« Being a communist in 2012 - Opinion - Al Jazeera English | Main | Interview With Chris Hedges About Black Bloc | Truthout »

February 09, 2012

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Alain

thank you for posting this Jodi. It is brilliant. I am tired so I cannot think this through yet but the key point seems to me that criticisms like Hedges end up taking the focus off the real source of the violence. How ironic that someone like Hedges, who usually can see through the standard bullshit of liberals, ends up becoming an "internal critic" of the movement.

Alain

Hi Jodi - I don't have a lot of time right now but i was wondering if you had seen this criticism of David Graeber from a gentleman named Andrew Kliman. (http://www.marxisthumanistinitiative.org/alternatives-to-capital/the-make-believe-world-of-david-graeber.html) He basically thinks Graeber's assumption that successful direct action must assume "we are already free" even though we are not is self defeating. I have to say I never thought of it this way but it does give me pause. But what Kliman seems to ignore is the Occupy has already had quite a bit of success precisely because they have suspended their pessimism and acted as if we can assume our collective ownership of public space. It seems this fantasy or pretend world the protesters are occupying is having real efficacy in the real world.

Jodi Dean

thanks for the link--I will take a look. I think it's true that anarchism was crucial for getting occupy going, as were other groups/ideas/practices as well. Like you say, suspending pessimism was absolutely the break that was needed.

Jodi Dean

the link doesn't work but I found the article--I had skimmed it when it came out but didn't think it was very good; I think the 'already lost' point isn't useful; it sets up a false premise of winners and losers, which isn't a very Marxist way of looking at struggles between labor and capital, which are ongoing and fluid rather than static. It means that he flattens out Graeber's view and doesn't get at the more significant and interesting benefits and problems with prefiguration.

Alain

sorry about the link. The one thing I found of interest in Kliman's criticism was the idea that the movement failed at creating or building society in an alternative manner. In what sense did this specific goal get accomplished? I think Kliman is too narrow in his view of how this would look it they were successful but it does speak to the limits of Graeber's tactics.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo