adequacy
i feel pulled in two directions in terms of general principles of moral economy and hence all politics.
on the one hand, the broad old utopian tradition of alternative economic development. this is the path that seems to invigorate american radicals most today, especially those inspired by the decentralist logic of ecology.
on the other hand, a fervent recognition that we entered a phase of capitalism long ago that can only be considered a general and integrated social factory; that its general character was put in place decades ago, from the ravages of mccarthyism to the economic and trade policies of nixon to the affective management of the 80s. and that alternative, secessionist appeals while ultimately the most valid and ultimately necessary, can only ever be marginal in the face of the social factory.
that this leaves us with another imperative, the outright resistance and disruption of the entire machine of contemporary capitalism in each and every level, at all times.
this requires a certain luddism, a certain militant willingness to break every machine in recognition of its placement within the entire mechanism of social regulation and control we find ourselves immersed in. that this machinery is not some simple thing, a question of radicalism versus conservatism, but is rather a matter of the regimentation and deliberate alienating management of all aspects of life. this occurs through capitalism simply because corporate capitalism builds a layer of analysis and control into every service and product, and functions to alienate moments of labor from free people both as workers and as consumers.
and that there can be no reconciliation with this, no bargaining, no reform, no hedged bets for the present weighed against hopes for the future. that the beast must be broken now and now and now, in every instant with every ounce of intensity.
these pull me in different directions, one experimental and invigorating and one practical and vicious. the conditions of both are correct though, the question seems to be simply how to bridge them effectively.
i'm still interested in the idea of a general strike accomplished permanently through willful self-misallocation. it has incredible rhetorical possibility, and it recovers terrain abandoned in contemporary culture.
it also allows a rejection of the social factory that is in the smae moment an affirmation. so a positive critique, a general field of disruption, tied to pockets and webs of alternative institutions, birthing them in the space of critique so to speak. maybe this could be seen as a new step beyond autonomist marxism? it describes what people are doing, and some of the political waves building in the world.
it's a helluva technique, that's for damned sure. and the effects would be totally anti-liberal. there really wouldn't be any way to stop it, not even through violence, and playing the cards right would set off "recessions"- i.e. create the space for alternative economic institutions to take over from weakened capitalist markets.
oi. if i publish this someday i'll never get tenure, that's for damn sure.