The same pcin| can be rendered
cri|i ca||y. ne|wcrked ccmmunica|icns are |he fcrm cf
capi|a|ism`s subs ump|icn cf |he scci al subs|ance |c i|s
|erms and dynami cs. Na||ec lasquine||i |hus argues
1 3 James Hendl er and Jennifer Col beck, "Metcalfe's Law,
Web 2. 0, and the Semantic Web, " cs . umd. edu .
1 4 John Markoff, "Entrepreneurs See a Web Gui ded by
Common Sense, " New York Times, November 1 2, 2006,
nyti mes. com.
that "Google is a parasi ti c apparatus of capture of the
val ue produced by common i ntelli gence. "1 5 He treats
the prestige that PageRank attends to (and refexively
enhances) i n terms of the "network value" of any gi ven
li nk. "Network value" describes a li nk's soci al rel a
ti ons: How many other links is it related to? Are those
l i nks related to other l i nks? How many? Googl e cap
tures this value, the l i nk's social substance, its place
wi thi n a general system of soci al relati ons .
Communicati on i n communi cative capital i sm joi ns
together the communi cati ve equi valence of contri bu
t i ons wi th the i nequal i ty of thei r network val ue. Rather
than a setting where a speaker deli vers a message to
a hearer who has to frst consi der matters of intent
and i ntelligibility (why is she telling me this and does
it make sene?), communi cative capital i sm is one
where messages are contributi ons to a ci rcul ati ng
fow of i nputs . As contri buti ons, messages are com
muni cativel y equi valent; thei r content, meani ng, and
i ntent i s i rrelevant. Yet this equi valence is accompa
ni ed by dynami c hi erarchi es and real i nequal i ty, a
1 5 Matteo Pasqui nelli. "Coogle's PageRank Algorithm: A
Diagram of the Cognitive Capitalism and the Rentier of the
Common Intellect." matteopasqui nel l i . com.
ccn|radic|icn perhaps bes| expressed as scme ccn-
|ri bu|icns are mcre equal |han c|hersbecause cf
|heir |inks. Cccgle search resu||s |el| us |ha| ne|wcrks
reccgnize inequa|i|y. Ncney and i nhuence make a
diherence. hesu||s can be paid fcr, manipula|ed fcr
a pri ce. The already prcminen| and pcpu|ar, |he ccr-
pcra|e fri end|y and media savvy, bea| cu| |he sma||
and rare, a phencmencn l discuss be|cw i n |enns cf
pcwer|aws . Wha| ma||ers here is |ha| |he ccn|radi c|icn
between equivalence and i nequa|i|y i n ccmmuni ca|ive
ccn|ribu|icns repea|s |he secre| cf |he expressicn cf
value |ha| Narx describes in ccnnec|icn wi|h ccm-
mcdi|i es. Equa|i|y in circu|a|icn res|s cn a dcminan|
rela|icn cf explci |a|icn.
We |eam frcm Narx |ha| mcreases m ccmmcdi |y
prcduc|icn resul| i n |he |css cf value cf any given ccm-
mcdi |y. Capi|ali sm as ccmmcdi|y prcduc|icn ccmes
up agains| |his |imi|. The vep dri ve |c prcduce mcre
resu||s in |he dimi nu|icn cf |he value cf pmduc|icn. l|`s
nc surpri se |ha| a glcba||y unleashed capi|alism wculd
enccun|er |he lcss cf an i ncen|ive |c make |hings, |ha|
is, a dec|ine i n |he wi||i ngness cf capi|a| |c i nves| in |he
prcduc|icn cf gccds . ln respcnse, i | has fcund unique
ways tc exp|ci t the sccia| substance, ways deep|y
i mbri ca|ed wi|h ccmmunica|ive capi |a|i sm`s i nunc-
ticns t c ccnnect, par|i ci pa|e, and share.
Cesare Casarinc |rea|s |he se|f-reprcducing excess
cf ccn|empcrary capi talism i n |erms cf |he ccmmcn.
Icr hi m, ccmmcn is nei|her an a||ribu|e ncr a |hing.
Like capi|a|ism itseh, |he ccmmcn i s a dynami c
prccess. l| is prcduc|icn. C|cssing Hard| and hegri ,
Casarinc wri|es, ncwadays |he ccmmcn is vir|ua||y
i ndis|inguishable frcm |ha| which ccn|inua||y cap-
|ures i|, namely, capi|al unders|ccd as a fully|ha| i s,
i n|ensive|y and ex|ensivelyglcba| ne|wcrk cf scci a|
re|a|icns. ' Casarinc dis|ingui shes |hi s sense cf |he
ccmmcn as a g|cba| netwcrk cf sccia| re|a|icns frcm
|he idea cf |he ccmmcns. The ccmmcns i s fnite and
charac|erized by scarcity. ln ccn|ras|, the ccmmcn is
innite and charac|eri zed by snrlns. The ccmmcn |hus
designates and takes the p|ace cf human |abcr pcwer
Narx`s scmce cf value), ncw reccncei ved in |he brcad-
est pcssi ble terms cf the pctentia| cf creativi ty, |hcught,
16 Cesare Casari no, "Su rpl us Common," In Praise of the
Common: A Conversation On Philosoph) and Politics, Cesre
Casarino and Antoni o Negri , Minneapoli s, MN: Uni versity of
Mi nnesota Press, 2008, 1 5.
knowledge, and communication as themselves always
pl ural , open, and producti ve.
Both common and commons are material and i mma
terial , natural and hi storical . Although the common
i ndi cates langage, affect, thought, and knowledge
that i s, communi cati on-it is not detached from its
material ity and hi storicity. Casari no thereby cl arifes
what the te1m "immaterial labor" tends to occlude.
Communication depends on a compl ex assembl age:
satell ites, fber-optic cables, broad spectrum band
wi dth, cellular networks, SIM cards, l aptops, mobil e
phones, personal media devices, screens, protocol s,
code, software, search engi nes, radi o signals, blogs,
i mages, emoti ons, catch phrases, j i ngl es, jargon, ci ta
tions, archives, fears, omi ssi ons, comfort, denial .
I nstal l i ng breaks i n this assembl age on the basi s of
an always questi onable material ity closes off what the
present opens, namely, the fecundity of communi cative
substance.
The move from commons to common helps explain
expl oi tati on and expropri ati on in contemporary capi tal
i sm. As Marx made clear, at least one of the problems
wi th the expropri ati on of the commons i s that a few get
a lot and some are lef with nothi ng, thus having to sell
their labor power. Privatization l eaves them deprived
of what they had. A contemporary versi on of thi s dep
rivation occurs through the widespread extensi on of
credit-whether i n the form of subpri me mortgages,
student loans, high-interest credit cards, or leverage
in i nvestment banking. Such forms of credit privatize
the future as they deprive the i ndebted of what they
will have. The common is different. There is expro
pri at i on, but an expropriati on that does not appear
to leave many with little. There is more than enough,
perhaps even too much. A questi on for the capture of
the common in capi tal i sm, then, is the cri me or harm:
If there is abundance or surplus, why is expropriation a
probl em? Or i s the probl em some ki nd of expl oi tati on,
and if so, what ki nd?
Networked communi cati ons provi de multi pl e
instances of expropriation and exploitati on of the
common. Here are si x: data, metadata, networks,
attention, capaci ty, and spectacl e. Each of these i s
an i nterconnected yet distinct exploitation of the
soci al substance. The noti on of the common, wi th
and agai nst the i dea of the commons, enables this
expl oitation to appear as expl oi tati on. In other words,
it enables us to grasp the precise ways i n whi ch
communi cati ve capitalism mns up agai nst its own
contradi cti ons.
First, Facebook and Amazon, l i ke many intemet
compani es, claim owners hi p of i nformat i on placed on
their sites. They clai m as their own property the prod
ucts of unremunerated creat i ve, communi cat i ve labor.
Proft ing from t he voluntary and unpai d labor of mi l
li ons, they extend i nto society expl oi tative practices
already coi ncident wi t h networked communi cati ons.
Coogle wouldn' t have sta1ted without free sofware
it rel ied origi nally on the Linux kerel . Bui ldi ng it
from scratch would have taken 270 devel opers roughly
eleven years and cost 4B! mill i on dol lars. 1 i
A second ki nd of expropriation i s of our metadata
our search patters, friends, and relationships . User
desire to navigate a ri ch i nformati on feld is exploi ted
for the access it provides to the larger feld of choi ces
and li nks. As we al ready saw i n Pasqui nell i 's account
of network value, Coogle treats the traces l ef by
searchi ng and l i nki ng as i ts own potenti al resource to
mi ne and market.
A third versi on of expropriation and exploitati on of
the soci al substance rei terates the di vi sion wi thi n the
17 I owe thi s poi nt to Mareell Mars. personal eommuni eation.
pecp|e, expcsing |his divisicn as a ma||er cf exp|ci |a|icn
ra|her |han exclusicn. l ca|| |his ne|wcrk explci|a|icn.
l| invc|ves |he s|ruc|ure cf ccmplex ne|wcrks.
Ccmp|ex ne|wcrks are charac|erized by free chci ce,
grcw|h, and preferen|ia| a||achmen|. Examples inc|ude
academic ci|a|icn ne|wcrks, |he pcpulari|y cf blcgs and
websi|es, as we|| as blcckbus|er mcvi es and bes|sellers,
all cI whi ch can be exp|ai ned i n |erms cf pcwerlaws.
As A|ber|-Lszl Barabsi demcns|ra|es, ccmplex ne|-
wcrks fcllcw a pcwer|aw di s|tibu|icn cI |inks. The i |em
i n ms| place cr a| |he |cp cf a gi ven ne|wcrk has |wi ce
as many |i nks as |he i|em i n seccnd p|ace, which has
mcre |han |he cne in |hird and sc cn, such |ha| |here
is very li ||l e difference amcng |hcse a| |he bc||cm bu|
massi ve differences be|ween |cp and bc||cm. Sc |c|s
cf ncvels are wri||en. Iew are pub|i shed. Iewer are
scld. A very few beccme bes|sellers. Ur |c|s cf ar|i c|es
are wri ||en. Iew are read. The same fcur are ci |ed by
everybcdy. The idea appears i n pcpu|ar media as |he
80/20 rule, |he winner-|ake-all cr winner-|ake-mcs|
charac|er cf |he new eccncmy, and |he |cng |ai l .
ln |hese examples, |he ccmmcn is |he general held
cu| cI which |he cne emerges. Explci|a|icn ccnsis|s in
effcr|s |c s|i mula|e |he crea|i ve prcduc|icn cf |he held
i n the i nterest of fndi ng, and then monet izing, the one.
Expandi ng the feld produces the one (or, hubs are an
i mmanent prope1ty of complex networks). Such exploi
tation contri butes to the expropriation of opportunities
for i ncome and paid labor, as i n the collapse of pri nt
joumali sm and academi c presses. We should recog
ni ze here a pri mary condi ti on of l abor under neol i beral
capitali sm. Now, rather than having a right to the pro
ceeds of one's labor by vi rtue of a contract, ever more
of us wi n or lose such that remunerati on is treated l i ke
a prize. In academi a, art, writi ng, archi tecture, enter
tai nment, desi gn, and i ncreas i ng numbers of fel ds,
people not only feel fortunate to get work, to get hi red,
to get pai d, but ever more tasks and projects are con
ducted as competitions, whi ch means that those doing
the work are not pai d unl ess they wi n. They work but
only for a chance at pay.
Thomas Hobbes' descri pti on of merit is helpful here.
I n Lviathan (chapter fourteen), Hobbes explai ns t hat
the one who performs frst in the case of a contract
merits that whi ch he i s to recei ve from the perfor
mance of the other. Because the frst has perormed (in
accordance wi th the contract), the second i s obi iged
to give the frst what is due hi m. In the i nstance of a
prize, we also say that the wi nner merits his wi nni ngs,
but there i s a difference: the prize i s the product of
the event, the contest . The relation between the one
awardi ng the pri ze and the wi nner depends on the good
wi ll of the giver. Nothi ng specifcally li nks the wi nner
to the pri ze. The i mpli cation of this shift from contract
to contest, from wages to prizes (a shift the consent
to whi ch i s currently being manufactured i n prut vi a
so-called reality televi si on competi tions), i s the mobi
lization of the many to produce the one. Without the
work of the many, there would not be one (who i s
necessarily conti ngent) .
The admi ni stration of US President Barack Obama
has made i nducement prizes a key part of i ts "Strategy
for Ameri can Innovati on. " Outli ni ng its vi si on for
a more competiti ve Ameri ca, the Whi te House
announced that government "should take advantage
of the experti se and i nsight of people both i nsi de and
outside" Washington by using "high-ri sk, high-reward
poli cy tools such as prizes and challenges to solve
tough problems. "1 8 What went unmentioned: the char
acteri sti cs of those i n a positi on to take ri sks . Contests
18 National Economic Counci l , "Strategy for American
Innovation, " whi tehouse. gov.
privil ege those who have the resources to take ri sks as
they transfer costs associ ated wi th doing work to con
testants (furtheri ng neoliberali sm's basic mechanism
of socializing risk and pri vatizing reward). Peopl e pay
to do work for whi ch t hey will not be remunerated. It
sounds l i ke art, bloggi ng, most w1iti ng, and most crea
ti ve work. Work i s done and then maybe paid for (the
wi nner) and li kel y not (the l osers) .
I n effect, each contestant faces the uncertai nty
typically associ ated with the capitalist who i nvests i n
production i n the hope of reali zi ng a proft. The di ffer
ence i s that rather than the outcome's bei ng determi ned
through competiti on in the market, the outcome of
the contest i s determined by a j udge. The onl y li nk
between the work and the remunerati on comes from the
pri ze giver, who i s now i n a posi ti on of j udge, charita
bl e giver, or benefcent lord and who has no obligati on
to any of the contestants. As a governmental pol i cy, or
approach to fundi ng, the l ogi c of the prize i s extended
i nto an acceptabl e work relati on.
One mi ght ask why i nducement prizes are a probl em:
no one forces anyone to enter t he competiti ons. The
probl em comes in with the shi ft in the approach to
work, when prizes become a general practice. Those
whc dcn`t chccse tc enter have fewer cppcrtuni ties fcr
ccntract-based wcrk because the amcunt cf ccntract-
based wcrk diminishes. The cverall he|d changes such
that pecp|e have |itt|e chcice but tc ccmpete under
these terms.
The next three i nstances cf ccmmuni cative exprc-
priaticn and exp|ci taticn highlight the i nstabi|ity cI the
distincticn between ccmmcn and ccmmcns. These are
attenticn, capaci ty, and spectacle.
The myriad entertainments and diversicns availab|e
cnli ne, cr as apps fcr smartphcnes, are nct free. We
dcn`t usual|y pay mcney direct|y tc Cmai|, YcuTube,
lacebcck, and Twi tter. These dcn` t ccst mcney. They
ccst ti me. lt |akes time tc pcst and wtite and time tc
read and respcnd. We pay with a||enticn and the ccst
i s fccus.
Uur attenticn isn` t bcund|ess. Uur ti me is hni te-
even as we try tc extract va|ue cut cf every seccnd
we dcn`t have time tc waste) . We cannc| respcnd tc
every utterance, c|ick cn every |ink, read every pcst.
We have tc chccse even as the pcssibility cf scme-
thing e|se, scmething wcndenu|, lures us tc search and
linger. Demands cn cur attenticn, i n uncticns fcr us
tc ccmmuni cate, parti ci pate, shareever s hriller and
mcre intenseare |ike sc many speed-ups cn the prc-
ducticn |ine, attempts tc extract frcm us whatever bit
cf mindshare is left.
Berardi thecrizes |hese speed-ups as a super-sat-
uraticn cf attenticn. The acce|eraticn prcduced by
netwcrk |echnclcgies and |he ccnditicn cI precaricus-
ness and dependence cf ccgniti ve |abcr, Icrced as i | i s
tc be subect tc the pace cf the prcduc|i ve netwcrk, has
prcduced a sa|ma|icn cf human a|ten|icn whi ch has
reached pathc|cgica| levels . ' ' He ccnnec|s i ncreases
in depressicn, anxi e|y, pani c discrder, sui ci de, and
the use cf psychc-pharmaceu|icals tc |his acce|era-
|icn, as human psyches and brai ns ccme up agai nst
their |imi|s and csci lla|e between the hyper-exci taticn
cI mcbi|i zed nervcus energy and wi|hdrawal and dis-
i nvestment. hecent research in neurcsci ence ccnmms
that the incessant i nunc|icns |c hnd cut, kncw, chccse,
and deci de are cver|cading and exhausting cur basi c
ccgnitive-emcticna| capacities. As a summary cf this
research exp|ained.
Nc matter how rational and high-mi nded ycu try tc
be, you can't make deci sion after deci sion without
1 9 Berardi , Precariozts Rhapsody, 71 .
paying a biological pri ce. It's different from ordi nary
physical fatigue-you're not consciously aware of
being tired-but you're low on mental energy. The
more choices you make throughout the day, the
harder each one becomes for your brai n, and eventu
ally it looks for shortcuts, usually i n either of two very
diferent ways. One shortcut is to become reckl ess:
to act impulsively instead of expending the energy
to frst think through the consequences. (Sure, tweet
that photo! What could go wrong?) The other short
cut is the ultimate energy saver: do nothi ng. Instead
of agonizing over decisions, avoid any choice. 20
The communi cative ci rcuits of contemporary capital
ism are loops of drive, i mpelli ng us f01ward and back
through excitati on and exhausti on. The more contribu
tions we make, the more we expand the feld i n whi ch
others have to deci de: respond or ignore? Either way
a choi ce has to be made and the more choi ces one i s
compel led to make, t he more exhausted one becomes.
When we respond to the invitations and i ncite
ments i n our media feeds, whether as pa1t of our work,
20 John Tierey. "Do You Suffer from Decision Fatigue?. "
New York Times Magaine. August 1 7. 2001 .
cur play, cur acti vi sm, cr cur ccnsumer practi ce, cur
ccntributicn i s an additicn |c an a|ready i nhnite ccm-
municati ve he|d, a |i tt|e demand cn scmecne else`s
attenticn, a |ittle i ncitement cf an affective respcnse,
a digi tal trace |hat can be stcredand cn and cn and
cn. The ccs| cf the expcnenti a|ly expanding circuit cf
i nfcrmaticn and ccmmuni caticn i s particu|ar|y high fcr
prcgressive and left pc|iti cal mcvements . Ccmpetiticn
fcr attenticn/u do we get our message across ?i n
a rich, tumu|tucus media envircnment tcc cften and
easi |y means adapting |c |his envircnmen| and making
i |s dynamic cur cwn, whi ch can resu|t i n a shift in
fccus frcm dcing tc appearing, that i s tc say, a shift
tcward thi nking i n terms cf getti ng attenticn in the
24/7 medi a cycle and away frcm larger questicns cf
bui|di ng a pc|i|i ca| apparatus with dura|icn. lnhni te
demands cn cur a||enticndemands we make cn each
cther and whi ch ccmmuni cati ve capi tali sm captures
and amplihesexprcpriate pclitica| energi es cf fccus,
crganizaticn, duraticn, and wi || vi tal tc ccmmunism as
a mcvement and a struggle. lt`s nc wcnder that ccm-
municati ve capi tali sm i s parti ci paticnist. |he mcre
partici paticn in netwcrked media envircnments, the
mcre traces tc hcard and energi es tc capture cr divet1.
The l imits of attention are not only the l i mits of indi
vidual s (and so can be resolved by di stributing l abor
and crowdsourci ng) . They are the l i mits that make
communi cation as such possible, as in, for example,
di sti nctions between signal and noise as well as those
characteri sti cs of our habits, environments, and pro
cesses that di rect our attention and thereby produce
the ci rcumstances of communi cati on. The l i mits of
attention are common. The common actual ized in con
temporary communi cation networks functions itself
as a means of expropri ati on. Overproducti on and
overaccumul ation of the common, then, are problems
unique to communi cative capital i sm. As Christian
Marazzi powerfull y demonstrates, "the di sproporti on
between the supply of i nformati on and the demand
for attenti on is a capitalistic contradi ction, an i nteral
contradiction of the value form. "21
The fact of attention's li mits points to the division
i nseparable from communi cati on: ideas and affects are
not infnitely transferable, accessible, communi cable.
Hardt mi sses this when he argues that shari ng i deas
i ncreases rather than decreases their "uti l i ty. " He
21 Chri stian Marazzi . Capital and Lnguage. trans. Gregory
Conti . Los Angeles. CA: Semi otext(e). 2008. 141 .
argues that in crder tc rea|ize their maxi mum prcduc-
tivity, i deas, images, and affects must be ccmmcn and
shared. When they are privatized their prcducti vi ty
reduces dramatica||y. H prcductivity means capac-
i ty tc circu|ate cr transmissibi|ity i ntc a variety cf
sectcrs, then increases i n prcductivity circu|aticn)
entai| dec|ines i n specihcity, accuracy, meaning,
and regi s|raticn. lresent i n ever wi der and mcre dif-
ferentiated settings, tc ever mcre vati ed audi ences,
i deas change. Thi s i s patt cf the p|easure i n mashi ng
tcgether videc and audic c|ipsscunds and i mages
take cn new meanings, beccming scmething different
frcm what they were befcre. Brands, |cgcs, i mages, and
i dentities |cse their unique signi|ing capacity when
they extend tcc brcad|y, tc tcc many different items
with tcc many different valenceswhi ch is exact|y
why ccrpcraticns hght tc keep |hem private. H every-
thing is hi ke, then hi ke dcesn`t mean anythi ng. Tc be
c|ear. l`m nct defendi ng prcperty rights in i deas and
i mages . hather, l am pci nti ng cut that i t is nct their
privatizati cn that fetters capi ta|i st prcducticn |ut the
cppcsite, name|y, their prc|iferaticn i ntc a massi ve,
22 Hardt, "The Common i n Communi sm, " 1 36.
ci rcu|ati ng hcw cf increasi ngly valueless ccntri buticns
i nscfar as each can ccmmand |ess and |ess attenticn.
The ccn|radi cticn i s parti cular tc ccmmuni cative capi-
talism i n that ccmmuni caticn cannct be expcnentia|ly
expanded as a fcrm cf capi tali st prcducticn. lt ccmes
up against |i mi|s i nherent tc ccmmuni caticn as such.
Casari nc argues that pctentia|ity i s ccmmcn. Whi le
pctenti ality i s fu||y embedded within capi tali sm,
i t dces nct belong tc capi tali sm. lt dcesn`| be|cng tc
anybcdy. But Casarinc mcves |cc qui ck|y tc link pcten-
tia|ity tc a ccmmcn that exceeds capi ta|ism`s grasp.
Ccmmuni cative capitali sm sei zes excess, surplus, and
abundance. lts dri ve i mpe|s us tcward extra and mcre,
new cppcrtuni|i es, unfcreseen p|easures, chances, and
ri sks that i we don't take someone else will, the very
chances and ri sks that derivatives ccmmcdify and cn
which high hnance speculates. Ccntempcrary capi ta|-
i sm securi tizes, mcnetizes, and pri vatives pctentia|.
lt dces sc thrcugh the excessive generaticn cf debt
whether cf indi vi duals, hcusehclds, cr states), thrcugh
the amplihed rcle cf specu|ative mance i n generating
ccrpcrate prcht, thrcugh the premediaticn cf events
such that massive amcunts cf energy and attenticn are
fccused cn what cculd cr might happen, and thrcugh
the i nci temen| c| crea|i ve wcrk |cward prcducing |he
cne.` lc|en|ia| i s |he gap in |he ac|ua|, |he diherence
wcr|h explci ting and be||i ng cn, as il|us|ra|ed by |he
arbi|rage and high-speed |rades cn which sc many
hedge funds rely.
The m|h ins|ance cf exprcpria|icn and exp|ci|a|icn
cI |he ccmmcn/ccmmcns i nvclves capaci|ies. |us| as
i ndus|rial labcr exprcpri a|ed craf| skill, breaking i|
i n|c i|s smalles| ccmpcnen|s and dis|ri bu|ing |hese
ccmpcnen|s vi a mechaniza|icn and assemb|y |ines, sc
dces ccmmuni ca|ive capi|alism par|ici pa|e i n |he dis-
pcssessicn cf cur previcus|y ccmmcn kncwledge and
capaci|ies . Ccmpu|er chi ps and prccesscrs, mcbi le
phcnes and mpB players are pri mary ccmpcnen|s
cf |he expansicn and accelera|icn cI di spcsabi|i|y.
Ccmpu|ers are antiqua|ed in under three years, mcbi |e
phcnes beccme c|d-fashicned if nc| cbsc|e|e) i n abcu|
eigh|een mcnths. We dcn` | learn hcw |c hx them, fcrget-
|ing |ha| |his is scme|hing we cnce migh| have kncwn.
Capaci |ies |c repair i|ems cf daily use have alsc di min-
ished. The suppcsi|icn i s |ha| we can us| buy a new
cne. Uf ccurse, |his was already |he case wi|h |he rapi d
23 Richard Grusi n, Premediation: ect and Mediality Afer
911 1 , New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 201 0.
expansicn c| dcmes|ic gccds a||er WWll. Niddle class
hcusehc|ds i n |he US and UK became |ess like|y |c
make |he |hi ngs |hey neededclc|hes, |urni |ureand
bcugh| |hem ins|ead. lressures cn hcusehclds |c earn
i nccme, even while raising kids and par|i ci pa|i ng in
|he care cf c|hers, has mean| i ncreased re|i ance cn
|ake away, |as|, and frczen fccd, wi|h a ccrrespcnding
decrease in capaci|i es |c prepare and ccck fresh Iccd.
Ccn|empcrary pcpular cul|ure highligh|s |he exprcpri-
a|i cn cf capaci|ies |ha| many i n |he midd|e and fcrmer
mi dd|e class cunen||y experi ence. Televisicn exper|s
prcvide guidance in hcusehc|d crganiza|icn, basi c
cccking ski||s, and hcw |c ge| a|cng wi|h c|hers.
hecliberal |rends in higher educa|icn ex|end |hese
dynami cs | c |he universi |y. i n a scci e|y wi |hcu| ski ||s,
whc needs a degree: Capi|alism nc lcnger requi res
a ski||ed, educa|ed middle class, sc mass universi|y
educa|icn is nc lcnger necessary. l| dcesn` | |ake as
many pecp|e as we have |c servi ce |he |cp 1 percen|,
sc mcst cI us are nc| needed any mcre except as |he
held cu| cf which |he cne can emerge) . ln a se||ing |ha|
reduces educa|icn |c kncwledge, kncwledge |c in|cr-
ma|icn, and i nfcrma|icn |c da|a, we are |c|d |ha| we
can hnd cu| any|hing we wan| |c kncw by gccgling i|.
ln a nu|shell. |hings dc i | fcr us sc tha| we dcn`t have
|c. We dcn`| need prcfesscrs |c |e|| us, cr a| |eas| nc|
very manya ccup|e cf great uni versi|ies can prcb-
ably supp|y a|| |he |awyers, sci en|is|s, bankers, and
ncve|is|s a ccun|ry needs and if nc|, we|l, |here is a
g|cba| eli|e frcm whi ch |c draw) . Ve` ve cu|scurced
basic skillsr, |hey` ve been exprcpri a|ed frcm us .
The six|h ins|ance cf explci|a|icn and exprcpri a-
|icn in ccmmuni ca|ive capi|a|ism is spec|acle. ln Th
Coming Community, Cicrgic Agamben presen|s |he
spec|ac|e as |he ex|reme fcrm cf |he exprcpri a|icn cf
the Ccmmcn. Thrcugh spec|ac|e, we are dispcssessed
cf |he very pcssibi |i|y cf a ccmmcn gccd. We are
audience fcr, witnesses |c, scme dramati c event hap-
peni ng scmewhere else |c scmecne else. Ye| inscfar as
the very appeal, the affec|ive charge, cf |he spec|ac|e
is i |s mass quali |y, |he way i| makes us fee| ccnnec|ed
tc a |arger we tc whi ch we be|cng, the spec|acle
re|urns |c us cur |inguis|ic na|ure in an inver|ed fcrm.
l| explci ts cur aspiraticns fcr ccmmcn being, uses |hem
agains| us as a mcde cf ccmmunica|ive pcwer |hrcugh
whi ch we are held cap|i ve whi|e a very few prch|, and
24 See Gij s van Oenen, "lnterpassi ve Agency, " Theory &
Event 1 4. 2, 201 1 .
yet c||ers a gli mpse c| |he pcssibi|i ty c| a pcsi|i vi ty |hat
migh| be used agains| i|. `
Agamben wcrks |rcm a di|emma expressed by Cuy
Debcrd. i n |he sccie|y c| |he spec|ac|e, |he |anguage
c| rea| ccmmuni ca|icn has been |cs| and a new
ccmmcn |anguage has ye| |c be |cund. Debcrd wri|es,
Spec|acu|ar ccnsump|icn preserves |he c|d cul|ure i n
ccngea|ed |cm, gci ng sc |ar as |c recupera|e and redi|-
|use even i|s nega|ive mani|es|a|icns, in |hi s way, |he
spec|ac|e`s cu||ura| sec|cr gives cver expressicn |c wha|
|he spec|ac|e i s imp|ici||y in i|s |c|a|i |ythe commu
nication of th inommunicabl. A gam ben res pcnds
|c |he exprcpri a|icn cI ccmmunica|ivi |y |ha| Debcrd
identihes by |urning the prcblem i n|c |he sclu|icn. He
uses |he spec|acle agai ns| i |seh. The inccmmuni cab|e
dissc|ves |he gap be|ween |he language |cs| and |he
language |c be |cund. l| can be ccmmuni ca|ed. lnsc|ar
as the inccmmuni cab|e is ccmmcn, i| persi s|s beycnd
even |he mcs| ex|reme a||emp|s a| i|s exprcpria|icn.
25 Gi orgio Agamben, The Coming Community, trans.
Mi chael Hardt , Mi nneapol i s, MN: Uni versi ty of Mi nnesota
Press, 1 993.
26 Guy Debord, The Society of the Spectacle, t rans. Donald
Ni cholson-Smi t h, New York: Zone Books, 1 999, 1 33.
The spectac|e |hus ccntains i ts cwn cverccming. The
exprcpriaticn cf |anguage i n |he spec|acle cpens up a
new experi ence cf language and linguis|i c being. hct
|his cr |ha| ccn|en| cI language, bu| |anguage itsel nc|
|his cr that |rue prcpcsiticn, but the very fac| |hat cne
speaks.
Agamben |rea|s ccmmuni ca|icn rehexively. he |urns
frcm what is sai d |c that scme|hing is sai d. Nc| cn|y
is a nega|ive ccndi|icn es|rangemen| frcm li nguis|i c
bei ng) uea|ed as a pcsi|i ve cpening new experi ence
cf be|cnging), bu| i |s pcsi|ivi|y i s a result cf rehexiv-
i |y. Language tums cn itsel lreud discusses dri ve as
precisely |his |urni ng rcund upcn |he seh, a |uming
tha| invclves a shift frcm activity tc passi vi |y. Agamben
hnds pcsi|i ve pc|en|ia| in |he ccmmuni ca|icn cI inccm-
municabi li|y by rep|acing the acti ve aim cf saying
scme|hi ng wi|h the passive fac| cf having said. The
mcvement |rcm ccmmcns tc ccmmcn repeats the shif|
frcm ac|i ve |c passi ve, frcm desire |c dri ve. The fcrce
cf scarcity that characterizes the commons pushes
ac|icn, deci sicn, a chci ce fcr |his ra|her |han |ha|. The
ccmmuni ca|ive excess, |he surp|us comnwn, suggests
27 Agamhen, The Coming Community, 83.
a he|d cr milieu wherein ac|i vi |y has beccme passivi |y,
a mcde cf cap|ure cr en|rapmen| i n |he nc| ye| cr
perhaps. Scci al media |ake cur ensemble c| ac|icns
and re|um |hem |c us as an endless ccmmuni ca|i ve
ccmmcn. Cenera|icn i s fcr circu|a|icn as cur i mages
and affec|s, cpinicns and ccn|ribu|icns hcw rcund and
rcund, accumula|ing and dis|rac|ing.
Hard| and Casarinc appea| |c an idea cf |he ccmmcn
as |anguage, kncwledge, and affec|. They high|igh|
wha| drives ccn|empcrary capi|ali sm, wha| ccmmuni-
ca|i ve capi|a|ism exprcpri a|es and explci|s. And |hey
bring cu| emanci pa|cry pcssibili|ies a|ready presen| i n
cur se||i ng, in par|i cu|ar |he ccmmcn whi ch exceeds
i |s cap|ure in capi |a|ism and |hereby hclds cu| |he
pc|en|i al |cr an au|cncmcus ptocess |ha| cculd des|rcy
capi |a| and crea|e scme|hing en|irely new. Hard|
argues |ha| |hrcugh |he increasing cen|rali |y c| |he
ccmmcn i n capi |alis| prcduc|icn|he prcduc|icn cf
i deas, affec|s, scci a| re|a|icns and |crms cf |ifeare
emerging |he ccndi|icns and weapcns fcr a ccmmuni s|
prcec|. lnscfar as each perscn i s prcduc|ive as an
28 Hardt, "The Common i n Communi sm, " 1 43.
expressive, |eeli ng, ccmmunica|i ng being and insc|ar
as all are prcduc|i ve in |heir ccmmuni ca|i ve i n|errela-
|icns|cge|her we prcduce |he sccial subs|ance |ha|
ccns|i |u|es usany cwnership cr prch| is clear|y |he||.
Under ccmmuni ca|ive capi|ali sm, such apprcpria|icn
cI |he sccial subs|ance i s visib|e and undeniab|eand
|hus a grcund Icr argumen|s cn behah cI glcba|, guar-
an|eed inccme. |here is nc cne whc dces nc| ccn|nbu|e.
A| |he same |i me, hcwever, |he very ccmmuni ca|ive
prac|i ces capi|alism drives and explci |s en|rap us i n
circui|s Ircm whi ch escape seems i mpcssib|e. par|i ci -
pa|icn is perscnaliza|icn, |he mcre we ccmmuni ca|e,
|he |ess is ccmmunica|ed, expansicns i n expressicn
and creativi|y prcduce |he cne ra|her |han a ccllec|ive
c| |he many. The challenge, |hen, ccnsis|s i n breaking
wi th curren| prac|i ces by insi s|ing cn and in|ensi|ying
|he divi sicn c| and in |he ccmmcn. Ccn|inui ng i n |he
hcw, persis|ing in the repe|i|icns c| dri ve, we cver and
cver reccns|i|u|e capi|alism`s basic dynami c, perhaps
genera|ing |he pcssi bili ty c| anc|her crganiza|icn c|
sccia| |iIe bu| alsc and a| |he same |ime hi ndering
|ha| pcssibi li|y |rcm being realized.' Capi|ali sm
29 Moi she Postone, "Rethi nki ng Marx (i n a Post-Marxi st
World) ," obeco. no. sapo. pt/mpt . ht m.
demands change, permanent revc|uticn, cnsi s. Bcm
cu| cf cppcsi|icn |c p|anni ng, nec|iberalism in par-
ticu|ar ||uives cn shcck and emergency, ccnverging
ye| again wi|h ccmmuni ca|ive capi|ali sm i n i|s mcde
cf spec|acle. Tc persi s| in |he prac|i ces |hrcugh whi ch
ccmmunica|ive capi|ali sm explci|s |he sccia| sub-
s|ance, |hen, i s |c fai | |c use divisicn as a weapcn cn
beha|f cf a ccmmunis| prcec|.
Divisicn i s ccmmcn. We have |c seize i |.
Chap|er live
Desire
I
n a wide|y ci |ed essay published i n ! , Wendy
Bmwn uses Walter Benamin`s |erm left me|an-
chc|y |c di agncse a melanchclia cf |he ccn|empcrary
Lef|. ' Her ccncem is wi |h |he fears and anxie|ies cf a
Lef| |ha| is backward-|ccking, seh-punishing, a||ached
|c i|s cwn fai lme, and seemingly i ncapab|e cf envi-
sicning an emancipa|c; egali|ari an fu|ure. Ti mely
and evcca|ive, Brcwn`s essay seemed |c cap|me a
|ru|h abcu| |he end cf a cer|ain sequence cf |he Ncr|h
Ameri can, Bri|i sh, and Eurcpean Lef|. A||uned |c |he
ends and lcss cccasicned by |he disin|egra|icn cf |he
we previcusly held in ccmmcn by |he disccurse cf
ccmmunism, Brcwn prcvided an cppcr|uni|y |c rehec|
cn |he |ai lures and ccn|inui|ies in lef| prcects in
|erms cf |he desires |ha| sus|ain |hem. Her |rea|men|
cf a |cs| his tcri cal mcvemen| |hus sugges|ed a kind
1 Wendy Brown, "Resi sti ng Left Melancholy," boundary 2
26: 3, 1 999, 1 9-27.
cf |ef| ccming |c grips wi|h |he reali |y cf nec|ibera|
capi|a|i sm and |he defea| cf |he we|Iare s|a|e.
head frcm |he dis|ance cf mcre |han a decade,
hcwever, Brcwn`s essay ncw appears |c err i n i|s basi c
acccun| cf wha| was |cs| and why. Her di scussi cn cf
Benamin i s mis|eading. Her |rea|men| cf lreud i s cne-
sided. hcne|heless, by analyzing |he Lef| i n |erms cf a
general s|ruc|ure cf desire, Brcwn cpens up pcssibi|i-
|ies fcr reccnceiving ccmmunis| desire, pcssibili|ies
|his chap|er ex|ends as i | cu|lines a m|h ccmpcnen| cf
cur ccn|empcrary se||i ng |ha| ccmmunism |ags . a cc|-
lec|ive desire fcr ccl|ec|ivi|y.
Lef|-Ving Nelanchc|y is |he |i|le cf Benamin`s
! B! revi ew cf |he pce|ry cf Eri ch hs|ner. hs|ner
was a wel|-regarded pce|, ncve|is|, and cuma|-
is| during |he Wei mar pericd. Benami n describes
hs|ner`s pce|ry as giving way |c |he ccmp|acency and
fa|a|ism cf |hcse whc are mcs| remc|e frcm |he prc-
cesses cf prcduc|icn and whcse cbscure ccur|ing cf
2 Walter Benj ami n, "Left -Wi ng Melancholy," t rans. Ben
Brewster, Walter Benjamin, Selected Writings: 1 931-1 934,
volume 2, part 2, ed. Michael W. Jenni ngs, Howard Ei land,
and Gary Smith, Cambridge, MA: Harvard Uni versi ty Press,
1 999, 423-27.
DESI RE 1 59
|he s|a|e cf |he marke| is ccmparab|e |c |he a||i|ude
cf a man whc yi e|ds himse|f up en|ire|y |c |he inscru-
|ab|e acci den|s cf his diges|icn. ` ln a fm1her essay,
The Au|hcr as lrcducer, Benamin uses hs|ner as
|he exemp|ar cf |he new cbec|ivi|y, a |i|erary mcve-
men| |ha| Benamin argues has made th struggle
against poverty an cbec| cf ccnsump|icn. Quc|ing
a percep|ive cri|i cac|ua||y himse|I, wri|ing in
Lef|-Wing Nelanchc|yBenamin says, Wi|h |he
wcrkers mcvemen|, |his |ef|-wing radi ca| i n|e||igen|si a
has nc|hing in ccmmcn. l| i s, ra|her, a phencmencn cf
bcurgeci s deccmpcsi|icn . . . The radica|-|ef| pub|i ci s|s
cf |he s|amp cf hs|ner, Nehring, cr Tuchc|sky are |he
prc|e|arian mimicry cf decayed bcurgecis s|ra|a. Their
|unc|icn is |c prcduce, ftom |he pc|i |i ca| s|andpcin|,
nc| pat1ies bu| c|iques, frcm |he |i|erary s|andpcin|, nc|
schcc|s bu| |ashicns, |rcm the eccncmic standpcin|,
nc| prcducers bu| agen|sagen|s cr hacks whc make
a grea| disp|ay cf |heir pcver|y, and a banque| cu| cf
3 I bid. , 426.
4 Walter Benj ami n, "The Author as Producer," t rans.
Edmund Jephcott, Walter Benjamin, Selected Writing.: 1 931-
1 934, volume 2, part 2, ed. Mi chael W. Jenni ngs, Howard
Eiland, and Gary Smi t h, Cambri dge, MA: Harvard Uni versi ty
Press, 1 999, 768-782.
yawni ng emp|iness. As far as Ben amin i s ccncerned,
|ef|-wing wri|ers such as hs|ner are hacks wi|h nc
sccia| func|icn c|her |han renderi ng |he pc|i|i ca| si|u-
a|i cn i n|c amusing ccn|en| fcr pub|i c ccnsump|icn.
They |ransmi | |he appara|us cf prcduc|icn ra|her |han
|ransfcrm i|, assi mi|a|ing revc|u|icnary |hemes i n|c
|he bcurgecis appara|us cf prcduc|icn and pub|ica|icn
whi |e i n nc way p|aci ng i n ques|icn |he exis|ence cf
|he bcurgecis c|ass. Benamin wri|es, l dehne 'hack
wri|er` as a wri |er whc abs|ai ns i n pri nci p|e frcm
a|i ena|ing |he prcduc|ive appara|us frcm |he ru|ing
c|ass by i mprcvi ng i | i n ways servi ng |he i n|eres|s cf
sccia|ism. ` ln sum, Benami n`s cri|ique i n bc|h Lef|-
Wi ng Ne|anchc|y and The Au|hcr as lrcducer
tge|s in|e||ec|ual ccmprcmi se, adap|a|icn tc |he
marke|, and |he be|raya| cf |he wcrkers` mcvemen|,
par|icu|ar|y i nscfar as |his ccmprcmise, adap|a|icn,
and be|raya| banks cn and cans au|hen|ic revc|u|icn-
ary i mpu|ses already par| cf everyday prc|e|ian life.
Brcwn c|ai ms |ha| "lf melancholy i s Benami n`s
unambiva|en| epi|he| fcr |he revc|u|icnary hack whc
is, ma||y, a||ached mcre |c a par|icular pc|i|i ca| ana|-
ysis cr i dea|even |c |he fai|ure cf |ha| idea||han
5 Ibi d. , 776, 774.
OFSI RF 1 6 1
tc sei zmg pcssi bi |i|ies fcr radi ca| change i n |he
presen|. l disagree. Ncwhere in his revi ew cf hs|ner
dces Benami n fau|| him fcr a li ngeri ng at|achmen| tc
pcli|ica| i deals . Benamin makes |he cppcsi |e pcin|,
ccndemning hs|ner fcr wri |ing pcems |ha| are b|i nd
|c ac|icn because |hei r bea| vetj precisely fc||cws
|he nc|es acccrding |c whi ch pccr rich fc|ks p|ay |he
b|ues. Benamin descri bes hs|ner`s lyri ci sm as prc-
|ec|ing abcve all |he s|a|us i n|eres|s cf |he middle
s|ra|umagen|s, cmna|is|s, heads cf depar|men|s . . .
i | nc|i ceably abandcns any s|ri ki ng pcwer agains| |he
big bcurgeci si e. hs|ner`s melanchc|y i s a |rend,
a ccmmcdi|y. He i s nc| a||ached |c an ideal, he has
ccmprcmised revcluticnary ideals by reducing |hem |c
ccnsumer prcduc|s.
lerhaps because her precccupaticn is wi|h |he i nad-
equacies cf |he ccn|empcrap Lf|, Brcwn dces nc|
emphasize |he ccmprcmise c| |he |eft me|anchcli c.
lns|ead she reads Benamin`s cri|ique cf hs|ner as
suggesting tha| senti ments themselves beccme |hi ngs
fcr |he leI| me|anchclic whc '|akes a' much pri de in |he
|races cf fcrmer spi ri|ua| gccds as |he bcmgeci s dc i n
6 Brown, "Resi sti ng Left Melancholy," 20.
7 Benjami n, "Left-Wing Melancholy," 426, 424.
their materi al goods . "' Brown locates i n this reifed loss
a point of contact with the contemporary Left: "We come
to love our left passi ons and reasons, our left analyses
and convicti ons, more than we love the existi ng worl d
that we presumably seek to alter wi th these terms or the
future that woul d be aligned with them. "8 Benj ami n,
though, i s not cri ti cizi ng a Left for i ts attachment to
left passi ons, reasons, analyses, and convi cti ons. He is
call ing out Kastner and the "new objectivity" trend for
their compromise and the resul ting "metamorphosis of
pol itical struggle from a compulsory deci si on i nto an
obj ect of pleasure, from a means of producti on into an
article of consumpti on. "9 Unli ke Brown's, Benjamin's
l eft melanchol i c subl i mates left commitment to revol u
tion and the proletariat, giving way to the bourgeois
vision of the existi ng world instead of holding fast to
revol utionary struggle.
Brown arges that "if the contemporary Left often
cl i ngs to the formati ons and formulations of another
epoch, one i n which the notion of unifed movements,
social total i ties, and cl ass-based pol i ti cs appeared
to be viable categori es of pol iti cal and theoretical
8 Brown. "Resisting Left Melancholy." 2 1 .
9 Benjamin. "Lft- Wi ng Melancholy." 425.
OFSI RF 1 63
ana|ysi s, |his means |ha| i| |i|era||y renders i|self a
ccnserva|i ve fcrce in his|crycne |ha| nc| cn|y mis-
reads |he presen| bu| i ns|a||s |radi |icnali sm in |he very
hear| cf i|s praxis, i n |he place where ccmmi|men| |c
ri sk and upheaval be|cngs. ' " ln cur presen| cf unde-
niab|e inequali|y, c|ass war, and cngcing capi|a|is|
cri si s, |he necessi|y cf unihed mcvemen|s and c|ass-
based ana|ysis i s undeniable i n a way i | perhaps was
nc| when Brcwn was wri|ing a| |he end cf nine|ies .
This c|ari|y he|ps i||umina|e Benamin`s cwn pcsi |icn
as cppcsi |e |c |he cne Brcwn |akes. His ccncern i s nc|
wi|h a |radi|icna|ism a| |he hear| cf praxis bu| wi|h |he
sub|i ma|icn cf lef| i dea|s in marke|-crien|ed wri|ing
and pub|ishing. Un|i ke Brcwn`s, Benami n`s le|| me|-
anchc|ic i s |he cne whc gives i n |c ccmplacency and
|a|a|i sm, cedi ng desire |ike |he sa|i a|ed man whc
can nc lcnger devc|e a|| his mcney |c his s|cmach. ' '
The mcs| valuable aspec| c| Brcwn`s analysis ccmes
when she |ums |c Ireud`s ! ! 7 paper cn melanchclia
|c pmvide an acccun| c| a par|i cular|y lef| s|ruc|ure cf
desire. As is we|| kncwn, Ireud dis|inguishes me|an-
chc|ia frcm mcmning. Ncuming respcnds |c |he lcss
1 0 Brown, "Resi st i ng Left Melancholy," 25.
1 1 Benj ami n, "Left -Wi ng Melancholy," 426.
cf an cbec| cf |cve, whe|her |ha| cbec| is a perscn,
ccun|ry, freedcm, cr idea|. 12 Uver |he |ime cf mcurn-
ing, |he subec| painfu||y and piecemeal wi|hdraws her
a||achmen| frcm |he |cs| cbec|. As in mcurning, |he
melanchc|ic subec| presen|s an absence cf in|eres| in
|he cu|side wcrld and a genera| inhibi|icn cf ac|ivi|y.
The crucial difference is |ha| |he melanchc|i c`s lcwering
cf se|f-regard is manifes| in a se|f-revi|ing |ha| ex|ends
|c |he very cver-ccng cf |he ins|inc| which ccmpels
evety living |hing |c c|ing |c |ife. The dea|h Jtive, |he
fcrce cf |css, refcrma|s |he s|ruc|ure cf desire i|seh.
Ireud wi|es, The me|anchchc displays scme|hing else
besides which is lacking in mcurni ngan ex|racrdinary
diminu|icn in his self-regard, an impcverishmen| cf his
egc cn a grand sca|e. ln mcuming i| is |he wcrld which
has beccme pccr and emp|y, i n me|anchc|ia i| is |he egc
i|se|f. The pa|ien| represents his egc tc us as wcr|h|ess,
incapab|e cf any achievemen| and mcra|ly despicable,
he reprcaches himseh, vilihes himse|f and expec|s |c
1 2 Si gmund Freud, "Mourni ng and Mel anchol i a," The
Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of
Sigmund Freud, Volume XIV (1 91 4-1 91 6): On the History of
the Psycho-Analytic Movement, Papers on Metapsychology and
Other Works, London: Hogarth Press, 1 959, 237-58.
DESI RE 1 65
be cas| cu| and punished.' ` Tc acccun| fcr |his dif-
ference in self-regard, Ireud dis|inguishes be|ween
mcuming`s ccnscicusness cf lcss and |he unkncwn and
unccnscicus dimensicn cf cbec| lcss in melanchcha.
Scme|hing abcu| |he me|anchchc`s |css remains unccn-
scicus. Even when |he melanchclic kncws tlt he has
lcs|, he dces nc| kncw 1vhat he ha |cs|, in wha| his lcss
ccnsis|s fcr him. lsychcanaysis addresses |his unccn-
scicus elemen| cf me|anchc|ic |css.
Ireud accep|s | he melanchc|i c subec|`s se|f-accu-
sa|icn|he subec| really is weak, dishcnes|, pe||y,
egcis|i c. Ye| he nc|es |ha| mcs| cf us, wi|h cur rea-
scnab|y heal|hy neurcses, dcn` | ackncw|edge |hese
limi|a|icns. We |ry tc hi de |hese weaknesses frcm
curselves and cthers. The accuracy cf |he me|anchcl-
i c`s seh-descrip|icn, |hen, i s basically ccrrec|. Ireud
accep|s i|. He j|he subec|j has |cs| his se|f-respec|
and he mus| have gccd reascn fcr |his. ` ` The rea|
ques|icn is why |he subec| has |cs| his self-respec|,
wha| |he gccd reascn fcr |his |css i s.
By way cf an answer, Ireud nc|es hcw in me|an-
chc|ia a cri|ical agency spli|s cff frcm |he egc, a vci ce
13 Ibi d. , 245.
14 Ibid. , 246.
cf ccnscience |ha| cri|icizes |he pccr egc fcr all i|s
mcra| failings. He exp|ains |ha| c|inical experience
revea|s |ha| |he specihc cri |i ci sms |he melanchc|i c
leve|s agains| hi mse|f ccrrespcnd mcs| fully nc| |c
|he me|anchc|ic subec| himseh bu| |c cne whcm |he
subec| lcves cr shcu|d |cve. The seh-reprcaches are
reprcaches agains| a lcved cbec| whi ch have been
shif|ed away frcm i | cn |c |he pa|i en|`s cwn egc.
Wha| |he pa|i en| seems |c be saying abcu| hi mself is
rea||y abcu| scmecne else. The melanchclic subec|
|hus i s cne whc has narcissis|i cally iden|ihed himse|f
wi|h scmecne else, his lcved cbec|, ncw lcs|. ha|her
|han ackncwledging |he lcss, narcissi s|ic iden|ihca-
ticn prc|ec|s |he subec| fmm i|, bringing |he cbec|
in|c |he subect and enab|ing hi m t c keep i t as par1 cf
himse|f. This i den|ihca|icn is fraugh| inscfar as |here
i s much abcu| the |cved cbec| |ha| |he subect dces
nc| |cve|ha| |he subec| even ha|es. Tc deal wi|h |his
unavcwab|e ha|red, a special agency cf |he egc sp|i|s
cff |c udge and ccndemn |he lcved cbec|, ncw pat1 cf
|he sub ec| himself. Ireud explains, ln |his way an
cbec| |css was |ransfcrmed in|c an egc-lcss and |he
ccnhic| be|ween |he egc and |he |cved perscn in|c a
cleavage be|ween |he cri|ica| ac|ivi |y cf |he egc and
OFSI RF 1 67
|he egc as al|ered by iden|ihca|icn.' ` The answer |c
|he ques|icn cf |he subec|`s |css cf self-respec| |ums
cn |he cbec|. i|`s |he in|emalized cbec| whc is udged,
cri|icized, and ccndemned, nc| |he subec| a| a|l.
Brcwn uses Ireud`s acccun| cf me|anchclia |c
unders|and |he fears and anxie|ies preven|ing |he Lf|
frcm revising i|s anachrcnis|ic habi|s cf |hcugh|. She
high|igh|s |he persis|ence cf melanchc|ic a||achmen|
|c a lcs| cbec|, a persis|ence |ha|, in superceding
ccnscicus desires |c reccver, |c mcve cn, renders me|-
anchclia a s|ruc|ure cf desire, ra|her |han a |ransien|
respcnse. She emphasizes as well |he unccnscicus,
unavcwed and unavcwable, na|ure cf melanchc|ic
lcss. And she nc|es |he shif| cf |he reprcach cf |he
lcved cbec| cn|c |he lef| subec|, a shif| |ha| pre-
serves |he lcve cr idea|iza|icn cf |he cbec| even as
|he lcss cf |his |cve is experienced in |he suffering cf
|he me|anchcli c. heccun|ing scme cf |he many lcsses
cn |he Lf|cf lccal and in|erna|icnal ccmmuni|y, cf a
mcra| and pcli|i ca| visicn capab|e cf sus|aining pc|i |i-
cal wcrk, cf a his|cri ca| mcmen|Brcwn asks whe|her
|here migh| alsc be a s|ill unccnscicus, unavcwed
lcss, name|y, cf |he prcmise |ha| |ef| analysis and
1 5 I bi d. , 247, 248.
lef| ccmmi|men| wcu|d supply i |s adheren|s a c|ear
and cer|ai n pa|h |cward |he gccd, |he righ|, and |he
|rue. ` ` She sugges|s |ha| |his prcmise foued |he
basis fcr lel se|f-lcve and fellcw feeling. Sc lcng as i|
remains fcunda|icnal, unavcwed and un|ransfcrmed, i|
will dccm |he Lef| tc self-des |ructicn.
Ireud`s s|udy cf me|anchc|ia enab|es Brcwn |c
bring |c ligh| |he disavcwed a||achmen| underlying |he
herce deba|es cver pcs|-s|ruc|uralism and |he s|a|us
cf |he subec| charac|eri s|ic cf a par|i cu|ar mcde cf
lef| |heoj. She asks, Vha| dc we ha|e |ha| we migh|
preserve |he idea|iza|icn cf |ha| rcman|ic lef| prcmise:
Vha| dc we punish |ha| we migh| save | he cl d guaran-
|ees cf |he Lef| frcm cur wra|hful disappcin|men|:
Her answer i s |ha| ha|red and punishmen| are symp-
|cms, s|rikes we wage upcn curselves sc as |c preserve
|he prcmises and guaran|ees cf |ef| analysi s. Sccrn fcr
iden|i|y pc|i|i cs and disparagemen| cf disccurse analy-
sis, pcs|mcdemi sm, and |rendy |i |erary |hecry is |he
disp|aced fcrm cf narci ssis|ic a||achmen| |c Narxis|
cr|hcdcxy. l|`s an a||ack ai med a| an in|ericrized cbec|,
1 6 Brown, "Resi sti ng Left Melanchol y, " 20, 21 , 22.
17 I bi d. , 22.
OFSI RF 1 69
the lcved and lcs t cbect tha| prcmised uni ty, certain|y,
clari|y, and pcli|i cal relevance.
A beneht cf Brcwn`s discussicn is its i llumi naticn cf
a cer|ain fan|asy in |ef| desire. lef| me|anchclia ex|rac|s
his|cri ca| expetiences cf divisicn, ccn|es|a|icn, and
be|rayal frcm |he Narxis| |radi|icn in |hecry and
sccia|is| s|a|es in prac|i ce. ln |heir p|ace i| leaves an
i nvincible, reihed hgure cf |he Nas|er, cne |ha| is i|self
spli| be|ween i|s au|hcri|a|ive and i|s cbscene enac|-
men|s . As Brcwn sugges|s, when |ef|is|s, s|uck in |heir
fai |ure, blame |hi s fai|ure cn pcs|-s|ruc|ura|is| |hecry
and i den|i|y pc|i|ics, |hey disavcw |he ncn-exis|ence
cf such a Nas|er. C|inging |c an i mpcssible, fan|as|ic
Narxism that never existed, |hey prctect |hemselves
frcm ccnfrcn|i ng |he lcss cf i|s his|cri ca| |i me, |he end
cf |he sequence beginning in I ! 7 cr, perhaps, ! 78.
They shie|d themselves frcm |he passing away cf a |ime
when i t made sense |c thi nk in |erms c| the de|ermin-
i sm cf capi|a| and |he primacy cf class.
ls Brcwn right: Having diagncsed left i mmcbi|i ty
and self-lca|hing as melanchcli c, dces she ccrrec||y
i den|ify wha| was |cs| and what is re|ained, wha| is dis-
p|aced and wha| is disavcwed: And dces her acccun|
cf me|anchclia as a s|ruc|me cf desire exhaus| |he
pc|en|ial cf her mcve |c Ireud, cr migh| addi|icna| ele-
men|s cf his analysis a|sc prcve helpful fcr ccming |c
grips wi|h |he Leh and |he fcrce cf lcss:
Benamin`s acccun| cf |ef|-wi ng melanchcly sugges|s
a |css cf a differen| scr|. |he be|raya| cf revclu|icnary
i dea|s, cf |he prcle|aria|. He cri|icizes hs|ner nc| cnly
fcr c|inging |c a fcrm marked by |he depi c|icn cf |he
bru|a|i|ies cf everyday |ife bu| fcr ccmmcdifying |his
fcrm, fcr packaging up |he |races cf spiri|ual gccds
as sc much ccmmerci a| ccn|en| |c be marke|ed and
scld |c |he bcurgecisi e. As Benamin argues in The
Au|hcr as lrcducer, hcwever revclu|icnary |he pc|i|i-
cal |endency assccia|ed wi|h |he new cbec|ivi |y
may appear, i| ac|ually func|icns in a ccun|errevclu-
ticnary manner as lcng as the wri |er experi ences his
sclidari|y wi|h |he prcle|aria| i declcgically and nc| as
a prcducer. ' A||ached |c an idec|cgica| experience
cf sc|idari|y, |he lef| melanchclic disavcws his prac-
|i ce, |he prac|ica| effec| cf his cuma|is|ic ac|ivi|i es.
Wha| Brcwn ccns|rues as a real lcss cf scciali s| i dea|s
fcr which |he Lef| ccmpensa|es via an cbs|ina|e and
narcissis|ic a||achmen| |c a Ian|as|i c cbec|, Benamin
presen|s as a ccmprcmise and be|rayal |ha| ideclcgi ca|
1 8 Benjami n, "The Author as Producer, " 3.
OFSI RF 1 71
i den|ihca|icn wi|h |he prcle|ari a| a||emp|s |c displace.
Brcwn sugges|s a Lef| defea|ed and abandcned in |he
wake cf hi s|cri cal changes. Benamin ccmpels us |c
ccnsider a Lef| |ha| gave in, scld cu|.
Ireud`s ges|ure |c |he melanchclic`s lcss cf seh-
respec| pcin|s in a si milar direc|icn. Describing a
wcman whc |cud|y pi|ies her husband fcr being |ied
|c such an incapab|e wife, Ireud cbserves |ha| she
is really accusing her husband cf incapaci|y. Her seh-
reprcaches, scme cf which are genuine, are allcwed
|c cb|rude |hemse|ves, si nce |hey he|p |c mak |he
c|hers and make reccgni|icn cf |he uue s|a|e cf affairs
impcssib|e. These reprcaches, Ireud wri|es, derive
frcm the prcs and ccns cf |he ccnhi ct cf lcve that has
led |c the lcss cf lcve. ' ' Night i| nc| be the case |ha|
|he wcman righ|ly reccgnizes her inabi|i|y |c md a
husband capab|e cf sus|aining her desire: Nigh| she
nc| be punishing herseh fcr ccmprcmising, fcr making
due, fcr allcwing |he prcs and ccns cf |he ccnhic| cf
lcve |c ccns|rain her desire as she acquiesces |c a
rea|i|y cf accep|ance and mcdera|icn |c which |here
seems |c be nc a||ema|ive: lf |he answer |c |hese ques-
|icns is yes, |hen |he wcman`s |css cf self-respec| is
1 9 Freud, "Mouring and Melanchol ia," 24 7.
an i ndi cati on of the guilt she feels at havi ng ceded her
desi re. To use the terms gi ven to us by Lacan, "the only
thi ng one can be guilty of is giving ground relative to
one's des i re. "20 The woman's i denti fcation with her
husband i s a compromi se, the way she subli mates her
desi re so as to make hi m the object of it. The feroci ty of
her super-ego and the unrelenti ng puni shment to whi ch
i t subj ects her i ndi cates that she has gi ven up on the
impossi bi l i ty of desi re, des i re's own consti tutive dis
satisfacti on, to accommodate herself to everyday l i fe.
Freud notes the deli ght the super-ego takes i n
torment as well as the fact that the subject enjoys it.
He writes:
If the love for the obj ect-a love which cannot be
gi ven up though the object itself i s gi ven up-takes
refuge in narcissistic identifcation, then the hate
comes i nto operati on on thi s substi tuti ve obj ect,
abusing it, debasing it, making i t suffer and deriving
sadistic sati sfaction from its suffering. The self
tormenting in melancholia, whi ch i s without doubt
enjoyable, signifies, j ust like the corresponding
20 Jacques Lacan. The Ethics of Psychoanalysis: The
Seminar of Jacques Lacan, Book V/. ed. Jacques-Al ai n Mi l ler.
trans. Denni s Porter. New York: Norton. 1997. 32 1 .
DESI RE 1 73
phencmencn | n cbsess|cn neurcs| s, a sat| sIac-
t|cn cf trends cf sad| sm and hate wh| ch relate tc an
cbject, and wh| ch have been |urned rcund upcn the
subj ect`s cwn selI.
Z
Ireud uses |he |erminc|cgy cf |he drives he se|s cu|
i n lns|inc|s and Their \i cissi|udes. As Lacan makes
clear, wha| is crucia| in |he Ireudian acccun| cf |he
drives is |he way drive prcvides |he subec| wi|h
anc|her way |c ency. Unable |c sa|i sfy cr main|ain
desire, |he subec| encys in ancther way, |he way cf
|he drive. Addi|icna||y, in ccn|ras| wi|h desire, dtive
i sn`| a ques| |or a fan|as|ic lcs| cbec|, i|`s |he fcrce
lcss exer|s cn |he he|d cf desire. Drives dcn`| circu|a|e
arcund a space |ha| was cnce cccupied by an idea|,
i mpcssible cbec|. ha|her, drive is |he sub|i ma|icn cf
desire as i| |urns back in cn i|seh.
An emphasis cn |he drive dimensicn cf me|anchclia,
cn Ireud`s a||en|icn |c |he way sadism i n me|anchc|ia is
|urned rcund upcn |he subec|`s cwn se|f, leads |c an
i n|erpre|a|icn cf |he general ccn|curs shaping |he Lef|
|ha| is differen| frcm Brcwn`s . lns|ead cf a Lef| a||ached
|c an unackncwledged cr|hcdcxy, we have cne |ha| has
21 Freud, "Mourni ng and Melanchol ia," 250.
given way cn |he desire fcr ccmmunism, be|rayed i|s his-
|crica| ccmmi|men| |c |he prc|e|ari a|, and sub|ima|ed
revc|u|icnary energies in|c res |cra|icni s| prac|ices
|ha| s|reng|hen |he hc|d cf capi|alism. This Lef| has
rep|aced ccmmi|men|s |c |he emancipa|cry, ega|i|ar-
i an s|ruggles cf wcrking pecp|e agains| capi|ali sm
ccmmi|men|s |ha| were never fu||y cr|hcdcx, bu|
always rup|ured, ccnhic|ed, and ccn|es|edwi|h
i ncessan| ac|ivi|y li ke |he mania Ireud assccia|es
wi|h melanchclia) and sc ncw sa|i shes i|seh wi|h
cri|i ci sm and in|erpre|a|icn, small prcec|s and lcca|
ac|icns, par|icu|ar issues and |egis|a|ive vi c|cries, ar|,
|echnc|cgy, prccedures, and prccess. l| sub|ima|es
revc|u|icnary desire |c demccrati c drive, |c the rep-
e|i |icus prac|ices cffered up as demccracy whe|her
represen|a|ive, delibera|ive, cr radica|) . Having
already ccnceded |c |he inevi |ab|y cf capi|a|ism, i|
nc|iceab|y abandcns any s|riking pcwer agai ns| |he
big bcurgecisie, |c re|un: |c Benami n`s language.
Icr such a Lef|, encymen| ccmes frcm i|s wi|hdrawa|
frcm respcnsibi|i|y, i |s sub|i ma|icn cf gcals and
respcnsibili|ies in|c |he branching, fragmen|ed prac-
|ices cf micrcpcli|i cs, se|f-care, and issue awareness.
lerpe|ually s|igh|ed, harmed, and undcne, |his Lf|
OFSI RF 1 75
remains s|uck in repe|i|icn, unab|e |c break cu| cf |he
circui|s cf dri ve in whi ch i| is caugh|, unable because i|
encys |hem.
Nigh| |his nc| exp|ain why such a Lef| ccnfuses
discip|ine wi|h dcmina|icn, why i| fcrfei|s sc|idari |y
in |he name cf an i||uscry, individua|is| freedcm |ha|
ccn|inucus|y seeks |c fragmen| and disrup| any asser-
|icn cf ccllec|ivi|y and |he ccmmcn: The wa|chwcrds
cf cri|ique wi |hin |his s|ruc|ure cf lef| desire are mcr-
ali sm, dcgma|i sm, au|hcri |ari ani sm, and u|cpianism,
wa|chwcrds enac|ing a perpe|ual se|f-surveillance. has
an argumen|, pcsi|icn, cr view inadver|en|ly riskd cne
cf |hese encrs: Even scme cf i|s mi|i|an|s reec| par|y
and sta|e, divi sicn and decisicn, securing in advance
an inefhcacy sure |c guaran|ee i| |he nugge|s cf sa|is-
fac|icn |ha| drive prcvides.
I |his Lef| is righ||y described as melanchc|i cand
l agree wi|h Brcwn |ha| i| is|hen i|s me|anchc-
lia derives frcm |he real exis|ing ccmprcmises and
be|rayals inex|ri cab|e frcm i|s his|cry, i |s acccmmcda-
|icns wi|h rea|i|y, whe|her cf na|icna|i s| war, capi|a|is|
encirc|emen|, cr sc-ca||ed marke| demands . Lacan
|eaches |ha|, |i ke han|`s ca|egcrical i mpera|ive, |he
super-egc refuses |c accep| reali|y as an exp|ana|icn
fcr fai lure. lmpcssible is nc excusedesire is always
i mpcssible |c sa|isfy. A wide specuum cf |he ccn|em-
pcrary Lef| has ei|her acccmmcda|ed i|self, in cne way
cr anc|her, |c an inevi |able capi|alism, cr |aken |he
prac|i cal fai lures cf Narxi sm-Lenini sm |c require |he
abandcnmen| cf an|agcnism, c|ass, and revclu|icnary
ccmmi |men| |c cver|uming capi|ali s| anangemen|s cf
prcper|y and prcduc|icn. Ne|anchclic fan|asy|he
ccmmunis| Nas|er, au|hcri|arian and cbsceneas
we|| as subli ma|ed, me|anchc|ic prac|ices|here was
nc al|ema|i veshie|d |his Lef|, shie|d lL, frcm ccn-
frcn|a|icn wi|h gui || cver such be|raya| as |hey cap|ure
us in ac|ivi|ies |ha| feel prcduc|ive, impcr|an|, radica| .
lerhaps l shculd use |he pas| |ense here and say
shielded because i| seems mcre and mcre |ha| |he
Lef| has wcrked cr is wcrking |hrcugh i|s melanchclia.
Whi|e ackncwledging |he inccmple|eness cf psychca-
nalysi s`s unders|anding cf melanchc|ia, Ireud nc|es
ncne|heless |ha| |he unccnscicus wcrk cf melanchc|ia
ccmes |c an end as each single s|ruggle cf ambiva-
lence lccsens |he hxa|icn cf |he li bidc |c |he cbec|
and |he cbec| is abandcned as useless . Ireud`s
22 Ibi d. , 255.
DESIRE 177
reference to "each single struggle of ambivalence"
suggests that the repeti ti ve acti vi ti es I've associ ated
with drive and subl i mation might be understood more
di alectically, that is, not merely as the form of accom
modation but also as substanti ve practices of de- and
reattachment, unmaki ng and making. Mladen Dolar
and Sl avoj
Z
izek emphasize this destructi ve di mens i on
of the dri ve, the way its repetitions result i n a cl eari ng
away of the old so as to make a space for the new. 2:
ln a setting marked by a general acceptance of the end
of communi sm and of particul ar pol i tical-theoreti cal
pursuits in ethi cs, affect, cul ture, and ontol ogy, a Left
desc1ibed in terms of its melancholi c structure of desire
may make l ess sense than a Left that doesn't exi st at
all . Brown's essay would then be a contribution to the
worki ng through and di smantl i ng of l eft melancholi a.
In its place, multiple practi ces and patterns ci rculate
within an academi c-theoretical enterprise al ready sub
sumed within communi cative capi tal i sm. Some of the
watchwords of anti-dogmati sm remai n, but their charge
is di mi ni shed, repl aced by more energeti c attach
ment to new objects of i nqui ry and i nterest. The drive
23 Mladen Dolar. "Freud and the Pol itical. " Theory &
Event 12.3. 2009.
shaping me|anchclia, in c|her wcrds, is a |crce c| |css
as i| |ums rcund, fragmen|s, and branches. Uver |ime,
as i|s prccess, i ts |ai|ure |c hi| i|s gcal, is repeated, sat-
i sfac|icn a||ains |c |his repe|i |icn and |he pricr cbec|,
|he lcs| cbec| cf desire, is abandcned. Icr example,
scme |hecns|s |cday hnd |he ana|y|ic ca|egcry cf |he
subec| |hecre|ica||y unin|eres|ing, essen|i a||y useless,
|hey`ve |urned ins|ead |c cbec|s, |cca|i ng |here new
kinds cf agency, vi|a|i|y, and even pc|i|i cs.
The recen| reac|iva|icn cf ccmmunism a|sc bears
wi|ness |c |he end cf me|anchclia as a s|mc|ure cf |ef|
desire. Descnbing |he massive cu|pcuring cf en|hu-
siasm fcr |he 200 lndcn ccmerence cn |he idea cf
ccmmunism, Ccs|as Dcuzi nas and S|avc
izek ncte tha|

|he ques|icn and answer sessicns were gccd-humcred
and ncn-sec|arian, a c|ear indica|icn |hat the pericd
cf guil| is cver. Even mcre prcncunced is |he mcve-
ment qains| capi ta|ism a| wcrk in 20! !`s Arab spting,
Eurcpean summer, and US fall. C|cba|Iy, cccupa|icns
pu| |c wcrk an insis|en| ccllec|ivi|y |ha| s|mggles |cward
a new asset1icn cf |he ccmmcn and ccmmcns.
24 Costas Douzi nas and Slavoj
Z
i zek, "Introducti on: The
Idea of Communi sm, " i n The Idea of Communism, ed. Costas
Douzi nas and Slavoj
Z
i zek, London: Verso, 201 0, i x.
DESI RE 1 79
ls i| pcssib|e tc unders|and |his reac|iva|icn cf ccm-
munism in |erms cf desire, and if sc, in wha| sense: l
|hink |hat i| is. ln |he nex| sec|icn, l defend |wc |heses.
hrs|, ccmmuni s| desire designa|es |he subec|ihca|icn
cf |he gap necessary fcr pcli|i cs, |he divisicn wi|hin |he
pecp|e, seccnd, |his sub ec|ihca|icn is cc||ec|ivecur
desire and cur cc||ec|ive desire fcr us.
The ccn|empcrary re|hinking cf ccmmunism prcvides
a| |eas| |wc pa|hs |cward a ccncep| cf ccmmunis|
desire. |he desire cf |he mul|i|ude and |he desire cf
|he philcscpher. The hrs| ccmes frcm Antcnic hegri`s
Spincza- and De|euze-inspired emphasis cn |he prc-
duc|ive desire cf |he mu||i|ude cf singulari|ies. hegri
emphasizes |ha| |he mu||i|ude is a |c|ali|y cf desires
and |raec|cries cf resis|ance, s|ruggle, and ccns|i|u-
en| pcwer.' The seccnd, |he desire cf |he philcscpher
an expressicn prcvided by A|essandrc hussc), |ags
Badicu`s emphasis cn |he e|emi|y cf ccmmunism.
ln a |ex| frcm ! ! , Badicu argues |ha| |he sc-ca||ed
25 Antonio Negri, "Communi sm: Some Thoughts on the
Concept and Pract i ce, " i n The Idea of Communism, 1 63.
26 Alessandro Russo, "Di d the Cultural Revoluti on End
Communi sm? , " i n The Idea of Communism, 1 90.
dea|h cf ccmmunism wasn` | an even|. The pc|i|i ca|
sequence assccia|ed wi|h Uc|cber !! 7 had a|ready
lcng been dead. Ccmmunism as a pcli|i ca| |m|h
names an e|erni |y, nc| an his|cri cal s|a|e fcrma|icn,
sc i| can`| di ei | necessari ly exceeds any par|icular
i ns|an|ia|icn. Badicu gives fur|her expressicn |c |he
phi|cscphi ca| idea cf an e|erna| ccmmunism wi|h his
ccmmunis| invari an|s|he ega|i|atian passicn,
|he ldea cf us|i ce, |he wi|l |c end |he ccmprcmises
wi|h |he servi ce cf gccds, |he eradica|icn cf egcism,
|he in|clerance |cwards cppressicn, |he desire fcr
|he cessa|icn cf |he S|a|e. Sc, |c rei|era|e, |here is
hegri whc wri|es, Ccmmunism is pcssi b|e because
i | a|ready exis|s in |his |ransi|icn, nc| as an end, bu|
as a ccndi|icn, i| is |he deve|cpmen| cf singu|ari |i es,
27 Badiou writes, " 'Communi sm, ' having named t hi s
eterni ty, cannot anymore adequately name a deat h. " See hi s
Of an Obscure Disaster, trans . Barbara Fulks, Alberto Toscano,
Nina Power, and Ozren Pupovac, Maastri cht , NL: Jan van
Eyck Academi e, 2009, 1 9.
28 I bi d. , 1 7. Bruno Bosteel s emphasizes that these
i nvari ants are "the work of the masses in a broad sense" and
"the i mmediate popular substance of all great revol t s. " See
his Badiozt and Politics, Durham, NC: Duke Uni versi ty Press,
201 1 , 277-278.
OFSI RF 1 81
the experimen|aticn cf |hi s ccns|ruc|icn andi n |he
ccns|an| wave cf pcwer re|a|icnsi|s |ensicn, |en-
dency, and metamcrphcsis. ' And there is Badicu whc
|rea|s ccmmuni sm as a |ranshis|cri cal |ru|h, a regula-
|i ve ideal capable cf grcunding Badicu uses |he wcrd
inccrpcra|ing) a subec| in his|cry. ln cne versicn,
ccmmunism is a|ready i mmanen| in |he wcrld. ln |he
c|her, ccmmuni sm is |he real cf a |ru|h |ha| in|rcduces
|he i mpcssib|e in|c |he wcr|d.
These |wc seeming|y cppcsed apprcaches |c ccm-
munis| desire cpera|e si milar|y. Each pcin|s |c an
underlying ccmmunis| necessi |y. Whether as |he rea|
exi s|ing pcwer cf |he mul|i|ude cr |he real cf a |ru|h
prccedure in |he symbclic narrati ve cf his|cry via
an individual subec|ihca|icn), ccmmunis| desire is
a given. What hegri pcsi|icns wi|hin |he |c|a|i |y cf
capi|a|is| prcduc|icn in |he presen|, Badicu pcsi|icns
wi thin the e|emi ty cf the philcscphi ca| idea.
hegri and Badicu are reassuring. Icr |hcse ccm-
mi |ted |c egali |ari an uni versalism and unwi||ing tc
acccmmcda|e |hemse|ves |c |he era`s dcminan| capi-
|alis| reali sm, hegri and Badicu es|ab|i sh places |c
29 Negri, "Communi sm: Some Thoughts on the Concept
and Pract i ce, " 1 63.
stand, sites from whi ch to thi nk and act and under
stand thi nki ng and acti ng. As communi sm, soci al i sm,
the worki ng class, and the soci al welfare state have all
been vilifed and di smantled as utopian ideals and as
post-war compromi se, this reassurance has been essen
ti al to the maintenance of courage, confdence, and
even knowledge of revol uti onary theory and practi ce.30
At the same time, as Brown's discussion highlights,
such reassurance can and someti mes does become an
obj ect of feti shi st i c attachment. It provi des a guarantee
as if the t i me for guarantees had not passed, somethi ng
to hold onto i n a setti ng of absence, a sett i ng where l oss
itself operates as a force.
The reassuri ng promi se from Negri i s that commu
nism has already arrved; it needs only to be released
from its capital i st constrai nts . Rather than a poli ti cal
economi c system ruptured by di vi si on and antagoni sm,
one where the desires and acti vities of producers con
fi ct wi th themselves and wi th each other, the desi re
of the multitude appears as an already given conver
gence, abundance, and whol eness, shi el di ng us from
30 See Dari n Barey's discussion of courage i n "Eat Your
Vegetables: Courage and the Possibility of Poli tics." Theory &
Event 14. 2. 20 l l .
DESIRE 183
confrontation with the gap within and between us . The
reassurance from Badi ou is not onl y that there are
tmths, but that these tmths are from time to ti me incor
porated in the worl d. The i mpli ci t promi se is then that
the poli ti cal tmth of the idea of communi sm will again
be i ncorporated i n new subjects. Rather than a con
vi cti on forci ng the di visi ons of enactment by a party
and a state, the desire of the philosopher appears as a
form of thought t hat may gui de or di rect the affective
attachments of those who contemplate it. Rather than
a mptured feld of practi cal and theoreti cal knowledge
and wi l l , thi s desire mani fests itself as a form that sees
and impresses itself on history's varying rebellious
subj ecti vi ti es. :n
These approaches to communi st desi re (paricularly
in the reducti ve descripti ons I' ve provi ded here) mb
uneasi l y agai nst the grain of the l ast t hi rty years or
so of cri ti cal theory, especially against those strands
of post-struct ural i st and postcol oni al theory to whi ch
Brown gestures i n her essay. While t he refusal to give
way on des i re and wal l ow i n melanchol i a i s vi tal to the
power of these approaches, somethi ng can nonetheless
31 See Bosteels. Badiou and Politics. 277.
be |earned frcm |hcse whc ccmprcmised. Iirs t, nc|
all pc|i|i cal suuggles presen| cr pas| are ccmmunis|
gus| as, contr hancire, nc| a|| pcli|ica| s|ruggles are
demccra|ic). The subsump|icn cf a|| ongoing pc|i|i ca|
s|rugg|es in|c |he mu||i|ude even if |he mu||i|ude is
cne cf singulari|ies) di savcws |he |ensicns and cppc-
si|icns amcng |hem as well as |he ways |ha| |hese
|ensicns are and can be manipula|ed in |he i n|eres|s
cf capi|al. The abscrp|icn cf a|| past pcpu|ar s|ruggles
i n|c a ccn|en| unchanging cver |he ccurse cf mi||ennia
disccun|s |he i mpac|s cf pricr s|rugg|es cn la|er cnes,
as we|| as |he ma|eria| and |echnc|cgica| de|ermina-
|icns cf fcrces, capaci|ies, and in|eres|s. ` Une dcesn` |
have tc embrace |he his tcri ci st`s happy pcsi|ivism tc
argue |ha| |he ccmmunis| ccmbi na|icn cf emancipa|icn
and egali |ari ani sm is unique. l| is infcrmed by mul|i-
p|e c|her s|rugg|esas Narx already makes clear in
distinguishing, |cr examp|e, be|ween bcurgecis and prc-
le|arian revclu|icns and as |wen|ie|h-cen|ury s|ruggles
fcr civil and wcmen`s ri gh|s and |wenty-hrs|-cen|ury
s|rugg|es fcr gay and |rans righ|s a||es|. Bu| i| is nc|
|he same as |hese s|rugg|es. Seccnd, and ccnsequen|ly,
32 I rely here on Bost eel s, i bi d. , 278.
DESIRE 185
communi sm is i nformed by its own failures and mis
takes-an i nformi ng repressed by reassuring appeals
to a communist entirety or i n variance. This is why
there is an endeavor to rethink communism today, to
critique and learn from the past i n order to i nstantiate
something better this ti me. There are specifc histo
ries and struggl es whose successes and fai l ures can
cont inue to i nspire, that can-but may not-incite a
desi re to look at our present di fferently, to see it i n l ight
of the communi st horizon. 34
Why di savow knowledge of the di fferences among
struggles beneath the expanse of an eternal communi st
substance? If there was a left structure of desi re appro
priatel y understood as mel anchol i c, and i f that structure
no longer holds, then some sort of working through has
taken place. Such work woul d have already cal l ed into
quest i on al l-encompassi ng vi si ons of a communi sm
persi sting apart from rather than through centuri es of
33 My vi ew here i s i nformed by conversati ons wi th James
Martel as well as by his compelli ng argument in Textual
Conspiracies. Ann Arbor. MI : Uni versity of Michigan Press.
201 1 . 147-1 49.
34 See also Bosteels' dialectical approach to "concrete
history and the ahistorical kernel of emancipatOf' politics."
The Actuality of Communism. 275-283.
s|rugg|es and |he signifying s|resses |hey |eave behind,
a ccmmunism seeming|y incapable cf |eaming and
adap|a|icn, as we|| a cf a ccmmunism uni|ing mul|i-
p|e s|ruggles |ha| pa|en||y refuse i|s |enns . `` Whereas
scme migh| |rea| |his wcrk as |raversing |he fan|asy
cr mcving frcm |he desire |c |he drive, l`ve argued |ha|
|he sub|ima|icn cf |he dtive cap|ures |he subec| in |he
repe|i|ive circui|s cf ccmmunica|ive capi|alism. `
35 I take t he term "signifyi ng stress" from Eri c Santner,
"Mi racles Happen, " in The Neighbor: Three Inquiries in
Political Theology, Slavoj
Z
i zek, Eri c Santner, and Kenneth
Reinhard, Chi cago: Uni versity of Chi cago Press, 2005.
Bosteels writes, "t he communi st i nvariants are t he work of
the masses i n a broad sense. There i s as yet no specifc class
determi nati on to the logic of revol t i n whi ch slaves, plebi as,
serfs, peasant s, or workers ri se up agai nst t he power that be"
(Badiou and Politics, 277). Further, i n del i neating three basi c
factors of ideological content, Bosteels notes the "unchanged
content of the communi st program, that i s, the i mmediate
popular substance of all great revolts, from Spartacus to Mao. "
My cri t i ci sm of Badiou addresses Lhe claim of "unchanged. "
I am argui ng agai nst the idea t hat there i s an unLhanged and
i mmedi ate popul r substance to all great revolts . There are
different ki nds of revolts; not all mass or plpular revol t s have
a communi st "substance. "
36 See Martel , Textual Conspiracies, for an overview of
these debates.
DESIRE 187
What's left ? A new, shi fted desi re, one that recog
ni zes the i mpossi bi l i ty of reachi ng or achi evi ng its
obj ect and holds on, refusi ng to cede i t.
:n
Z
izek li nks
thi s new desi re to Lacan's noti on of the "desi re of the
anal yst. "38 Such a desi re i s col l ecti ve, sustai ni ng a
communi ty even as it has moved past the need for some
ki nd of phantasmi c support. Col l ecti vi ty, bui l t around
a l ack, provi des a common desi re capable of breaki ng
through the sel f-encl osed ci rcui t of dri ve without rei n
stal l i ng a new authority or certainty. 39
Even as they take communi st desi re as a ki nd
of gi ven, Negri and Badi ou contri bute t o t hi s other
thi nki ng of communi st desi re, one that, wi th Lacan,
associ ates desi re with the consti tuti ve rol e of l ack.
Desi re depends on a gap, a questi on, a mi ssi ngness,
and an i rreduci bl e non-sati sfacti on. In thi s vei n (and i n
contrast to hi s usual approach to desi re), Negri writes,
"communi st i magi nati on i s exalted i n the moment of
37 Martel develops thi s idea via a reading of Poe's metaphor
of the maelstrom.
38 Slavoj Ziek. The Ticklish Subject. London: Verso. 1999.
296.
39 That is. without reverting to what Martel theorizes as
i dolatry.
rup|ure. " Badicu, |cc, albei| differen|ly, emphasizes
rup|ure, |he rup|ure cf |he even| in |he noual crder
cf bcdies and languages as i| exis|s fcr any par|icu-
lar si|ua|icn. Each |hereby |inks ccmmuni sm |c a gap
cr a break al|hcugh, again, |hey diher in |heir |hec-
riza|icn cf |he |ime and place cf such a gap). Badicu
expresses i | we|| i n his early wri|ing. a mi|i |an| cbs|i-
nacy, a cer|ain sub ec|ive fcrm, has a|ways and fcrever
acccmpani ed |he grea| pcpu|ar uprisings, nc| when
|hey are cap|ive and cpaque like every|hing we see
|cday. na|icnalisms, marke| fascina|icn, Nahcsi and
demagcgues, rai sed cn a pedes|a| cf par|iamen|atian-
i sm), bu| ra|her i n free mp|ure wi|h being-i n-si|ua|icn,
cr ccun|ed-being which keeps |hem in check. '
These emphases cn rup|ure rescna|e wi|h hancire`s
emphasis cn |he divisicn wi|hi n pc|i |ics be|ween pcli-
|i cs and |he pcli ce.' Icr hancire, pcli |i cs is |he c|ash
cf |wc he|ercgenecus prccesses|he prccess cf |he
pclice and |he prccess cf equa|i|y. He vi ews |he pc|i ce
40 Ant oni o Negri , "Communi sm: Some Thoughts on the
Concept and Pract i ce, " 1 61 .
41 Badi ou, Of an Obscure Disaster, 6, 1 7-1 8.
42 See my di scussion of Ranci ere i n "Polit i cs wi thout
Politics, " Parallax 1 5: 3, 2009.
OFSI RF 1 89
as an crder cf bcdies |ha| dehnes |he allcca|icn c|
ways cf dcing, ways cf being, and ways cf saying . . . l|
i s an crder cf |he visible and |he sayable. He |hen
uses pcli|i cs |c designa|e wha|ever breaks wi|h |he
|angible ccnhgura|icn whereby par|i es and par|s cr
lack cf |hem are dehned by a presuppcsi|icn |ha|, by
dehni|icn, has nc place in |ha| ccnhgura|icn|ha| cf
|he par| cf |hcse whc have nc par|. lcli|ics inscribes
a gap wi|hin an exis|ing crder cf appearance. The pat1
cf |hcse whc have nc par| is |his gap in |he exis|ing
crder cf appeatance be|ween |ha| crder and c|her pcs-
sible arrangemen|s, |his space be|ween and wi|hin
wcr|ds. The par|-cf-nc-pat1 dcesn`| designa|e a subse|
c| perscns, a we cr a ccncrete iden|i ty |hat can be
empiri cal|y indi ca|ed. l| names |he gap, divisicn, cr
an|agcnism |ha| marks |he ncn-identi |y cf any crdering
wi|h i|s cwn ccmpcnen|s. The Lacanian |erm fcr |he
par|-cf-nc-par| wculd |hen be objet petit a, an impcs-
sible, fcrmal cbec| prcduced as |he excess cf a prccess
cr re|a|icn, a kind cf gap |hat incites cr anncys, |he
missingness cr nc|-qui|e-righ|ness |ha| ca||s cu| |c us .
l|`s |he gap, |he mis- cr ncn-iden|i|y be|ween scme|hing
43 Jacques Ranci ere, Disagreement, trans. Julie Rose,
Mi nneapol i s: University of Mi nnesota Press, 2004, 29-30.
si mp|y presen| and scmething desired, |he cbect-
cause cf desire cr, re|uming |c |he pc|i |ical held, |he
gap be|ween a pc|i|icized pecple and a pcpu|a|icn cr
se| cf perscns.
hancire nc|es |ha| pcli |ical sub ec|ihca|icn is
i |seh a disiden|ihca|icn and regis|ra|icn cf a gap. He
exp|ains. |here are pcli|ical mcdes cf subec|ihca|icn
cnly in |he se| cr re|a|icnships |ha| |he we and |he nam
mai n|ain wi|h |he se| cf 'perscns,` |he ccncre|e p|ay cf
i den|i|ies and a||eri|ies imp|i ca|ed in |he demcns|ra-
|icn and |he wcr|dsccmmcn cr separa|ewhere
these are dehned.` Sc we have a rup|ure cr a gap and
|he sub ec|ihca|icn cf |his gap. Bu| subec|ihca|icn in
wha| sense: There are differen| pcli|i ciza|icns, differ-
en| mcbiliza|icns and subec|ihca|icns |ha| call cu| |c
and crganize differen| ccnvic|icns and in|eres|s.
The gap necessary fcr communist desire is mani-
fes| in the non-coinciderue cf ccmmunism wi|h i|s
se||ing, |he gap |ha| is wi|hin and par| cf |he se||ing, as
Narxis| |hemes cf nega|icn and |he ccmmunis| |egacy
cf revclu|icn bc|h amm. Ccmmunism is cf ccurse nc|
|he cn|y pc|i|i cal ideclcgy |ha| mcbi |izes nega|icn
44 Ibid. , 36.
45 Ibi d. , 59.
OFSI RF 1 9 1
and revclu|icn|here are and have been libera|-
demccra|i c, bcmgecis revclu|icns. And ccmmunism
shares wi th capi |a|ism a revc|u|icnary mcbiliza|icn
cf nega|icn, hence ccmmunism as |he nega|icn cf |he
nega|icn. The difference i n |he ways |hey subec|ify
|he gap, |hen, is cmcia|. Capi|a|is| sub ec|ihca|icn, |he
desire i| s|nc|ures and inci|es, is i ndividual even as
i| |ends |c sublima|e desire in dive, cr, differen|ly pu|,
even as individua|ed desires ge| caugh| up in and gi ve
way |c drive`s pcwet1ul|y repe|i |ive circui|s) . Tc inver|
Al|husser, capi |a|ism in|erpel|a|es subec|s as individ-
uals. A ccmmuni sm |ha| dces likewise fai|s |c ehec| a
np|ure cr ins|al| a gap. Ccmmunis| desire can cnly be
ccllec|ive, a ccmmcn re|aticn |c a ccmmcn ccndi|icn
cf divisicn.
hancire`s ccnnec|ing cf pcli |i cia| subec|ihca|icn
|c |he gap be|ween we and |he se| cf perscns pci n|s
in |his direc|icn. i| describes a ccmmcn rela|icn |c a
ccmmcn ccndi|icn cf divisicn |ha| i s sub ec|ihed as |he
we cf a cc||ec|ive subect. hegri direc||y and explic-
i ||y emphasizes collective desire. Badicu, i n his wri|ing
cn |he dea|h cf ccmmunism, invckes a ccllec|ive
subec|, albei| cne |ha| a| |he |ime cf |he ccllapse cf
|he Scvie| par|y-s|a|e has been i ncpera|ive fcr mcre
than twenty years. Badicu cbserves tha| i| was |he
phrase 'we ccmmunis|s,` a ncmina| preci sicn added |c
'we revcluticnari es, ` whi ch i n |um gave pcli ti cal and
subec|ive fcrce |c |his 'we` ccns|tued as an u||i ma|e
reference|he 'we` cf |he class, |he 'we` prcletari ans,
which was never ar|icu|a|ed, bu| whi ch every ideal ccm-
muni|y pcsi |ed as i|s scurce as a his|cri ca| axicm. Ur in
c|her wcrds . we, fai|hfu| |c |he even| cf Uc|cber !! 7 .
Badicu |e||s us |ha| such a sense cf we infoued his
adc|escen| unders|anding cf Sar|re`s phrase Every
an|i-ccmmuni s| is a dcg. Because, Badicu exp|ains,
every an|i -ccmmunis| |hereby manifes|ed his ha|red
|cwards |he 'we,` his de|ermina|icn |c exis| sc|e|y
wi|hin the li mi ts cf the pcssessicn cf himse|fwhi ch is
always |he pcssessicn cf scme prcper|i es cr gccds. A
ccns|i |u|i ve ccmpcnent cf the ccmmuni s| subec|ihca-
|icn cf |he gap be|ween wha| exi s|s and wha| ccu|d be,
be|ween wcrking and capi tali st classes, be|ween revc-
lu|icnaries fai|hfu| |c Uc|cber I ! 7 and c|her pc|i|i ca|
subectihcaticns i s the cppcsi ticn be|ween a ccllective
we and an individual de|ermined in and by hi s sin-
gular se|f-pcssessicn. The ccmmunis| sub ec| is nc|
46 Badi ou, Of an Obscure Disaster, 1 1 -1 2.
OFSI RF 1 93
an ensemble cr assemb|age cf individua|s but a fcrce
cppcsed |c such an individua|ism and i|s a||achmen|s.
Badicu qualihes |his view tcday. Even as he insis|s
|ha| every |ru|h prccedure prescribes a Subec| cf
|his |ruth, a Subec| whceven empirica||ycannc|
be reduced |c an indivi dual, he ncne|he|ess high-
ligh|s |he subec|ihca|icn cf indivi duals. Wha| is a|
i ssue is |he pcssibi|i|y fcr any individua|, demed as
a mere human anima|, and clearly dis|i nc| frcm any
Subec|, |c decide |c beccme par| cf a pc|i |ica| |ru|h
prccedure. The i ndividual decides . Badicu ccns|rues
|his decisicn cf |he individual as an inccrpcra|icn
i n|c |he bcdy-cf-|ru|h. The individual ma|eria|izes
tru|h in the wcrld, he cr she serves as the si|e cf |he
syn|hesis cf pcli|i cs, i declcgy, and his|cry. Badicu
wri|es . We wi|| say that an ldea is |he pcssibility fcr
an i ndividual |c unders|and |ha| his cr her par|i cipa-
ticn in a singu|ar pc|i ti cal prccess his cr her entry i ntc
a bcdy-cf-|ru|h) is a|sc, in a cer|ain way, a historical
decisicn. Describing a ccnversicn matked|y si mi|ar
|c |he Chris|ian`s par|ici pa|icn in |he Hcly Spiri|,
Badicu main|ains.
47 Badiou, "The Idea of Communi sm, " 2-3.
Th| s |s the mcment when an | nd| v| dual declares
that he cr she can gc beycnd the bcunds c| selhh-
ness, ccmpet| t| cn, hn|tude . . . ) set by | nd| v| dua|| sm
cr an| mal| tythey`re cne and the same th| ng) . He
cr she can dc sc tc the extent that, wh||e rema| mng
the | nd| v| duaI that he cr she | s, he cr she can alsc
beccme, thrcugh | nccrpcrat| cn, an act | ve par1 cI a
new Subject. I call th|s dec| s| cn, th|s w| ll, a subjec-
t| vat|cn. Hcre generally speak| ng, a subject| vat| cn
| s always the prccess whereby an | nd| v|dual deter-
m| nes the p|ace c| a truth w| th respect tc h| s cr her
cwn v|tal ex|stence and tc |he wcr|d |n wh| ch |h| s
ex|stence | s l| ved cut'
lnscmr as Badicu argues that ccmmuni st can nc
lcnger quahfy a pc|i|ics cr func|icn as an adec|i ve
fcr a party cr a s|a|e, i| makes sense |ha| he has tc hnd
anc|her lccus fcr ccmmunism`s inccrpcra|icn, |ha| i s,
fcr an cpera|icn capable cf ccnnec|ing |ru|h |c his|cry.
Likewise, inscfar a cur ccn|empcrap se|ting is nc| cne
wherein |he stcry cf |he his|cri cal missicn cf the indus-
tri a| wcrking class |c usher i n ccmmunism remains
ccmpehing, |he ques|icn cf |he subec| cf ccmmunism is
cpen and pressing. Ye| Badicu`s chcice cf |he individua
48 Ibid. , 3.
OFSI RF 1 95
as the lccus cf such a subect effaces the difference that
ma||ers in ccmmunis| desire. i| is and has |c be cc|-
lec|ive, |he ccmmcn acticn and will cf thcse whc have
undergcne a cer|ain prc|e|atianizancn cr des|i|u|icn, cf
|hcse whc relinquish their a||achment |c an i magi nary
individuali|y. lf ccmmunism means any|hing a| a||, i |
means cc|lec|ive ac|icn, de|ermina|icn, and wi||.
Under ccndi|icns cf capi |a|ism`s cu|| cf indivi dua|-
ism, |c emphasize ac|s cf individual decisicn and wil|
reduces ccmmunism |c cne amcng any number cf pcs-
sib|e chci ces. Such an emphasis |hereby assen|s |c
capi |ali st fcrm, rendering ccmmuni sm as ust anc|her
ccn|en|, an cbec| cf indivi dua| desire ra|her |han |he
desire cf a cc||ective subec|. ln Badicu`s versicn,
|he individua|`s ac|ive par|i cipa|icn in a new subec|
dcesn`| even require any radical change cn |he part cf
|he individualhe cr she can remain |he individua|
tha| he cr she is . What ge|s lcs| is |he ccmmcn that
gives ccmmuni sm i|s fcrce. This is |he very lcss |ha|
drives capi |alism. Ccmmunism is subcrdinated tc an
i ndividua|`s decisicn fcr i|. Desire remains individua|,
nc| ccmmunis|, nc|hing happens |c i|s basic s|ruc|ure.
ln effec|, desire is sub|ima|ed wi|hin |he |arger cir-
cui|s cf drive whi ch perpe|ually cffer differen| cb ec|s,
different nuggets to enjoy, different opportunities to get
off on fai l ure, repeti ti on, and the i mmedi ate movement
from one thing to another. Social, economic, and politi
cal condi ti ons may well contribute to a setting wherei n
t he choi ce for communi sm becomes more compelli ng
to more i ndi vi duals, but the constituti on of these i ndi
vi duals as somethi ng more, as a "we," has fal l en out of
the pi cture.
Al though our pol i ti cal problem di ffers i n a funda
mental way from that of communists at the begi nning
of the twentieth century-we have to organize i ndi
vi dual s; they had to organi ze masses-Georg Lukacs's
i nsight into individual i sm a a barrier to collective will
formati on is cruci al to theori zi ng communi st desi re as
collective desire. Lukacs notes that the "freedom" of
those of us brought up under capital i sm i s "the freedom
of the individual isolated by the fact of propely," a
freedom over and agai nst other, isolated i ndi vi duals, "a
freedom of the egoi st, of the man who cuts hi mself off
from others, a freedom for whi ch solidarity and com
muni ty exi st at best onl y as i neffectual 'regul ative
i deas. ' " He writes, ' 'The concious desire for the realm
of freedom can onl y mean consciousl y taki ng the steps
that will real l y lead to it. And in the awareness that i n
OFSI RF 1 97
ccntempcrary bcurgecis scciety individual freedcm can
cnly be ccnup| and ccrrup|ing because i| is a case cf
uni la|eral privilege based cn |he unfreedcm cf c|hers,
|his desire mus| en|ai| |he renuncia|icn cf individua|
freedcm. ' Ccmmunis| desire is a desire fcr ccllec|ivi ty.
ln a se||ing cf capi|alism`s dis|rac|icns and ccmpu|-
sicns, cne may very weh feel hke scme|hing is wrcng,
scme|hing is rmssing, scme|hing is deep|y umair. Then
cne migh| ccmp|ica|e |his idea, cr ccn|ex|ualize i|, cr
fcrge| abcu| i| and check email. Ur cne migh| |ry |c
make a differencesigning pe|i|icns, blcgging, vc|ing,
dcing cne`s cwn par| as an individual. And here is the
prcblem. cne ccn|i nues |c |hink and ac| individualis-
ti cally. Under capi talist ccnditicns, ccmmunist desire
en|ai|s |he renuncia|icn cf indivi dua| freedcm, |he
deliberate and prac|i cal subcrdina|icn cf self in and tc a
cchec|ive ccmmunis| wih. This subcrdina|icn requires
discipline, wcrk, and crganiza|icn. l| is a prccess cat1ied
cu| cver |ime and |hrcugh cchec|ive s|ruggle. lndeed, i|
is active ccllective struggle that changes and reshapes
desire frcm i|s individua| and fcr Lukcs, bcmgecis
and reihed) fcrm i ntc a ccmmcn, ccllec|ive cne.
49 Georg Lukacs, History and Class Consciousness, trans.
Rodney Livingstone, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1 985, 3 1 5.
The most renowned and compel l i ng account of the
rol e of revol uti onary struggl e in constituting commu
nist desire, that i s, i n reforming i ndi vidual i nterests
i nto a collective one, of course comes from Leni n.
Leni n constantly insists on struggling, testi ng, learn
ing, developi ng, forging. The overthrow of the old
soci ety cannot occur wi thout "prol onged effort and
hard-won experience. " In '"Left-Wing' Communism,"
Leni n presents a "fundamental law of revol uti on": "It
is only when the 'lawer classes ' do not want t o live in
the old way and the 'upper classes' cannot carry on
in the old way that the revoluti on can triumph. " The
lower classes have to want i n a communist way. If they
are to overthrw capi tal i sm and begi n establ i shi ng a
communist soci ety, they have to desire as communi sts.
Wi thout collective, communi st desi re, revoluti onary
upheaval moves in countenevoluti onary directi ons.
Leni n writes, "A petty bourgeois driven to frenzy
by the horrors of capi tal i sm i s a soci al phenomenon
which, l i ke anarchi sm, is characteristic of all capital
ist countri es. The instabi l ity of such revol uti oni sm, its
barrenness, and its tendency to tur rapi dly into sub
mi ssi on phantasms, and even a frenzi ed i nfatuat i on
wi th one bourgeoi s fad or another-all thi s i s common
DESIRE 199
knowledge. "50 "Submi ssi on phantasms"-here Lenin
desi gnates a fai l ure of col l ecti ve wi l l , a fai l ure that
seeks the cover of a master rather than holding fast to
a communi st desire to steer, wi th courage and without
certainty, the conditions we are always ourselves
already maki ng.
I n my account of communi st des i re, I' ve emphasized
lack (the openness of desire) and its subjectifcation.
I' ve argued that communi st desi re i s the collecti ve
subj ectifcation of an i rreducible gap. Communist
desi re names the col l ecti ve assumpti on of the di vi si on
or antagoni sm consti tutive of the pol i t i cal. Col l ecti vi ty
is the form of desire in two senses: our desire and our
desire for us; or, communi st desi re i s the col l ecti ve
desire for collective desiring.
Stati st i cal i denti ty provi des a contemporary fgure
for such a desi re. As I mentioned, Badiou links the
communi st i nvariants to great popul ar upri si ngs
in free rupture wi th counted bei ng. As he uses i t i n
the context of hi s di scussi on of the "death of com
muni sm," the idea of counted bei ng affl i ates wi th a
50 V. I. Leni n. '"Left-Wi ng' Communi sm." i n Te Lnin
Antholog. ed. Robert C. Tucker. New York: Norton. 1975.
554. 602. 559.
l arger critique of the State and Law, more particularly
wi th the work of State and Law in orderi ng a si tuation
and determining its facts. I n a somewhat more l iteral
criti ci sm of counting as a mode of contemporary state
power, Ranci ere criticizes polling as a rendering of the
people as "identical to the sum of its parts," as nothi ng
but its demographi c componentsY Rather than agree
with Badiou and Ranciere, I suggest a counter-thesis:
a count can provi de a form for expressi ng collecti vi ty,
even for rupturi ng the very selli ng i n whi ch i t arises.
One of the sl ogans to emerge with pa1ticular power
out of the movement to Occupy Wal l Street i s "We are
the %. Instead of naming an identity, the number
hi ghl ights a di vi si on and a gap, the gap between the
wealth of the top 1 percent and the rest of us . As it
mobi l izes the gap between the ! percent owni ng
hal f the country's wealth and the other percent of
the popul ati on, the sl ogan asse1ts a collecti ve and a
common. It does not uni fy t hi s collect i vity under a sub
stantial i dentity-race, ethni ci ty, nati onali ty. It asse1ts
it as the "we" of a di vided people, the peopl e di vi ded
between expropri ators and expropriated. I n the sett i ng
5 1 Ranci ere. Disagreement. 105.
OFSI RF 201
cf an cccupied Wa|| Stree|, |his we is a class, cne cf
|wc cppcsed and hcs|i|e classes, |hcse whc have and
ccn|rc| |he ccmmcn wea||h, and |hcse whc dc nc|. The
anncuncemen| |ha| We are |he % names an apprc-
pria|icn, a wrcng. ln sc dcing, i| alsc vcices a ccllec|ive
desire fcr equa|i|y and us|ice, fcr a change in |he ccn-
di|icns |hrcugh which |he 1 percen| seizes |he bu|k cf
wha| is ccmmcn fcr |hemselves, leaving |he percen|
wi|h |he remainder.
Addi|icna||y, We are |he % erases |he mu||iplic-
i |y cf individua|ed, par|ial, and divided in|eres|s |ha|
fragmen| and weaken |he pecple. The ccun| dis-indi-
vidua|izes in|eres| and desire, refcrma||ing bc|h wi|hin
a ccmmcn. Agains| capi tal`s ccns|ant a||emp|s tc pul-
verize and deccmpcse |he cc||ec|ive pecple, |he c|ai m
cf |he percen| respcnds wi|h |he fcrce cf a be|cng-
i ng |ha| nc| cnly cannc| be erased bu| |ha| capi|al`s
cwn methcds c| acccunting prcduce. Oh, dnwgra
phrs and statisticians! What hve yon nnlashed? As
capital denwlishes all previons social ties, th counting
on tvhich it depends provides a ne fgure of belong
ing! Capi|a| has |c measure i tself, ccun| i|s prch|s, i|s
ra|e cf prch|, i|s share cf prch|, i|s capaci|y |c |ever-
age i|s prch|, i|s ccnhdence cr anxie|y in i|s capaci|y
fcr fu|ure prch|. Capi |a| ccun|s and analyzes whc has
wha|, represen|ing |c i|seh |he measures cf i|s success.
These vep numbers can beand in |he slcgan We
are |he % |hey arepu| |c use. They aren` | resig-
nihed|hey are claimed as |he s ubec|ihca|icn cf |he
gap separa|ing |he |cp ! percen| frcm |he res| cf us.
Wi |h |hi s c|aim, |he gap beccmes a vehic|e fcr |he
expressicn cf ccmmunis| desire, |ha| is, fcr a pcli|i cs
|ha| asser|s |he pecp|e as a divisive fcrce in |he in|eres|
cf cver|uming presen| sccie|y and making a new cne
anchcred in ccllec|ivi|y and |he ccmmcn.
ln a c|cse engagemen| wi|h Ca|henne Na|abcu`s dis-
cussicn cf severe brain inuries,
izek discusses |he |cgi c

cf dialecti cal |ransi|icns. Af|er nega|icn/a|i enaticn/
lcss, |he subec| 're|ums |c i|seh,` bu| |his subec|
i s nc| |he same as |he subs|ance |ha| underen| |he
ali ena|icni | is ccns|i|u|ed in |he very mcvemen| cf
re|uming |c i|seh.`
izek ccncludes, "tir snbject is as

such th snrivor of its own death, a she|| whi ch remai ns
af|er i| is deprived cf i |s subs|ance. lrc|e|arianiza|icn
is a name fcr |he prccess cf |his depriva|icn under
capi|a|. The depriva|icn cf subs|anceccmmcn, sccia|
52
Z
izek, Living in the End Times, 307.
OFSI RF 203
subs|anceleaves ccllecti vi ty as i|s she||, as |he fcrm
|ha| remains fcr ccmmunis| desire.
Thi s ccllec|ive fcrm cver|aps wi|h |he cbec|-cause
cf ccmmunis| desire, |he pecp|e unders|ccd as |he par|-
cf-nc-par|. As l argue abcve, |he par|-cf-nc-par| names
|he gap cr an|agcnism |ha| marks |he ncn-iden|i|y cf
any crdering wi|h i |s cwn ccmpcnen|s . l| can |hus be
designa|ed wi|h Lacan`s objet petit a, an i mpcssible
fcrma| cbec| prcduced as |he excess cf a prccess, a
missingness cr cff-ness |ha| calls cu| |c us.
izek nc|es
|ha| fcr Lacan, |he cbec| cf desire a|ways remains a|
a dis|ance frcm |he sub ec|, nc ma||er hcw clcse |he
subec| ge|s |c |he cb ec|, |he cb ec| remains e|usi ve.
The di s|inc|icn between cbec| and cbec|-cause
acccun|s fcr |his diherence, |here is a gap because |he
cbec|-cause is nct the same as any c|d cbect |c which
i | a||aches. The cbec|-cause is wha| makes an cbec|
desireable, nct a prcperty inhering in | he cbect.
Une migh| |hink |ha| |he cbec| cf ccmmunis| desire
wculd be a wcrld wi|hcut explci |a|icn, a wcrld charac-
|erized by equali|y, us|ice, freedcm, and |he absence
cf cppressicn, a wcr|d where prcduc|icn is ccmmcn,
53 Ibi d. , 303.
di saibu|icn is based cn need, and decisicns rea|ize |he
general will. Unce cne s|ar|s |c describe |his penec|
wcr|d, |hcugh, i| always ccmes up lacking. Scme|hing is
always missingwha| abcu| an end |c sexism, racism,
and egcism: Wha| abcu| an end |c sccial hierarchies:
Wha| abcu| religicus freedcm and |he in|cleran|: Vha|
abcu| meanness and bu||ying: l|`s nc surprise |ha| ccm-
munism`s cri|ics a| |eas| a ely as Aris|c||e in Th
Politics) cri |i cize ccmmunism as u|cpian and i mpcssi-
b|e. l| seems anc|her wcrd fcr pene c|. Bu| |he i mpcssible
cf ccmmunis| desire is nc| |he same as i|s cause. The
cbec|-cause cf ccmmunis| desire is |he pecple and,
agai n, |he pecp|e nc| a a name fcr |he sccial whc|e bu|
as a name |cr the explci ted, prcducing macri ty.
Icr any gcvernmen|, sys|em, crganiza|icn, cr
mcvemen|, |he pecp|e remain elusive, inccmpa|-
i ble wi|h and disrup|ive cf |ha| which a||emp|s |c
reduce, ccns|rain, cr represen| i |. Au|hcri tari ani sm,
cligarchy, ari s|ccracy, represen|a|ive demccracy, par-
liamen|ary demccracyncne cf |hese |crms wcnies
|cc much abcu| |he di sccnnec| be|ween gcvemmen|
and pecp|e. Bu| |he disccnnec|, |he gap, ma||ers fcr
ccmmunism because ccmmunism is nc| cn|y an assc-
ci a|icn fcr gcvemance, bu| alsc an crganiza|icn cf
DESIRE 205
producti on;' (The gap also matters for fasci sm, which
tri es to deal wi th it by essenti al i zi ng the peopl e vi a
bl ood, soi l, and the Leader and attempting to exter
nal ize and el i mi nate the remai ni ng and unavoi dable
antagoni sm. ) The people are elusive. They exceed
their symboli c i nstantiati on as well as the images and
fantasi es that tr to fll the gap. Communi st desi re, a
collective desi re to desire communi sm, occupi es and
mobi l izes this gap, recogni zi ng its openness (that i s,
the impossibility of the people) and treating it as the
movement of communi sm itself-i n the words of Ma
and Engel s (The German Ideology) : "We cal l commu
nism the real movement which abolishes the present
state of t hi ngs. "
I have set communi st desi re i n the space marked by
the end of left melanchol i a and by an alterative to the
way of the dri ve. Whereas some vi ew dri ve's subl i ma
ti on as the way beyond a desi re confgured in terms of
law and its transgressi on, the collecti ve noti on of desi re
that I present breaks from drive's repetitive ci rcui ts.
54 Alberto Toscano makes this poi nt wi th particular power
i n his "The Pol itics of Abstraction." The Idea of Communism.
202.
As in |he image chered us by
_
|varc Carca Li nera,
desire describes a ccllec|ive subec| in |he ac|ua|i|y
cf i|s mcvemen| wi|h expec|ing and desiring eyes se|
upcn |he ccmmuni s| hcrizcn. lns|ead cf being |rapped
i n fai|ureand ge||ing cff cn |his failureccmmunis|
desire subec|ihes i|s cwn impcssibi|i |y, i|s ccns|i|u|ive
cpenness. Such subec|ihca|icn is inex|ri cable frcm
ccllec|ive s|rugg|e, frcm |he i mpac| cf changes cver
|ime |ha| enab|e wha| |ames Nat1e| ca||s |he reccgni-
|icn cf misreccgni|icn, |ha| i s, |he ackncw|edgemen|
cf false s|ar|s and errcrs, cf fan|asy ccns|ruc|icns and
my|hs cf ccmp|e|eness and inevi|abi|i |y.` Because
such s|rugg|e is necessari |y cc||ec|ive, i| fcrges a
ccmmcn desire cu| cf individua|ed cnes, rep|acing
i ndividua| weakness wi|h ccllec|ive s|reng|h.
55 Martel, Textual Conspiracies.
Chap|er Si x
Occupation and the Party
T
he genera| hcrizcn cf cur era is ccmmunis|.
Ccmmunism ccnhgures cur setting, pmviding i t
wi|h |he shape tha| i | |akes. Ccmmunism i s presen|
as |he fcrce cf an absence and an a||ema|ive, as |he
genera| held and divisicn cf |he ccmmcn, as |he sub-
ec|ihca|icn cf |he gap cf desire. l ccnc|ude wi|h a six|h
fea|ure |ha| ccmmunism |ags|he pat1y. Whereas
curren| dismissa|s cf |he pat1y fcrm prcceed as if |he
very nc|icn cf |he par|y depends cn |he fan|asy |ha| |he
par|y can kncw and realize |he pecp|e`s desire, l argue
|ha| |he pat1y is a vehic|e fcr main|aining a specihc gap
cf desire, |he ccllec|ive desire fcr ccllec|ivi|y.
Ccmmunism as |he par|y re|urns |c and cver|aps
wi|h ccmmunism`s mcs| ccnven|icna| referen||he
Scvie| Unicn. The ccmmunis| par|y and the Scvie|
Unicn enccunter the same cri|icisms. cverly unihed,
hi erarchica|, exclusicnap, and dcgmati c. lnscfar as
ccmmunism |ags bcth |he USSh and a pcli|ical party
|ha| i s, inscfar as |he |wc in|ermix and beccme indis-
|inguishab|e) , |he |ef| a||ema|ive |c |hem has been
fcrmed cu| cf cppcsi |icn |c bcth. l| |hus |ends |c be
charac|erized by diversi|y, hcrizcn|a|i|y, indivi dua|-
i |y, inc|usivi|y, and cpenness where cpenness ac|ual|y
means |he refusal cf divisive idec|cgica| ccn|en|) . Tha|
|hese a||ribu|es a|sc apply |c |he g|cbal netwcrks cf
ccmmunica|ive capi|alism, |ha| |hey are ce|ebra|ed by
adver|isers and invcked as bes| prac|i ces fcr efhcien|
ccrpcra|icns, |ends |c be lef| unsaid. Tha| exp|ci |a|icn
and exprcpri a|icn persis| and can cn|y be addressed
|hrcugh crganized cc||ec|ive pcwer is shun|ed aside,
diver|ed arcund an individualis| fan|asy.
Ccnsider David Craeber`s ccn|ras| be|ween classi-
cal sec|arian Narxis| grcups and anarchis|-inspired
grcups . Narxis| grcups, he wri|es, invari ably crgan-
ize arcund scme mas|er |hecre|i ci an, whc cffers a
ccmprehensive analysis cf the wcrld si |ua|icn and,
cf|en, cf human his|mj as a whcle, bu| very |i||le
thecre|i ca| rehec|icn cn mcre immedi a|e ques|icns
cf crganiza|icn and prac|i ce. ln ccn|ras|, anarchis|-
i nspired grcups genera||y cpera|e cn |he assump|icn
|ha| nc cne ccu|d, cr prcbab|y shcu|d, ever ccnver|
anc|her perscn ccmp|e|e|y |c cne`s cwn pcin| cf view,
OCCUPATION AND THE PARTY 209
tha| deci sicn-making s truc|ures are ways cf managing
diversi|y, and |herefcre, |ha| cne shculd ccncen|ra|e
ins|ead cn main|aining egali tarian pmcesses and
ccnsidering immedia|e ques|icns cf ac|icn in |he
presen|. Craeber ackncwledges tha| his dis|i ncticn is
ra|her s|ark, even mis|eadingly sc. Wha| he |hinks is
i mpcr|an|, |hcugh, is |he ccn|ras| be|ween vanguard-
i sm, |he leading rcle cf in|e|lec|uals cr a par|y, and
wha| he pcsi|icns as |he a||erna|ive, name|y, a ccnsen-
sus prccess buil| cn a principle cf ccmprcmise and
crea|ivi|y where cne is ccns|an||y changing prcpcsa|s
arcund un|i l cne can ccme up wi|h scme|hing everyone
can a| |eas| |ive wi|h. '
The glcbal mcvemen|s cf cccupa|icn and prctest gath-
ering pc|i|i ca| mcmen|um in 20! ! seem a| hrs| g|ance
tc be clear indicaticns tha| |he anarchists are righ|.
Uccupy Wa|| S|ree| emphasized ccnsensus, i nclusicn,
and the prac|i ces necessary |c main|ain and suppcr|
cccupa|icn. l| did wi|hcu| leaders, spckesperscns,
Davi d Graeber, "The Twi l i ght of Vanguard i sm," The World
Social Forum: Challenging Empires, June 2001 , choi ke. org.
2 See the art i cl es publ i shed as a speci al suppl ement to
Theory & Event 1 4:4, 201 1 , ed. Jodi Dean, James Martel, and
Davide Panagia.
and demands. The ideas c| au|cncmy, hcrizcn|a|i |y,
and |eaderlessness |ha| mcs| galvanized pecple a| |he
mcvemen|`s cutset, hcwever, came later |c be fau||ed
fcr ccnhic|s and disillusicnmen| wi|hin |he mcve-
men|. Emphases cn au|cncmy enccuraged pecple |c
pursue mu||ip|e, separa|e, and even ccnhic|ing gca|s
ra|her |han wcrk |cward ccmmcn cnes. Celebra|icn
cf hcrizcn|a|i |y heigh|ened skep|icism |cward crgan-
izing s|ruc|mes like |he Ceneral Assemb|y and |he
Spckes Ccuncil, ul|ima|e|y leading |c |he dissc|u|icn
cf bc|h. Asset1icns cf |eaderlessness as a principle
i nci|ed a kind cf parancia arcund leaders whc emerged
bu| whc cculd nc| be ackncwledged cr held acccun|-
ab|e as |eaders. Sc ra|her than sc|ving the prcblem cf
lef| pc|i|i cal crganiza|icn by fccusing cn prccess and
i mmedi a|e ques|icns c| ac|icn, as anarchism sugges|s,
Uccupy Wa|| S|ree| i n fac| pcses i| anew. l| pushes us
tc think agai n abcu| |he rcle cf a ccmmunist par|y.
Un |he hipside, us| as Uccupy can he|p us |hink
abcu| wha| a party might dc cr mean tcday, sc dces
|hinking abcu| |he par|y prcvi de an a||erna|ive visicn
c| |he mcvemen|`s s|reng|h as ari sing frcm i|s asser|icn
cf divisicn, i|s new mcde cf represen|a|icn, and i|s afhr-
ma|icn cf cc||ec|ive pcwer. Wi|h |his unders|andi ng cf
OCCUPATION AND TiE PARTY 21 1
its strengths, Occupy can temper autonomy with soli
dari ty (recogni zi ng that i ndi vi dual i zed autonomy can
be a barrier to solidarity, that i s, collective autonomy),
add veiti cal and di agonal strength to the force of hori
zontal ity, and attune itself to the facts of leadership
(leaders emerge and serve different purposes). It can
provi de the contours, in other words, for a new ki nd of
communist pa1ty, one indistinct and i n formation yet
di sceri ble i n the gap of a collecti ve desi re for collec
tivity that the movement i nscribes within the repetitive
ci rcuits of communicati ve capi tal i sm.
September 201 1 shattered the ideol ogy of an i nvin
cible Wal l Street much as September 2001 shattered
the illusion of an i nvulnerable United States. All of a
sudden and seemi ngly out of the blue, people outraged
by the fact that "banks got bai led out" and "we got sold
out" i nstalled themselves in the fnanci al heart of New
York Ci ty. Occupyi ng the symbol of capi tal i st cl ass
power, they ruptured i t. The ostensi ble controllers of
the gl obal capitali st system, st i l l reel i ng from the crash
of 2008, appeared to have lost control over their own
cement nei ghborhood. Hi ppi es wi th tents and cops
wi th barri cades had turned Lower Manhattan i nto a
chac|ic mess. Thcse seeking tc ccmbine |he pecple`s
wcrk, deb|s, hcpes, and fu|ures in|c specu|a|ive i ns|ru-
men|s fcr priva|e prch| ccnfrcn|ed a visible and ac|ual
ccllec|ive ccun|erfcrce. There in |he pcwer cf |he
pecple where inves|men| banks and hedge funds had
already iden|ihed an encrmcus sccial surplus, a cadre
cf |he newly ac|ive lcca|ed an inexhaus|ible pc|i|i ca|
pc|en|i al. l| was like a gian| hc|e had been cpened
up in |he s|ee| and g|ass ci|adel cf |he hnanci a| class.
Thrcugh i|, |raders, brckers, and marke|-makersas
we|| as everybody elsecculd see |he pcssibili|y cf a
wcr|d wi|hcu| capi|alism. Wa|| S|ree| was cccupied.
As i| um|ded in hew Ycrk Ci|y in |he fall cf 20! I ,
cccupa|icn demcns|rated i|seh |c be mcre |han a
|ac|i c. Uccupy became an even|a| si|e and pc|i|i-
cal fcrm. l use |he |erm even|al si |e |c pcin| |c |he
event cf |he mcvemen|, i|s rup|uring cf cur pcli|i-
cal se||ing. Uccupy Wa|| S|reet changed |he US Le||.
Befcre Uccupy, |he Lef| was fragmen|ed, me|anchcli c,
depressive. hcw we appear |c ourselves-we say we,
even as we argue cver whc we are and wha| we wan|.
We say we kncwing |ha| |here are divisicns and dif-
ferences amcng us |ha| we express and |ha| |he |erm
we expresses. Because cf Uccupy Wa|| S|ree|, we
have been ab|e |c imagine and enac t a new subec|
|ha| is cc|lec|ive, engaged, if, perhaps, a|sc manic and
dis|rac|i b|e. Appearing differently |c curse|ves, seeing
curse|ves as changing |he si|ua|icn we are in, we alsc
see cur se||ing differen|ly. l| dcesn`| |cck like i| did
befcrei|`s rup|ured, cpen. Uur se||ing is nc |cnger
hxed and given as |he in|rac|able rea|i|y cf capi|ali sm.
Badicu wri|ing abcu| |he laris Ccmmune) cbserves
|ha| a pcli|i ca| mp|me is always a ccmbina|icn cf a
subec|ive capaci|y and an crganiza|icn cf |he ccn-
sequences cf |ha| capaci|y. The mp|me brcugh|
abcu| by Uccupy ccmbines |he ccurage |c manifes|
curse|ves as a ccl|ec|ive pcli|i cal presence |he sub-
ec|ive capaci |y) wi|h |he eli mina|icn cr inexi s|ence)
cf |he suppcsi |icn |ha| we will gc a|cng wi|h |he s|a|us
quc, |ha| we will s|and by and dc nc|hing as we are
dispcssessed cf cm |ives and fu|ures |he crganiza|icn
cf |he ccnsequences c| |he subec|ive capaci|y) . Wi|h
Uccupy, we have in|rcduced a new pc|i|ical sub ec|
in|c |he scene. This changes every|hing.
Thi nking abcu| Uccupy Wall S|ree| as an even|a|
si|e a||cws fcr a cer|ain repe|i|icn, rehexivi |y, cr
3 Alain Badiou, The Communist H)pothesis, trans. David
Macey and Steve Corcoran, London: Verso, 2010, 227.
self-i nclusion. This refexi vity marks the event of the
si te as a subjecti fcati on, a forci ng of a new bei ng-thus.
To paraphrase Badiou, Occupy "i mposes itself on all
the elements that bting about its existence. "4 Occupy
is more than the sum of its parts. It's the patts and the
sum. Those who resi st attempts to represent the move
ment's pol i t i cs and consti tuencies can be understood as
voicing thi s "extra" di mensi on, the way the movement
i s an element of itself. A merely empi ri cal descri pti on
can't account for thi s excess over its elements that is
the movement.
In addi t i on to being an evental si te, the move
ment around Occupy Wall Street i s an organizati on
of capaci ti es and i ntensi ti es, a pol i ti cal form for t he
i ncompatibility, the i rreducible gap, between capital
ism and the people. To concei ve Occupy as a political
form i s to thi nk of it as a confgurati on of opposi t i on
wi thi n a parti cular social -hi stori cal setti ng. To call
Occupy a pol i t i cal form for the incompatibility between
capitalism and the people is to say that it has a specifc
and fundamental content and that thi s content consi sts
in the concentrati on of i ntensi ti es around the gap of
4 Ibid . . 208.
OCCUPATION AND TiE PARTY 21 5
capitali sm's failure as an economic system adequate to
the capaci ti es, needs, demands, and col lecti ve wi l l of
the people. On the one hand, this emphasis on the gap
between capitali sm and the people locates the tmth
of the movement in class stmggle, i n the antagoni sm
between the exploiters and the exploited, those who
own and those who do not, the ri ch and the rest of us.
On the other, the emphasis on the gap between capital
ism and the people marks the change i n the setting of
class stmggle, a diference i n setting such that to refer
to the two great hostile classes as the proletariat and
the bourgeoi si e is no longer as obvi ous and compel
l i ng as it once was . It now appears as i f everythi ng i s
capi tal i sm and t hi s makes capi tal appear i n i ts com
municative, social , and affecti ve-that i s to say its
common-di mensi ons.
How, then, does Occupy confgure opposition wi thi n
its-within our-setti ng? As I explained i n chapter
four, our setti ng i s one of the convergence of com
munication and capitalism i n a formati on that incites
engagement and part i ci pat i on i n order to capture
them i n the affective networks of mass personalized
medi a. These networks materi al ize a contradi ct i on.
They produce a common, a collecti ve i nformati on and
ccmmunica|icn mesh cf circula|ing affec|s and ideas .
Ye| |hese ne|wcrks a|sc presuppcse and en|rench
individua|i sm such |ha| widely shared ideas and ccn-
cerns are ccnceived less i n |etus cf a se|f-ccnscicus
ccllec|ive |han |hey are as viruses, mcbs, |rends,
mcmen|s, and swarms, as if cc||ec|ivi|y were nc|hing
bu| a cb ec| cf epidemic|cgy an idea cr image wi|h
an i mpac| gces viral). The event cf Uccupy, Uccupy`s
capaci|y |c in|ervene in cur se||ing, making i| and us
differen| frcm wha| we were befcre, has |c be under-
s|ccd in |erms not of continuity wi|h ccmmuni ca|i ve
capi |ali sm bu| cf rup|ure, cf a hcle cr break. lf Uccupy
si mp|y ccn|inued |c cffer ne|wcrks, brands, and i ndi-
vidual chcices, i| wcu|d be indis|i nguishab|e frcm
wha| we have. lndis|ingui shab|e, i| wculd be incapa-
b|e cf making new pcssibili|ies appear. l| wcu|d lack a
subec|ive capaci |y.
hemarkab|y, even as Uccupy uses ccmmunica|i ve
capi|a|ism`s ne|wcrks and screens, i|s energy ccmes
frcm a vanguard cf disci plined, ccmmi||ed ac|ivis|s
under|aking and suppcr|ing ac|icns in |he s|ree|s . The
physica| amassing cf pecple cu|side prcduced a new
sense cn |he US Lef| |ha| ccllec|ive resis|ance was
again pcssib|e here. lrc|es|ers delibera|e|y and cpen|y
abandcned |he scrip| cf ancdyne marches, adcp|ing
i ns|ead |he new, demandi ng, and unceasing prac|ice
cf cccupa|icn. Tlzy clse inconvenience in a scci e|y
i dec|cgica||y ccmmi||ed |c i|.
hc| a|l prc|es|ers afhlia|ed wi|h a specihc cccupa-
|icn cccupied all |he |ime. Scme wcu|d sleep a| |he
si |e and |hen gc |c |heir day cbs cr schccls. U|hers
wcu|d sleep e|sewhere and cccupy during |he day
and evening. S|ill c|hers wcu|d ccme fcr |he Irequen|,
hcurs-|cng Cenera| Assemblies . hcne|heless, cccupa-
|icn invc|ved pecple ccmp|e|e|yas Lukcs wculd say,
"with tlze wlwle of tleir personality. " As |he cccupa-
|icns persis|ed cver weeks and mcn|hs, pecple cined
i n differen| capaci |i esfaci li |aticn, lega|, |echnclcgy,
media, medical, fccd, ccmmuni |y re|a|icns, educa|icn,
direc| acticnpar|i ci pa|i ng i o |i me-i n|ensive wcrki ng
grcups and suppcr| ac|ivi|ies |ha| i nvclved |hem in
|he mcvemen| even as |hey weren`| cccupyi ng a space
direc||y. The mcvemen| became a wcr|d cI ac|ivi|y Icr
every cne cf i|s members. `
The dedi ca|ed vanguard |ha| is Uccupy rup|ured |he
5 Georg Lukacs, History and Class Consciou.mess, t rans.
Rodney Livi ngstone, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1 985, 335,
227.
lie |ha| what`s gccd fcr Wall Stree| is gccd fcr Nain
S|ree|. Uccupy claims |he divisicn be|ween Wa|| S|ree|
and Nain Stree| and names |his divisicn a fundamen|al
wrcng, |he wrcng cf inequa|i |y, explci|a|icn, and |hef|.
l |urn, |hen, |c di vi si cn as |he ms| cf |hree key fea|ures
cf Uccupy |ha| acccun| fcr i |s specihc ccnLgura|icn cf
cppcsi|icn and ccncen|ra|icn cf in|ensi|ies and pcin|
|cward new pcssibili|ies fcr |he par|y fcrm.
Uccupy Wall S|ree| asser|s |he inccmpa|ibi|i|y be|ween
capi |a|i sm and |he pecple. l|s cen|ral s|cgan, We are
|he %, |ransfcrms a s|a|is|ic in|c a crime. l| subec-
|ihes i|. The s|cgan |akes an empitica| fac| regarding
a numeri cal de|ermina|icn cf |he ! percen|`s degree cf
prcsperi |y re|a|ive |c |ha| cf |he percen| and politi
cizes |his fac|, separati ng it cu| frcm |he in|crma|icn
s|ream as a fac| |ha| matters, |hat is mcre |han si mp|y
cne amcng many innumerable fac|s. We can ccn|ras|
|his slcgan wi|h |hcse cf Barack U|ama`s 2008 presi-
den|i al campaign. Change We Can Believe ln and
Yes Ve Can. Ii||ed i n by his emphasi s cn uni|y,
cn ccming |cge|her in a mcre penec| unicn, |hese
slcgans cbscure divisicn, a||emp|ing |c repress and
depc|i|icize i|.
Uccupy cu| a hcle in this idec|cgi ca| image cf uni ty
and made |he under|ying divisicn appear. lc|i|i ci ans
lamen|ed the |um tc c|ass warfarebu| they haven`|
denied i|. The ! percen| ccmp|ai ned |ha| |hey shcu|dn`|
be ha|ed fcr being ri chbu| |hey haven`| denied |he
fundamen|al i nequa|i |y. As a lew hesearch Cen|er
pcl| fcund, percen| cf Ameri cans |hink |ha| divi-
sicns between ri ch and pccr are s|rcng cr very s|rcng,
an i ncrease cf ! percen| si nce 200. Nc| cnly i s |his
vi ew he|d i n every demcgraphic ca|egcry, bu| mcre
pecp|e |hink |ha| c|ass divisicn is |he pri nci pa| scci a|
divisicn |han |hey dc any c|her divisicn.
Scme i n |he mcvemen| have missed |he pcin| cf
Uccupy`s fcrcing cf divisicn, as if the mcvement were
nc|hing bu| an ex|ensicn cf |he hcpe and change prcm-
i sed by |he Ubama campaign. hather |han emphasizing
class s|ruggle, |hey emphasize |he mu||iplici|y cf |he
percent`s inccmpa|i b|e grcups and tendenci es,
and demccracy as a prccess cf in|egra|ing |hem. Un
this vi ew, Uccupy serves as a kind cf pc|i|i ca| cr even
pcs|-pc|i|ical cpen-scurce brand |ha| anycne can
6 Rich Mori n, "Ri si ng Share of Ameri cans See Confi ct
Between Ri ch and Poor, " Pew Research Cent er, January 1 1 ,
201 2, pewsocialtrends. org.
use. Because cccupa|icn i s a tac|i c |ha| galvanizes
en|husi asm |ac|ics as brand) , i | can affec|ive|y and
demccra|ically ccnnec| a range cf i nccmpa|i b|e pcli|i-
cal pcsi|icns, basica||y wcrking arcund fundamen|a|
gaps, divisicns, and differences.
There are |wc mis|akes here. hrs|, igncring |he an|ag-
cni sm |ha| ccnnec|s |he mcvemen| |c i|s se||ing, name|y,
class s|mggle as a ccn|empcrary s|rugg|e agains| prc-
le|arianiza|icn, and seccnd, effacing |he dis|i nc|icn
be|ween Uccupy and |he elemen|s |ha| bring abcu| i|s
exis|ence. By denying |he fundamen|a| cppcsi|icn |c
Wal| S|ree| |ha| divides |he mcvemen| frcm |he pcli|i cs
|ha| preceded i |, |he embrace cf mul|iplici|y prcceeds
as if we were us| |he same asscrtmen| cf individua|s
wi|h cpi nicns and vi ews as befcre, ra|her |han a ccl-
lec|ivi|y sc |hrea|ening as |c i nci te cverwhelming and
viclen| pcli ce respcnse. As a ccnsequence, par|i ci pan|s
are enccuraged tc emphasize |hei r i ndividual pcsi|icns
ra|her |han cul|i va|e a genera|, ccllec|ive cne. The
resul| i s |ha| |hey ccn|i nucusly ccnfrcn| cne anc|her`s
par|icu|ati|ies as differences |ha| mus| be expressed
ra|her |han, say, di sci p|ined, repressed, redi rec|ed,
sacri hced, cr igncred as nc| re|evan| fcr |his s|nggle.
Tac|i cs as brand neglec|s |he way cccupa|icn is a
OCCUPATION AND THE PARTY 22 1
|crm |ha| crganizes |he inccmpa|ibili|y c| capi |alism
wi|h | he pecple, i | s direc| and ma|ena| es|ablishmen| cf
a physi cal base where pecple persi s| i n bcdi|y cppcsi -
|i cn |c capi|al . As hacmi hlei n pci n|s cu| i n a ccn|ras|
wi|h |he even|-cri en|ed al|er-glcba|iza|icn mcvemen|,
cccupa|icn es|ablishes a hxed pcli|i ca| si |e a a base
fcr cpera|icns. Hc|ding a space Icr an inde|ermina|e
amcun| cf |ime breaks wi|h |he |ransience cf ccmmu-
nica|ive capi |a|i sm, a||cwing a mcre durab|e pcli |ics |c
emerge. Vhi|e |he encampmen|s were ac|i ve, pecp|e
had |he cppcr|uni|y |c be mcre |han spec|a|crs. A||er
leami ng c| an cccupa|i cn, |hey cculd cin. The prc|es|
wasn`| cver. Uccupa|icn i mplies a kind cf permanence.
pecple are in i | |ill |hi s |hing is dcneuntil |he basi c
prac|i ces cf scci e|y, cf | he wcr|d, have been remade. Tc
be sure, |his beneh| i s a|sc a drawback. Since cccu-
pa|icns are nei|her eccncmi cally self-sus|aining ncr
chcsen tacti cally as si|es |rcm whi ch |c expand cn
|he grcund b|cck by b|cck, say, un|i | a ci|y i s |aken),
there i s a prcblem c| scale buil| i ntc |hei r |crm. Bu|
ra|her |han addressing |his prcb|em cf sca|e, |ac|i cs
7 Naomi Kl ei n, "Occupy Wal l Street : The Most Important
Thing i n the World Now," The Nation, October 6, 201 1 ,
thenation. com.
as brand" sidesteps it by treating "occupati on" as an
easi l y rep] i cabl e set of practi ces (when occupati on i s
actually diffcult and demandi ng! ).
"Tacti cs as brand" hi ghlights fexi bil ity and adapt
abi lity, and in so doi ng makes occupation fully
compatible with capital i sm. Reduced to "tactics as
brand" or "tacti cs as generator of affecti ve attach
ment," Occupy Wall Street isn't a new political
subj ecti fcati on at al l . It's a platform anyone can use i f
they feel l ike it. From thi s perspective, Occupy is just
another strand of i nformati onal and affecti ve content
that appears on our screens and i s i ntensely felt before
other images pop up; it's compatible with the system it
ostensi bl y rejects.
Si milar problems hold for the emphases on plural
i ty and i ncl usi vi ty also prevaent i n movement rhetori c.
They merge seamlessly i nto communicative capitali sm
and thereby efface the class antagoni sm at the move
ment's heart, as i f the movement were but a physi cal
i nternet where people can post and blog and rant and
opi ne without havi ng to l i ve with and adapt to the opac
ities of others for the sake of a common i nterest. It's
al ready the case that there are multi ple ideas and oppor
tunities ci rculating on the i nternet-so the contribution
cf the mcvement isn` t i t abili ty tc prcvide them. l|`s
already |he case |ha| pecp|e can hc|d even|s, fcrm
digi tal grcups, and carry cut discussicns. lecp|e can
even assemb|e in |en|s cn sidewalksas |cng as |hey
are in line fcr mcvie |i cke|s cr a big sa|e at Wal-Nar|.
Ccmmuni ca|ive capi|ali sm is an cpen, mu|able held.
l|`s i nclusi ve, all-enccmpassi ng, mcbi|e, and ma||ea-
b|e. Tha| aspec| cf |he mcvemen|inclusi vi |yisn` |
new cr diheren|. l|`s a ccmpcnen| cf Uccupy |ha| i s
fdly compatible wi|h | he mcvemen|`s se||i ng i n ccm-
munica|ive capi|a|ism. Wha|`s new a| |eas| i n |he las|
|hir|y years) is |he organized collective opposition to the
capitalist expropriation of our lives and fttures and l
shcu|d add here that |his organized collective opposition
even i n i|s s|ill frus|ra|i ngly i nchca|e and Iragi le
curren| fcrmalsc marks the difference between |he
even| cf |he mcvemen| and cur pricr |i me cf asscr|ed
sma|| sccia|i s| and ccmmuni st par|i es, scme cf whi ch
suppm1ed Ubama and c|hers cf whi ch have been re|uc-
tan| tc wcrk as a pcpular frcn|, befcre Uccupy |hey had
lcs| wha|ever capaci |y |hey mi gh| have cnce had |c
enable the ccllec|ive fcrcing cf cppcsi |icn |c capi|al-
i sm, i| remai ns |c be seen whe|her |hey wi|l adap|) .
ln |he Iace cI |he mu||ip|e evi c|icns and massi ve
pcli ce respcnse |c |he cccupa|icns, Uccupy faces |he
cha||enge cf keeping presen| and rea| |he gap, |he
i nccmpa|ibili|y, be|ween cccupa|icn and |he crdi nary
media prac|i ces and individua|i zed ac|s cf resi s|ance
|ha| a|ready ccmpri se |he faux-cppcsi|icn enccuraged
in everyday |iIe.
heeping divi sicn frcm being abscrbed i n ccmmuni ca-
|ive capi|alism i s hard. Capi |a|i s| scci e|y is a|ready
divided, wi|h mul|iple gaps, cmissicns, and gli|ches.
Uccupy Wall S|ree|, |hen, dces mcre |han divide. l|
fcrci b|y inscribes divi sicn. Uccupy asser|s divisicn
and |his asser|i ng makes divisicn mcre |han i |seh, i|
makes i | i |se|f p|us i|s asser|icn. Wi |hcu| |his fcrci-
b|e i nscri p|icn cf divisicn, divi sicn wculd be nc|hing
bu| fcrking and sp|i ||i ng and hence fu||y ccmpa|ib|e
wi|h ccmmunica|ive capi |ali sm. lci n|ing |cward new
ways cf |hi nki ng abcu| |he wcrk cf |he par|y, Uccupy
Wal| S|ree| reinven|s represen|a|icn as |he ac|i ve,
se|f-au|hcrizing asser|icn cf divisicn i n re|a|icn |c |he
appearing cf an|agcnism. ln Uccupy`s new pc|i|i cs cf
represen|a|icn, divi sicn isn` | effaced, displaced, cr
cverccme. l|`s asser|ed and linked |c capi|alism`s Iun-
damen|a| an|agcnism. c|ass s|ruggle.
Scme argue |ha| Uccupy ccmple|e|y breaks wi|h
represen|a|i cn and represen|a|icnal pc|i|i cs. There
are |wc i n|erccnnec|ed versicns cf |his pcin|. Une
emphasizes |he individua| subec|s par|icipa|ing i n
|he mcvemen|. The c|her emphasizes |he mcvemen|`s
re|a|icn |c i|s se||ing, |c |hcse cu|si de i|. The ms| reec-
|i cn cI represen|a|icn hc|ds |ha| nc cne can cr shculd
speak Icr anc|her perscn because dcing sc deprives |he
spcken fcr cf |heir au|cncmy. Acccrding |c |his vi ew,
delega|ed au|cncmy is nc| au|cncmy a| a|| bu| subec-
|i cn |c |he cpinicn, will, and decisicn cI anc|her as
if ccllec|ive ac|icn and ccmmcn s|ruggle were nc|hing
bu| aggrega|icn wi|hcu| submissicn, ccns|rain|, cr
transIcrma|icn) . Hence, tc respec| |he au|cncmy cf
each, |hcse i n |he mcvemen| have been enccuraged |c
par|i ci pa|e cnly in |hcse ac|i cns wi|h whi ch |hey agree
and |c reccgni ze |ha| mul|iple he|ercgenecus prccesses
ccmpri se |he mcvemen|, |ha| |hese rehec| ccnhi c|ing,
inccmpa|ible i n|eres|s is pushed asiJe, repressed, cnly
tc re|urn la|er wi|h a vengeance. The seccnd reec-
|i cn cI represen|a|icn ex|ends |he ms| by i nsi s|ing
8 For a di scussi on of this cl ai m, see Jodi Dean and Jason
Jones, "Occupy Wall Street and the Poli ti cs of Representation, "
Chto Delat 1 0: 34, 201 2.
tha| ust as nc cne can speak fcr anc|her, nc cne can
speak fcr |he mcvemen|. The mcvemen| is leaderless.
Because Uccupy is t he mul|ip|ici|y cf t he ever-chang-
i ng pecple and prac|ices ccmprising i |, any a||emp|
|c represen| the mcvemen| wculd necessari|y res|ri c|,
udge, and nega|e i|, reducing i|s pc|en|ial |c |he
already given |erms and expec|a|icns cf |he dcminan|
sys|em. Tc prcceed c|hetise, i | is c|ai med, e|eva|es
scme vci ces and ccncerns cver c|hers, rei ns|a|ing |he
hierarchies |he mcvemen| wcrks |c disman|le. hc|
surpri si ngly, |he fac| |ha| scme vcices and ccncerns
dc emerge as leaders, as dcmi nan| cr mcre pcpular,
i nduces i n scme par|icipan|s a ki nd cf i nsecuri|y and
parancia cver |he dcub|e|hinkuhy are we all saying
that this movement is compltely horizontal 1vhn it '
obviously not ?
The reec|icns cf represen|a|icn are misplaced.
Treatments cf Uccupy as pcst- cr anti-represen|aticna|
disavcw divisicn and |hereby miss |he new fcrm cf
pc|i|ica| representa|icn Uccupy is inventing. Thcse
urging |ha| each speak cn|y fcr him- cr herself disavcw
divisicn within perscns. Assuming |ha| an individual
can clearly kncw and represen| her cwn in|eres|s, |hey
avcid ccnfrcn|i ng |he ways subec|s are i n|ernally
divided, nct fu||y ccnscicus cf the desires and drives
|ha| mc|iva|e |hem. Iur|hermcre, |c |he ex|en| |ha|
they pcsi ticn |he individual as |he pri mary si te and
grcund cf pcli|i cal deci sicns, |hcse arguing agai ns|
represen|a|icn fai l |c ackncw|edge hcw subec|s are
ccnhgured under capi|ali sm. Speaking a |ibera| |an-
guage cI au|cncmy and a capi|a|i s| language cI chci ce,
|hey neglec| |he biases, misccncep|icns, and a||ach-
men|s s|ruc|uring i ndi vi dual subec|s. l|`s almcs| as iI
|hey fai | |c ge| |heir cwn cri|ique, s|cppi ng i | |cc sccn.
lf represen|a|icn excludes and hi erarchizes, | hen |hese
prccesses cccur wi |hi n perscns as well as beneen
|hem an insigh| fcund nc| cnly in psychcanalysis bu|
alsc in ccuntless discussicns cf subect fcrmaticn,
di sci p|i ne, and ncrma|ivi |y) .
Thcse whc insist cn the unrepresen|ability c| Uccupy
alsc disavcw divisicn bettveen perscns . Iai ling |c |ake
divisicn sericusly encugh, they embrace a nearly
pcpu|i s| presump|icn cf crganic scci a| |c|ali|y. hc| sur-
prising|y, the fact cf hierarchywhether bcrn cf ski lls,
pri vi |ege, diligence, cr ccn|ingencynecessari|y and
unavci dably ccmes up agai ns| c|aims cf hcrizcn|al-
i |y, disillusicning pecp|e perpe|ua||y suspicicus cf
ac|ua| and pc|en|ia| leaders. l|`s nc wcnder |ha| an
i dec|cgy cf leaderlessness breeds suspi ci cn|here
aren`| clear and cpen ways |c selec| and reec| leaders.
Icr newccmers, i| seems mystericus, |i ke a hidden
eli |e ccn|rcls every|hi ng behind |he scenes . Simi|arly,
fearfu| cf exc|uding pc|en|ial cppcr|uni |i es, scme i n
Uccupy |ri ed early cn |c avcid ccnIrcn|ing fundamen-
|al divisicns wi|hin |he mcvemen|. They advcca|ed
a fccus cn |he i mmedia|e |asks cI cccupa|icn. The
effec|, |hcugh, was |c reduce divisicn |c Icrking in
c|her wcrds, |c subli ma|e i |) . lecple pursued |heir cwn
prcec|s, pete|ually sp|i||ing acccrdi ng |c |heir pricr
i n|eres|s and exper|i se, repea|ing |he pa||erns dcmi-
nan| i n ccmmuni ca|ive capi|ali sm and failing |c keep
cpen |he hc|e in Wa|| Stree| even as |hey dug mu||i-
p|e li ||le cnes. The fan|asy a| wcrk in |he insis|ence
cn |he unrepresentabi|i|y cf Uccupy is a fan|asy cf
mu||i plici|y wi|hcu| an|agcni sm, cf difference wi|hcu|
divisicn.
The Uccupy mcvemen| brings |cge|her differen|
pcli|i ca| |endenci es, varyi ng degrees cf radi ca|i |y, and
mu||ip|e i n|eres|s and ccncerns. Bu| |his dces nc| mean
|ha| i | mcves beycnd represen|a|i cn. Un |he ccn|rary,
|his brcadness pcin|s |c |he unavci dabi li |y cf repre-
sen|a|icn as well as |c i|s ccns|i|u|ive cpenness and
malleabi li |y. Wha| ac|icns h| wi|h |he mcvemen|, whi ch
cnes |c |ake, and hcw direc|ly |hey | i nk up are cngcing
ques|icns. Ever-changing plurali ty i s |he ccndi|icn cf
represen|a|icn, nc| i|s cverccming. Thcse whc ccns|rue
Uccupy as pcs|- and an|i-represen|a|icn mi sread plu-
rali|y as |he nega|ive |i mi| |c represen|a|icn when |hey
shcu|d ins|ead reccgnize plura|i|y as represen|a|icn`s
pcsi|ive ccndi|icn. Uccupy Va|| S|ree| is nc| actually
|he mcvemen| cI percen| cf |he pcpula|icn cf |he
Uni |ed S|a|es cr |he wcrld) agains| |he |cp l percen|.
l| i s a mcvemen| mcbi|izi ng i |seh arcund an cccupi ed
Wal| S|ree| in the name of |he percen|. Asser|ing
a divisicn i n rela|icn |c |he Iundamen|a| an|agcnism
Uccupy makes appear, i| represen|s |he wrcng cf |he
gap be|ween |he ri ch and |he res| cf us .
Cri|i cs cf represen|a|icn miss |he way Uccupy rein-
ven|s |he pcli|i cs cf represen|a|i cn because |heir i mage
cf represen|a|icn remai ns deeply |i ed |c par|iamen-
|arianism. l|`s |rue |ha| Uccupy eschews mains|ream
elec|cral pcli |i cs. l| is alsc |rue |hat Uccupy reec|s |he
nes|ed hierarchies |ha| ccnven|icna|ly crganize pc|i |i-
cal asscci a|icns . Bu| nei|her cf |hese fac|s elimi na|es
represen|a|icn. ha|her, |hey pcin| |c a reec|icn cf |he
curren| pc|i|i ca| and eccncmic sys|em because cI i|s
fai lure tc represent adequately the pecple`s will, a
will |ha| i s i|self divided and can cnly be represen|ed
divisive|y.
Lacan`s acccun| cI separa|icn can help make sense
cf the way Uccupy represen|s divisicn. Lac an descri bes
separa|icn as |he cverlappi ng cI |wc |acks. As
izek
emphasizes in a reading cI Hegelian de-a|ienaticn as
separa|icn, when |he subec| enccun|ers a lack in
|he U|her, he respcnds wi |h a pricr lack, wi|h his cwn
lack. ' ln c|her wcrds , |he subec| realizes |ha| nc| cn|y
dces he nc| kncw, bu| |he U|her dcesn`| kncw ei|her.
Each is lacking. Ny sugges|icn is |hat Uccupy refcr-
ma|s represen|a|icn as an asser|icn cI |he cverlap cI
twc lacks and |hereby separa|es the mcvemen| frcm its
se||i ng. Brcken in|c |hree steps. ! . Uccupy enccun|ers
the |ack in the big Uther that i s, the inccmpatibility cf
capi|a|ism wi|h |he pecp|e, |he ccrrespcnding fai |ure
cf liberal demccracy preci sely inscIar as it is capital-
i sm`s pcli|i cal Imu, and |he cverall dec|ine cI symbc|i c
efhci ency characteristic cf ccmmuni cati ve capitali sm).
2. Uccupy respcnds by asser|ing i |s cwn lack, whe|her
9 See Sl avoj
Z
i zek, "The Most Subl i me of Hysteri cs: Hegel
with Lacan, " t rans. Rex Butler and Scott Stephens, lacan. com/
zizlacan2. htm.
OCCUPATION AND THE PARTY 23 1
as precan|y deb|, unemp|cymen|, fcrec|csure) , ncn-
kncw|edge nc cne rea||y kncws wha| |c dc, hcw |c
crea|e a func|icning egali |arian sys|em cf prcduc|icn
and dis|ribu|icn), cr i nccmple|eness |he mcvemen|
i sn`| a whcle cr uni|y, i|`s ccmpcsed cf mu||ip|e, ccn-
hic|ing grcups and i n|eres|s). And, B. Uccupy names
cr represen|s |he cver|ap cf |hese |wc lacks . l| i mpcses
i |seh as |he ex|ra dimensicn cf |he seh-ccnsci cus
asser|icn cf |he cver|ap.
Uccupy Va|l S|ree| ccmbines an|i-represen|a|icna|
rhe|cri c wi|h |he i n|ensi|y cf ac|s cf represen|a|icn.
Iew wan| |c be represen|ed, many wan| |c represen|.
Irequen||y, videc and phc|cgraphic i mages cf |he
mcvemen| shcw pecp|e reccrding and |ransmi||ing
represen|ing|he mcvemen|. Admi||ed|y, scme
live-s|reaming ac|icns cn|ine presen| |heir ccverage
as curnali sm. They vary wi|h respec| |c whe|her |hey
pcsi|icn |hemse|ves as ci |izen-curnali s|-ac|ivis|s cr
as cbec|ive repcr|ers ccvering s|mies neg|ec|ed in
mai ns|ream media. U|hers see |heir |wee|s, phc|cs,
videcs, and upda|es as key ccmpcnen|s cf |heir ac|iv-
i sm. |hrcugh |hese media ccn|ribu|icns |hey spread
awareness cf |he mcvemen|, infcrm pecp|e cf cngcing
and upccming ac|icns, and ac|i ve|y i ncrease |urncu|
|cr meeti ngs and demcnstraticns. A |hird, mcre rehex-
ive aspec| cI |hese represen|a|icnal prac|i ces appears
i nsc|ar as the i mages and repcrts share in a ccmmcn
name, in a ccmmcn rela|icn |c an cccupied Wal|
S|ree|. |hi s aspec| is |he selI-ccns|i|u|icn c| |he mcve-
men| as a ccnscicus ccl|ec|ive prac|ice. Tcge|her, in
ccmbina|icn, |he mul|iple s|reams and images reIcr-
ma| |he sense cI wha| is pcssi b|e |hrcugh ccllec|i ve
ac|icn.
Whc is i | Icr: Whc dc we imagine wa|ching |he
s|reams and Icrwarding cr remedia|i ng |he images: Tc
|he ex|en| |ha| |he i maginary audience is anybcdy cr
everybcdy, we accep| and repea| |he expec|a|icns cI
ccmmunicati ve capi tali sm, |ccki ng cu|side |he mcve-
men| Icr vali da|icn, and precccupying curselves wi|h
media and means rather |han divisicn and ends . Bu|
|c |he ex|en| |ha| we are |he audi ence, |ha| we are |he
ccllec|ivity c| thcse ca||ing curselves i ntc being as a
new mcvemen| cI |he pecple in cppcsi |icn |c capi|a|,
we enhance cur ccurage and i n|ensi|y cur ccnhdence
i n |he pcli|i ca| Icrm cI Uccupy.
The |hird relevan| aspec| cI Uccupy as an even|a|
si|e and pcli|ical Icrm is ccllec|ivi|y. Breaking wi|h
OCCUPATION AND TiE PARTY 233
domi nant tendencies toward the specifcati on of
i ssues and i denti ti es, the movement combi ned voi ces
so as to amplify thei r oppositional political force.
As I ' ve already suggested, i t replaced the ease of
MoveOn-style "clicktivism" with the demanding and
t i me-consumi ng practice of supp01ting an occupation.
No wonder occupi ers have been a vanguard-they are
dedicated, di sciplined, and unifyi ng through prac
ti ce a di spersed poli ti cal fel d. Occupy arranges the
physi cal presence of large groups of people outsi de, i n
vi si bl e, urban spaces, i n pol i ti cal acti ons authorized
by nei ther capi tal nor the state but by the peopl e's col
lective political will. The self-authorized practices of
a pol i ti cized col l ect i ve ampl i fy speci fc contradi ct i ons
i n the current arrangement of the capitali st state such
as the relati on between publ i c and pri vate propetty (a
relati on mani pulated and occluded i n networked com
muni cati ons platforms) and the di sti ncti on between
l egal and ill egal (for exampl e, Occupy Wal l Street
osci llates between acti ons that challenge capital i st
state power and appeal s to the l aw to protect them
as they carry out these actions). Bluntly put, Occupy
does work that Leni n associ ates wi th a revol ut i onary
party: establi shi ng and mai ntai ni ng a cont i nui ty of
cppcsi|icna| s|ruggle |ha| enables brcader numbers cf
pecp|e |c cin in |he mcvemen|. ' l| bui|ds ccllec|ivi|y.
ln ccmmunica|ive capi |ali sm, pecp|e can be
vir|ua||y presen| i n a|| scr|s cf numeri ca||y lge ccn-
cen|ra|icns. lndividua|s can pass |hmugh many urban
spaces wi|h rela|ive|y |i|||e hassle par|i cul|y i f |hey
adhere |c c|ass, race, and gender ccdes). Capi|a| and
|he s|a|e can and do crganize and Iaci|i|a|e |he pres-
ence cI |arge numbers cf pecp|e i n cne si |e cr anc|her.
Uccupycccupa|icn as a |ac|i cseh-ccnscicusly and
delibera|e|y reccmbines |hese ccmpcnen|s i n a specih-
cally pc|i |i cal fcrm |ha| in|ervenes as a new pc|i |ica|
subec|ihca|icn, cne |ha| cpens up a new sense cf cc|-
lective pcwer.
ln his di scussicn cf |he latis Ccmmune as an even|,
Badicu describes hcw |hcse whc were inexis|en| were
brcugh| i n|c a pcli|i cally maxi ma| exis|ence. ' ' As
wha| was inexis|en| ccmes |c exi s|, anc|her e|emen|
ceases |c exis|. Wi|h Uccupy Wal| S|ree|, |he ccllec|ive
and seh-ccnscicus asser|icn cf cur cc||ec|ivi|y des|rcys
10 V. I. Leni n, "What I s to Be Done? ," in The Lnin
Anthology, ed. Robert C. Tucker, New York: Norton, 1 975,
76-77.
1 1 Badi ou, The Communist HJpothesis, 221 .
cur pricr pcli |i ca| i ncapaci |y, cur pricr subec|icn |c
|he |erms and frame cf ccmmunica|ive capi|alism. hcw
we can and are ri gh| |c say we. The mcvemen| i s
|he Icrm |ha| i nci |es cur ccurage and ccnhdence i n
dcing sc. We dcn`| have |c re|rea| ei|her |c |he pc|i |i ca|
weakness cI dispersed indivi dua|s agains| |he fcrce cf
capi|a| and |he s|a|e cr |c |he i declcgical imaginap
cI unique, s|rcng, and ccmple|e indivi duals au|cnc-
mcus|y crea|ing |heir cwn des|inies.
We shcu|dn`| be aIrai d |c ackncwledge, |hcugh, |he
ccn|inuing mis|rus| cI cc||ec|ivi|y. Lven as pecp|e fee|
|heir cc||ec|ive pcwer during marches and demcn-
s|ra|icns, through chan|s asser|i ng |hei r pcwer |he
pecple, united, will never be defea|ed, we are |he
percen|) , and in |he lecple`s Ni c ccnsc|i da|icn
cf vcices, |here remains anxi ety arcund hi erarchy,
ncn-|ransparency, |eadership, delega|icn, ins|i|u|icn-
ali za|icn, and cen|ra|izaticn. lerhaps sensi ng, Ieari ng,
and repressing |heir cwn and c|hers` encymen|
whe|her cf pcwer cr submi ssicn) , pecple dcn`| qui|e
|rus| each c|her as pat1ici pan|s in ccmmcn s|rugg|e.
Un |he cne hand, pecp|e cany an i ndividual sense
|ha| |hey have |c dc i | |hemselves cr a| leas| kncw
a|| |he de|ails cI wha|`s being dcne) . They dcn`| uus|
that others will do thi ngs the right way, their way; they
don' t see themsel ves and each other as sol i dari l y con
nected. On the other hand, some of us at the same ti me
di splace thi s sense of getting thi ngs done onto others.
We assume that someone el se is doi ng it or knows
what's happeni ng. We say, "well , l et's wait and see
what happens, " as i f we were someone removed from
or outside the movement, as if the movement were the
acti ons of others. Thi s i s the fipsi de of the suspi ci on
toward leaders-someone el se is in charge. It's also a
ki nd of del egati on without del egati on, or a del egati on
wi thout representati on i nsofar as i t hol ds onto a fantasy
of autonomy as i t denies the emergence, functi on, and
need for leaders (that i t nevertheless unconsci ously
embraces).
I n the US setti ng of overal l mi stmst of the pol i ti
cal and economi c system, too many on the Lef have
tended to bel ieve that autonomy, fragmentati on, and
di spersi on can substi tute for sol i dari ty. Consi der, for
exampl e, the affecti ve osci l l ation between the sense
that the movement gets energy from l arge numbers
of people amassed together i n a central location and
the sense that networks of l ocal , speci fc, and often
temporary practi ces and projects are the best model
|cr |he mcvemen| rather |han the se||ing m whi ch
we are beginning and cn whi ch we bui|d) . Simi |ar|y,
|here is anxie|y cver prac|i ces c| i nc|usicn and exc|u-
sicn, real cha||enges regardi ng diIIeren| capaci|ies Icr
expressicn and ccllabcra|icn, as we|| as cver di||eren|
cppm1uni|ies |c mee|, discuss, and par|i ci pa|e. The
very mee|i ngs |ha| make scme pecple Ieel like |hey are
bui|di ng a new wcr|d make c|hers Iee| |ike |hey are
was|ing |heir |ime, spinning |heir wheels, and ge||ing
nc|hing acccmp|i shed.
Wha|`s |he al|erna|i ve: Trus|ing cur desire |cr cc|-
lec|ivi|y. This means ackncw|edging hcw au|cncmy
is cn|y ever a ccl|ec|ive prcduc|, fragmen|s are pat1s
c| ever larger whcles, and dispersicn is bu| |he hip-
side c| ccncen|ra|icn. We migh| |hink here i n |erms
c| a dynamic ra|her |han an ei ther/cr. dispersed lcca|
ac|icns ma||er, |hey ate amplihed when |hey are |inked
|c a mcvemen| |ha| can bri ng cu| huge numbers c|
pecp|e Icr massive even|s. And |hese massive even|s
are mcre |han us| spec|acles, mcre |han mcmen|ary
hin|s a| |he pecple`s wi||, when |hey are s|reng|hened
by |he specihc achi evemen|s cf specihc, |arge|ed
campaigns. !n many ways, |his has a|ready been a
key ccmpcnen| cf Uccupy. Ye|, |cc much mcvemen|
rhe|cri c dencunces cen|ra|iza|icn and ce|ebra|es |cca|-
i |y such |ha| pecple |cse ccnhdence in any|hing bu| |he
lcca| and |he ccmmuni|y-based.
Lkewi se, s|rcng s|ruc|ures, s|ruc|ures |ha| can grcw,
s|ruc|ures wi|h dura|icn, need ver|ical and diagcna|
ccmpcnen|s in addi|icn |c hcrizcn|al cnes. Agai n, |his
has been cbvicusly |rue i n |he mcvemen|, ye| much
cI |he rhe|mic cI Uccupy celebra|es cnly hcrizcn|a|i|y,
|rea|ing ver|icali|y as a danger |c be Icugh| a| every
|urn. Di agcnali|y is basi cal|y neg|ec|ed, whi ch means
we haven` | pu| much energy i n|c develcping s|ruc|ures
cI acccun|abi |i|y and recall.
Ccl|ec|ive pcwer isn`| us| ccming |cge|her. l|`s
s|i cki ng |cge|her. And s|icking tcge|her requires a
willingness |c make sacrihces Icr |he sake cI c|hers.
Nany are a|ready dcing |his, ye| |he mcvemen| dcesn`|
ackncw|edge i| i nscfar as i |s language ce|ebra|es and
valcrizes au|cncmy cver ccllec|ivi|y. Cc||ec|i vi |y is
presen| i n |he ccmmcn |anguage and ccmmcn ac|icns
in |he mcvemen|, bu| nc| tc and Icr i|selI. lt`s scme-
|imes assened, scme|imes experienced. Bu| i | has |c
be ccllec|ively desired and ccllec|ive|y bui l|hence
|he need Icr a par|y.
ln sum, |he Uccupy mcvemen| demcns|ra|es why
scme|hi ng like a party i s needed inscfar as a party is an
exp|i ci | aser|icn cf cc||ec|ivi|y, a s|ruc|ure cf acccun|-
abi|i |y, an ackncwledgmen| cf differentia| capaci ti es,
and a vehic|e fcr sc|idari |y. !| a|sc gives us a sense
cf |he fcrm such a par|y migh| |ake. a se|f-ccnscicus
asser|icn cf |he cver|ap cf |wc gaps i n |he main|enance
cf cc||ec|i ve desire.
Scme depic| |he Leninis| pat1y as a spec|re cf hcncr,
|he remnan| cf |he failed revclu|icn |he |encrs cf whi ch
mus| be avcided a| a|| ccs|s. ln such a vi sicn whi ch
may nc| be ccncre|ely held by anycne bu| seems
vague|y i n|ui|ed by many) , ccmmunism is reduced nc|
si mp|y |c the ac|ual whi ch is always necessarily rup-
|ured, i nccmple|e, i rreduci ble |c i|seh, and pregnan|
wi th the unrea|ized pcten|i a|s cf |he pas t) but |c |he
parcdy cf cne ac|ua|i |y, an ac|ua|i |y |ha| has i n fac|
changed cver time and frcm differen| perspectives.
Thrcugh |his reduc|icn whi ch i s an cngcing prccess),
ac|uali|y is disp|aced by an i mpcssible hgure, a hgure
sc resc|u|e as |c be incapab|e cf revc|u|icnary change.
higid, exc|usi ve, dcgma|ici |`s hard |c see hcw such
a p|y ccu|d even func|icn i n a revclu|icnary si|ua|icn
much |ess ever a||rac| members in |he ms| p|ace. hcw
wculd i| ge| pecple |c shcw up, |c march, |c wri|e and
dis|nbu|e newspapers, |c pu| |heir |ives cn |he |ine:
Hcw wculd i | grcw cr spread:
ln ccn|ras|, Lukcs`s acccun| cI |he Leninis| par|y
sugges|s an crganiza|icn fcrmed as |he subec|ihca|icn
cI |wc lacks, |he chacs cI revc|u|icn and |he ncn-kncw|-
edge cI |he pany.
Z
Lukcs argues |ha| Leni n`s pat1y
presuppcses |he ac|uaIi|y cf revc|u|icn. l|`s a pc|i|i ca|
crganiza|icn premised cn |he Iac| cI revc|u|i cn, cn |he
Iac| |ha| |he |errain cI pcli|i cs i s cpen and changing
and |ha| revclu|icns happen. hevclu|icns ate nc| mes-
si ani c even|s wherein lcng-awai|ed dei|ies i n|ervene in
human aIIairs. They are resul|s, ccndi|icns, and effec|s
c| pcli|i cs wherein s|a|es are cver|hrcwn, disman|led,
di s|ribu|ed, reccnhgured, redirec|ed. ln |he chacs cI
revclu|icn, |endenci es in cne direc|icn can suddenly
mcve in a ccmple|ely cppcsi |e direc|icn. Because |he
revclu|icnary si |ua|icn is charac|erized by unpredi c|-
abi li |y and upheava|, nc ircn laws cI his|cry prcvide
a map cr playbcck |ha| revc|u|icnari es can fcllcw |c
cer|ain vi c|cry.
Tha| revc|u|icn is ac|ual means |ha| deci sicns,
1 2 Georg Lukacs, Lnin: A Study on The Unity of His
Thought, trans. Nicholas Jacobs, London: Verso, 2009.
acticns, and udgment cannct be perpe|ually defened.
When we |ake |hem, we are fully expcsed | c cur |ack
cf ccverage i n his|cry, |c the chacs cf the revclu|icnary
mcmen|. Ve have |c be ccnhden| |ha| |he revclu|icnary
prccess will bring abcu| new ccns|ella|icns, arrange-
men|s, skills, and ccnvi c|icns, |ha| |hrcugh i | we wi||
make scme|hing e|se, scme|hi ng we haven` | ye| imag-
i ned. Icr |he Leninis| par|y, |c wai|, |c pcs|pcne un|i|
we are sure, un|il we kncw, i s |c fai l ncw.
The ac|ua|i |y cf revc|u|icn requires di scip|ine
and prepara|icn, nc| because |he ccmmunis| pat1y
can accura|e|y predi c| every|hi ng |ha| wi|| cccuri |
cannc|and nc| because i| has an infallible |hecry-
i | dces nct. lts thecry, like the ccndi |icns in which i| is
se|, i s cpen |c rigcrcus cti|icism, tes|ing, and revisicn.
Di sci p|ine and preparaticn enable |he party |c adapt
|c circums|ances ra|her |han be ccmple|ely mclded cr
de|ermined by |hem. The par|y has |c be ccnsis|en|
and hexible because revclu|icn i s chac|i c. The ac|u-
ali ty cf revclu|icn is |hus a ccndi|icn cf ccns|i|u|ive
ncn-kncw|edge fcr which |he pat|y can prepare. l|`s a
ccndi|icn |ha| demands respcnse, if |he par|y is |c be
acccun|ab|e |c |he exp|ci|ed and cppressed pecp|e, if
i | is |c func|icn as a ccmmunis| par|y.
A ccmmuni s| par|y i s necessary because nei|her
capi |a|is| dynamics ncr mass spcn|anei|y i mma-
nen||y prcduce a proltarian revclu|icn |ha| ends |he
exp|ci|a|icn and cppressicn cf |he pecple. A revclu-
|icnary pericd bri ngs |cge|her and ccnfuses mu||i ple
and changing grcups and c|asses. DiIIeren| spcn|ane-
cus |endencies, degrees cf class ccnscicusness, and
idec|cgica| persuasicns ccnverge. The Leninis| par|y
dcesn`| kncw wha| |he pecple wan|. l|`s a Icrm Icr
dea|ing wi|h |he spli| in |he pecp|e, |heir ncn-kncw |edge
cI wha| |hey, as a cc||ec|ivi|y, desire. As Lukcs w1|es,
lI even|s had | c be de|ayed un|il |he pm|e|atia|
en|ered |he decisive s|ruggles uni|ed and clear in i|s
ai ms |here wcu|d never be a revc|u|icnary si |ua|icn. ' `
Wha| |he pat1y kncws i s |ha| such a lack cI kncw|edge
mus| nc| i mpede ac|icn because i | cannc| fcres|a|l |he
ac|ua|i |y cf revclu|icn. The par|y, |hen, is an crgani za-
|i cn si |ua|ed at |he cverlap cf |wc lacks, |he cpenness
cI his|cry as we|| as i|s cwn ncn-kncw|edge.
The ccmmunis| par|y cccupies |his si|e and subec-
|ihes i|, i | prcvides a fcrm Icr pcli|i cal sub ec|ivi|y as
i| wcrks in |c|a| sc|idari|y wi|h and suppcr| fcr all |he
1 3 Ibi d. , 3 1 .
cppressed and explci|ed wi|hin capi ta|is| scci ety. '
Thi s dedica|icn requires ccns|an| in|erac|icn wi|h |he
s|rugg|ing, prcle|ari anized pecple. Ccns tan| in|erac-
|icn ins|alls a dcub|e dynamic i n |he par|y. Un |he cne
hand, i | mus| be s|ric||y di sci p|ined. Un |he c|her, i|
mus| be hexi b|e and respcnsi ve, capab|e cf |eaming
frcm and adap|ing |c |he ever-changing si|ua|icn. As i|
learns frcm |he s|rugg|ing masses, |he par|y prcvides
a vehi cle |hrcugh which |hey can unders|and |heir
ac|i cns and express |heir ccl|ec|ive wi||, much as |he
psychcana|ys| prcvides a means fcr |he analysand |c
beccme ccnscicus cf her desire.
O
Une migh| cbec| |ha| my use cf Lukcs | c presen| a
view cf |he Leninis| par|y as a |crm respcnsi ve |c lack
and ccn|ingency is se|ec|ive a| bes|. Such an cbec-
t i cn cculd emphasize Lukcs`s clai m |ha| because
|he pat1y, cn |he basis cf i |s kncwledge cf scci e|y i n
i ts |c|a|i |y, represen|s t he i nteres|s cf t he whc|e prc-
le|aria| and i n dcing sc media|es |he i n|eres|s cf al|
the cppressedthe fu|ure cf mankind), it mus| uni|e
wi|hin i | al| |he ccn|radic|icns i n which |he |asks |ha|
1 4 I bi d. , 30.
15 Slavoj
Z
izek, Revolution at the Gates, London: Verso,
2002.
anse frcm the very heart cf |his sccial tcta|i ty are
expressed. ' Thi s cbec|icn misses i|s |arge|. |c uni|e
ccntradi cticns i s nct tc resclve them. The party dcesn`t
resc|ve ccn|radic|icns, i| expresses |hem as ccn|ra-
di cticns. Lenini st revc|uticnaties take cn themse|ves
|he demands and ccnhi c|s cI |he revclu|icn. They
perfcrm the revclu|icnary si tua|icn, in a|| its chacs and
uncet1ain|y. Tc |his ex|en|, |he Lenini s| party cannct
be a party that makes demands cn |he pecple, i t i s a
party that makes presen| |c the pecple |he demands
they are already maki ng cn |hemse|ves, bu| can` t yet
ackncw|edge.
There i s cccupati cn and |here i s its pc|i ticizaticn. As
crganized cppcsiticn |c capi |ali sm, the pc|i ti cal fcrm
cf cccupaticn inscribes a gap that makes antagcnism
appear and fcrces |his i nscri pticn as |he di vi sicn
between the ! percent and the rest cf us. Iailing tc
reccgnize hcw the even| cI the mcvement breaks with
i |s setting, scme have been re|uctant |c ackncw|edge
|he Icrce cf divisicn and |hus resis|an| |c the very
pcli|i cs it enables. They prefer tc insist that Uccupy
1 6 Lukacs, Lnin: A Study o n The Unity of His Thought, 34.
is ncnparti san, pcs|-pclitical. This i mbues the mcve-
men| wi |h liberal and capi|alis| lukcs and lenin
wculd say bcurgecis) elemen|s because that is cur
defau|| mcde, cur immedia|e way cf |hinking, dcing,
and respcnding. Underp|aying |he cri si s cf capi|a|i sm
and cverp|ayi ng |he capaci |y fcr demccracy |c prcduce
pc|i|ica| change, vci ces in |he mcvemen| |ry |c deny
|he divi sicn |hey enac|.
The rcle cf |he par|y is |c insis| cn divi sicn. A par|y
pc|i|ici zes a par|. The ccmmunis| par|y pcli |i cizes |he
par| |ha| i s nc| a par|, c|ai mi ng |he gap ccns|i |u|i ve cf
|he pecp|e and subec|ifying i| as |he cc||ec|ive desire
fcr ccllec|ivi|y. l|s |ask is nc| |c fum| cr sa|isfy |his
desire an impcssibility), |ut tc mai ntai n i t, tc cultiva|e
i| as a desire. ln cur presen| se||ing, ccmmunica|ive
capi |ali sm attemp|s |c abscrb cur pc|i|i cal effcrts in|c
i |s circui|s. Ccnfcrmi ng |c i ts |erms seems natural,
necessary, |he cnly way tc strugg|e. we must engage in
elections; our actions must provide good media content;
we need a catch phrase that will go viral. This is mcve-
men| as ccmmcdi|y and fashicn chci ce. The par|y
prcvides a fcrm fcr resis|ing these |erms, |he fa|se
chci ce cf ccmprcmise cr nc|hing inexis|ence, failure,
i ne|evance) |ha| has resul|ed in lef|-wing me|anchclia.
As the organization of lack, it lets the choi ce for a gap
be the choi ce for the power of col l ecti ve desi re.
Only by readi ng Occupy Wall Street through an
insistence on the gap of desi re, that is to say, i n terms
of the communist pa1ty as a f01m, is the communi st
horizon of the movement vi si ble. To what crime does
the movement respond? To whi ch processes does it
react ? The remarkable rupture the movement effects
ari ses out of its organizati on of a radi cal collecti ve
response to capitali sm. Readi ng the movement any
other way resubmerges it in what was al ready ci rcu
lating through, and as i ndi vi dual contri butions to, the
affective networks of communi cative capital i sm.
But what do they want ? What do you want ? The ques
tion of demands infused the initial weeks and months of
Occupy Wall Street wi th the endl ess openi ng of desi re.
Nearly unbearable, t he l ack of demands concentrated
i nterest, fear, expectati on, and hope i n the movement.
I n these moments, the occupat i on functi oned as a gap
hysteri cizing the mainstream medi a, perhaps even
the publ i c i t cal l ed i nto bei ng. What does the move
ment want-fom us?! Wat is it demanding-of us ?!
Occupy Wall Street was an other that reawakened
pol i ti cal desi re, forci ng people to acknowledge the
ways their compromised choi ce for l iberal democracy
and neol i beral capi tal i sm has subl i mated and betrayed
their desi re . . . and for what ? For widespread proletari
anization, global warming, and economic collapse ?
Contemporary communists are tasked with organ
izi ng i ndi viduals. (To be sure, Lukacs grappled with
capi tal i st over- i ndi vi dual izati on al ready i n the twen
ties. ) Those of us in t he US, UK, and EU operate within
an i deol ogi cal setti ng that celebrates the i ndi vi dual ,
its unique voice and valuabl e opinion. Collecti vity is
ei ther confgured as sti fi ng and oppressive or romanti
ci zed as the communi tarian ground of authenti c i dentity
(whether ethni c, racial, rel igious, or otherise). This
i deol ogi cal confgurati on di spl aces attenti on from the
powerlessness of indivi duals as individuals to reform
the systems determi ni ng t hei r l i ves (systemi c change
requires the organi zed power of a group) to the wi de
range of opportunities for i ndi vi dual consumpti on and
sel f-expressi on. It hol ds out these opportuni ties as a
ki nd of lure or reward, as that speci al something col
l ecti vi ty threatens to take or abol i sh, obscuri ng the fact
that for the vast majmity such opportunities are there
onl y as possi bi l i ti es under threat, not actual experi
ences of freedom.
What do they want ? What do yon want ? The par1y
seems pcised |c s|eal cur encymen|, making cur i ndi-
vi dua| vcices and chcices and pc|en|ial fcr fame and
wea||h) al| |he mcre |i ke|y |u| fcr |he |hrea| |c |hem.
Ye| |he ques|icn cf wha| |he par|y wan|s cr |he anxi e|y
sc many cn |he Lef| have wi|h regard |c |he pa1y
exhibi|s |he same |ransIeren|i al inversicn a| wcrk in
|he demand Icr demands addressed |c Uccupy Val|
S|ree|what does th party demand of me ?as if |he
par|y wculd |ell us wha| |c dc, wha| |c wan|. lerhaps
|he underlying desire is fcr a pa1y |ha| could |ell us
wha| we wan| and hcw |c ge| i|. The cpera|ive fan|asy is
|ha| |he par|y really does kncw hcw |c crganize scci e|y.
Ur perhaps |he underlying desire is fcr a par|y |ha|
ccu|d fcrce us |c dc wha| we secre||y wan| and |ha|
wcu|d give us |he permi ssicn and means we need |c
ency. We can smi |e cur enemi es, |ake all |heir s|uff,
and be cn |he ngh| lef|) si de cf his|cry' Lef|i s|s are
us|ihably anxicus wi|h regard |c |he par|ya desire
fcr cc|lec|ivi|y is nc| |he cn|y desire fcr which par|i es
have prcvided a fcrm. They have a|sc sered as fmus
fcr desires fcr a mas|er. hcne|heless, prcceeding as
iI |he par|y is and can |e cn|y |he Icu cI a mas|er
leaving |he mas|er`s pcwer i n p|ace, allcwi ng i| |c
thwait our collective power all the more effectivel y.
The fantasi es of a master help us avoi d the more
unbearable confrontation with the gap constitutive
of the people. Together with the nuggets of momen
tary enj oyment we accrue i n the repetitive ci rcuits of
capitalist drive, they defend us agai nst a desire for col
l ect i vi ty that we don' t yet want. Collect i vi ty-common
cause and common determi nation-is diffcult. It
i nvolves gi vi ng up what we don' t have for something
we can't achieve. We are and cannot name a whole. We
are and cannot ful l y j ustify the coerci ve and produc
ti ve forces we unleash. The communi st party i s a form
for maintai ning thi s gap without yielding to fantasy or
fatal i sm-whi ch is why Badi ou theorizes its opera
tion in terms of courage as well confdenceY Nei ther
i nstant i ati on nor representati ve of the people, t he party
formalizes i ts coll ecti ve desi re for collect i vi ty; when
t he party fai ls to keep open the gap of desire, it ceases
to be a communi st party.
A coupl e of months after the movement to Occupy Wal l
Street was unde1way, a common gloss to the compl ai nt
17 Alain Badiou. Theory of the Subject. trans. Bruno
Bosteels. New York: Conti nuum. 2009. 330.
250 THF COMMUNIST HORIZON
tha| the mcvement hadn`| made any demands ci rcu-
la|ed. l|s basic message was |ha| |he ccmp|ain| was
disingenucus. We kncw fu|| we|| that the demand is
fcr an end |c |he i nequa|i |y and unmirness permea|-
i ng |he sys|em. Une cf |he i mages acccmpanying |he
message was cf a mass|he pecple, |he percen|
agains| cne, a fat cat high net 1vorth individual wi|h a
dc||ar sign cn his sui|. The gcal cf ccmmuni sm is alsc
clear. frcm each acccrding |c abi |i|y, |c each acccrding
|c need. Hcw we make |his happen i s up |c usi |`s |he
purpcse and pri nciple cf |he scvereign|y cf |he pecple.

0330368362.macmillan Children's Books - Alexander, Sama - Jodie.dec.100

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

0330368362.macmillan Children's Books - Alexander, Sama - Jodie.dec.100

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

The Communist Horizon

The Communist Horizon

izek argues |ha| |he ru|ing i dec|cgy wan|s

izek, |he divisicn

izek wri |es, class s|rugg|e cannc|

izek`s reading cf Lacan prcvides a fur|her argumen|

izek`s acccun| cf re|rcac|i ve de|ermi na|icn

i zek reccgnizes |ha| |he fccus cn exclusicn

izek ri gh|ly de|aches prcle|ari an frcm

izek`s argumen| is mcs| ccmpelling when i| ccn-

izek`s merger cf prc|e|ari aniza|icn wi|h |he par|-

i zek`s versicn, |he

izek emphasizes |he commons inscIar as reIerence |c

izek ncte tha|

izek discusses |he |cgi c

izek ccncludes, "tir snbject is as

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi