| Race, class, kind and sexuality: between power to act and colonial ambivalence |
|
Source: http://multitudes.samizdat.net/spip.php?article2677
To see the continuation…
Source: http://multitudes.samizdat.net/spip.php?article2677 Without completely rejecting the prospect for Bhabha (which sees in the imitation (mimicry) colonized and the ambivalence of the colonial speech the place of a fault structural of the colonialism, which would thus work with its own subversion), the auteure refuses to consider that the location of such structural faults is enough to determine the sources of the power to act political of dominated; consequently, it calls some with a tight historical analysis of the political situations and histories, which in particular highlight the concrete articulation and the dynamic indissociable ones of the kind, sexualities, the race and the memberships of class. It shows 1) that colonization was not, from the point of view of the colonial metropolises, an external business or a historical, foreign accident to their historical gasoline, and 2) that the colonization and the processes of transformation socio-policy into metropolis were basically overlapping (and that in them also overlapping the transformations of the reports/ratios of class, kind were, of race, etc). To see the continuation…
By Santiago Castro-Gómez Source: http://multitudes.samizdat.net/spip.php?article2673 L misses in Empire an analysis of the passage of colonial to the postcolonial. To believe Hardt and Negri of it, the hegemony of immaterial work would return to last the dichotomies centers/peripheries and the forms of colonial domination. The fault is in their genealogy of modernity: by paying attention only to Europe, by being unaware of the system-world, they miss the “obscure side” of the Empire, its colonial face and today postcoloniale. One however attends a reorganization of the coloniality, sitting on new representations of the development (sustainable development), which reinforces the hierarchies between the legitimate knowledge of the ones and the not-knowledge of the others. To see the continuation…
By Patrick Chamoiseau and Edouard Glissant/ To see the continuation…
for the Institute of the All-world (www.tout-monde.com) One of the most fragile richnesses of the identity, personal or collective, and most invaluable as, is as obvious it develops and is reinforced in a continuous way, nowhere one does not meet identity fixity, but also which it could not be established nor to be reassured starting from rules, of edicts, laws which would found authority of it nature. The identity principle is carried out or déréalise sometimes in phases of regression (loss of the feeling of oneself) or of pathology (aggravation of a collective feeling of superiority) which the various “cures” do not concern, they either, of prepared and taken decisions, then mechanically applied. Let us try to approach this complex multiplicity, ever given like a whole, nor of only one blow, which we call identity. People or an individual can be attentive with the movement of their identity, but cannot decide some by advance, by means of precepts and of postulates. One could not manage a ministry for the identity. If not the life of the community would become a mechanics, its asepticized future, made unfertile by fixed controls, as in an experiment of laboratory. It is that the identity is initially a being-in-the-world, as say the philosophers, a risk above all, than it is necessary to run, and than it provides thus to the relationship with the Other and this world, at the same time as it results from the report/ratio. Such an ambivalence nourishes at the same time freedom to undertake and, front, the audacity to change.
That would be a community without presupposed, without conditions of membership, without identity. How to think from now on a made community men who do not assert an identity (to be French, red, Moslem)? How to think from now on a community formed by unspecified singularities, i.e. perfectly determined, but without never a concept or a property being able to be used to them as identity? The being which comes: neither individual, nor universal, but unspecified. Singular, but without identity. Defined, but only in the empty space of the example. And, however, neither credits nor indifferent: on the contrary, such as in any event it is important, clean object of the love. Its logic: paradoxes of the set theory, the anonymity of the idea, the radical impossibility of a meta-language. Its ethics: to be only its own manner of being, of being able only its own possibility or power, of making to the experiment of the language as tel. Its policy: to make community without presupposed nor conditions of membership, irrevocable exodus of the State, construction of a body communiquable.
discussion with Giorgio Agamben carried out by Stany Pickaxe & Mathieu Potte-Bonneville Giorgio Agamben is philosophical. It in particular theorized, in the line of Foucault, the “biopolitique one”. A structure of being able very old, of which it makes go up the genealogy with Western Antiquity and who did not cease a épandre since, until becoming the dominant form of the policy in the modern States: a “state of exception become the rule”.
source: http://www.republicart.net/disc/hybridresistance/steyerl01_fr.htm To see the continuation…
The debate concerning the cultural globalisation is often associated with the so-called post-colonial theory. Which are contours of such an association? According to Ruth Frankenbert and Lata Mani (1993, 292), post-colonialism refers to a “economic situation” specific of the fields of the social forces like to a type of political positioning connected to the local conditions. The slopes of the geopolitical capacities influence in an important way these social reports/ratios. They influence the emergence of certain types of subjectivity, and consequently, the artistic production, as well as the formation of the cognitive and aesthetic categories connected to perception of this one. Since the total relations of capacity structure now the living conditions as a whole of planet, effects of the post-colonial reports/ratios capacity - of after the definition of Frankenberg and Mani- are also omnipresent. The places where are felt these effects are not external nor are beyond the social practices and of the borders of the Western companies. These borders and practices take part rather in their reproduction as a social report/ratio of simultaneous inclusion and exclusion.
source: http://multitudes.samizdat.net/Le-devenir-revolutionnaire-et-les.html To become revolutionist and political creations In your intellectual life the problem of the policy seems to have been always present. On a side, the participation in the movements (prisons, homosexual, Italian autonomy, Palestinians), other, the constant problematization of the institutions are followed and intermingle in your work, since the book on Hume until that on Foucault. From which is it born this continuous approach with the question from the policy and how succeeds in being maintained always there, with the wire of your work? Why the movement-institutions ratio is always problematic? To see the continuation…
The work of Mr. Hardt and T. Negri, Empire, seeks to clarify a double stake: to determine the adequate political form with mondialized capitalism and, at the same time, to bring it back immediately, as a whole of practices of control, with the new manners of living and of producing, with the desire of deterritorialisation of the multitudes. Hardt and Negri begin again, to apply it on a world scale, the central thesis of this Marxism hétérodoxe which one called the opéraïsme: the development of the capital is not autonomous, it is a reaction to the inventions and becoming work. It returns to a transnational form of being able, whereas the imperialism forever be only one prolongation of the State-nation, and obliges to reconsider the processes of emancipation apart from the unifying and organisational paradigm of the subject
To see the continuation…
|
| ||||||||||||||||||