Mobs
A character in Don Delilio's Mao II, watching the death of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini on TV:
I seem to be treading a little away from mafia-triads, thematically at least, and more toward the more general concept of the mob, or the crowd. This is not just a tactical move (since it's difficult to find literatures on triads of literary or theoretical, rather than just informational depth) but also a conceptual one. For if questions of the state and political organization seem to be outdated now -- there is no outside of late capitalism, as Badiou says -- it is even more urgent to reimagine new forms of organization that exceeds the political. And here goes my new, even more colossally embarrassing and impossible entry point: the social.
How ironic it was to pose that thought to a sociologist last night at our dinner table while the Trojan brass band was determined to blow our eardrums and intestines all at once. I think that while the original idea of illicit economies still hold, it has been nearly done to death, though in a different way, by folks like Bataille and Goux in the glorious days of Marxist-Freudianism. Anna was kind enough to give us a quick run-down of the difference between internationalism and transnationalism. The former focuses more on official, inter-state cooperations and avenues while the latter aims at less official, more culturally specific ways to broach cosmopolitan relations beyond the state. Hence the former's traction in policy-making, political science, and the latter's stronghold in other parts of the social sciences, the humanities and especially cultural studies, although transnationlism is really buzzing everywhere now, for good and for bad reasons. However, I asked my lovely dinner companions, isn't this where the history of Marxist Internationals precisely challenge the international/transnational distinction over the state since the Marxist Internationals were really tossing for the withering away of the state? Have we suppressed the significance of the Marxist Internationals so as to reify current anti-state movements as precisely 'counter-socialist", more "democractic" and thus more "free"?
This is where Hannah Arendt's The Human Condition, while really dry to read, makes a very good base for what I'm trying to tie together. The early translation of Aristotle's zoon politikon by animal socialis, by Senaca and subsequently Thomas Aquinas is significant in that the word social is Roman in origin and has no equivalent in the Greek language or thought. Yet the Latin usage of the word societas, according to Arendt also had a limited political meaning; "it indicated an alliance between people for a specific purpose, as when men organize in order to rule others or to commit a crime" (Aquinas also maintains the economic purposes of a true sociatus where "the investor himself shares in the risk") (23).
Karen could not imagine who else was watching this. It could not be real if others watched. If others watched, if millions watched, if these millions matched the number on the Iranian plain, doesn't it mean that we share something with the mourners, know an anguish, feel something pass between us, hear the sigh of some historic grief? She turned and saw Brita leaning back on the far arm of the sofa, calmly smoking. This is the woman who talked about needing people to believe for her, seeing people bleed for their faith, and she is calmly sitting in this frenzy of a nation and a race. If others saw these pictures, why is nothing changed, where are the local crowds, why do we still have names and addresses and car keys? ( 191)
I seem to be treading a little away from mafia-triads, thematically at least, and more toward the more general concept of the mob, or the crowd. This is not just a tactical move (since it's difficult to find literatures on triads of literary or theoretical, rather than just informational depth) but also a conceptual one. For if questions of the state and political organization seem to be outdated now -- there is no outside of late capitalism, as Badiou says -- it is even more urgent to reimagine new forms of organization that exceeds the political. And here goes my new, even more colossally embarrassing and impossible entry point: the social.
How ironic it was to pose that thought to a sociologist last night at our dinner table while the Trojan brass band was determined to blow our eardrums and intestines all at once. I think that while the original idea of illicit economies still hold, it has been nearly done to death, though in a different way, by folks like Bataille and Goux in the glorious days of Marxist-Freudianism. Anna was kind enough to give us a quick run-down of the difference between internationalism and transnationalism. The former focuses more on official, inter-state cooperations and avenues while the latter aims at less official, more culturally specific ways to broach cosmopolitan relations beyond the state. Hence the former's traction in policy-making, political science, and the latter's stronghold in other parts of the social sciences, the humanities and especially cultural studies, although transnationlism is really buzzing everywhere now, for good and for bad reasons. However, I asked my lovely dinner companions, isn't this where the history of Marxist Internationals precisely challenge the international/transnational distinction over the state since the Marxist Internationals were really tossing for the withering away of the state? Have we suppressed the significance of the Marxist Internationals so as to reify current anti-state movements as precisely 'counter-socialist", more "democractic" and thus more "free"?
This is where Hannah Arendt's The Human Condition, while really dry to read, makes a very good base for what I'm trying to tie together. The early translation of Aristotle's zoon politikon by animal socialis, by Senaca and subsequently Thomas Aquinas is significant in that the word social is Roman in origin and has no equivalent in the Greek language or thought. Yet the Latin usage of the word societas, according to Arendt also had a limited political meaning; "it indicated an alliance between people for a specific purpose, as when men organize in order to rule others or to commit a crime" (Aquinas also maintains the economic purposes of a true sociatus where "the investor himself shares in the risk") (23).
posted by msl at 8:42 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home