UNIVERSITY OF NOVA GORICA GRADUATE SCHOOL DISSERTATION Gal Kirn PDF
Preview UNIVERSITY OF NOVA GORICA GRADUATE SCHOOL DISSERTATION Gal Kirn
UNIVERSITY OF NOVA GORICA GRADUATE SCHOOL CONCEPTUALISATION OF POLITICS AND REPRODUCTION IN THE WORK OF LOUIS ALTHUSSER: CASE OF SOCIALIST YUGOSLAVIA DISSERTATION Gal Kirn Mentor: prof. Rado Riha Nova Gorica, 2012 2 Table of Contents ABSTRACT 6 ACKNOWLEDGMENT 9 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 11 A NOTE ON TEXT 12 CHAPTER 1: LOUIS ALTHUSSER AND SOCIALIST YUGOSLAVIA IN POST-‐MARXIST-‐ SOCIALIST-‐YUGOSLAV CONTEXT? 13 1.1. BEFORE THE BEGINNING: HOW TO RE-‐ANIMATE DEAD OBJECTS? 13 1.2. AFTER THE DEATH OF REVOLUTIONARY REFERENTS 20 1.2.1. POST-‐MARXISM AND LOUIS ALTHUSSER 23 1.2.2. POST-‐SOCIALISM IN (POST-‐)YUGOSLAV CONTEXT: AGAINST ANTI-‐TOTALITARIAN REASON AND YUGONOSTALGIC/LIBERAL MEMORY 29 PART I: ALTHUSSER AND PHILOSOPHY 36 CHAPTER 2: ON ALTHUSSER’S BREAK AND SOLITUDE: POST-‐ALTHUSSERIAN READINGS OF GREGORY ELLIOTT AND JACQUES RANCIÈRE 36 2.1. ALTHUSSER'S EARLY CONCEPTION OF BREAK: NOVELTY (IN SCIENCE) 36 2.2. ALTHUSSER’S INTERNAL RUPTURE: FROM DEFINITE BREAK TO THE CONTINUATION OF THE BREAK 42 2.3. FROM BREAK TO THEORETICAL SOLITUDE: REFUTATION OF GREGORY ELLIOT’S DEFENCE OF ALTHUSSERIANISM AS TRANSITIONAL FORM 45 2.4. RANCIÈRE’S CHALLENGE: ALTHUSSER, FROM “PURVEYOR OF TRUTH” TO THE CIRCLE MARXISM-‐ COMMUNISM? 52 CHAPTER 3: BETWEEN THE TENTH AND ELEVENTH THESIS ON FEUERBACH: ALTHUSSER’S RETURN TO NEW MATERIALISM 68 3.1. INTRODUCTORY CRITICAL NOTES ON ‘ALEATORY MATERIALISM’ 68 3.2. … THE THESES ON FEUERBACH: “ANNOUNCEMENT OF RUPTURE” 73 3.3. THE TENTH THESIS: THE STRUGGLE OF MATERIALISMS, OR ONE DIVIDES INTO TWO STANDPOINTS 74 3.3.1 FROM A TEMPORAL STANDPOINT TO A THEORETICAL STANDPOINT 77 3.3.2. ALTHUSSER’S CONCEPTUALISATION OF THE BREAK IN THE THESES 79 3.4. THE ELEVENTH THESIS: TO TRANSFORM PHILOSOPHY… AND THE WORLD 82 3. 5. PHILOSOPHY-‐POLITICS-‐SCIENCE AND THE OSCILLATING DEFINITION OF PHILOSOPHY 84 3.6. NOTE FOR NEXT CHAPTERS 93 PART II: ALTHUSSERIAN THEORY OF POLITICS AND REPRODUCTION 95 CHAPTER 4: ALTHUSSERIAN THEORY OF POLITICS: RETURN TO MACHIAVELLI 95 4.1. RETURN TO POLITICS: FROM LENIN TO MACHIAVELLI 95 4.2. RETURNING MACHIAVELLI TO THE MARXIAN TRADITION? 98 3 4.3. THE THEORETICO-‐HISTORICAL CIRCUMSTANCES OF MACHIAVELLI: AGAINST CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY, HUMANISM AND “THE ACCOMPLISHED FACT” 102 4.3.1. MACHIAVELLI’S THESES ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY 106 4.3.2 MACHIAVELLI’S FOURTH THESIS: ON NOVELTY 107 4.4. ALTHUSSER’S MACHIAVELLI: POLITICS OF THE ENCOUNTER 109 4.4.1. ON TWO TYPES OF KNOWLEDGE: VERITA EFFETUALE DELLA COSA 110 4.4.2. ON THE ENCOUNTER OF FORTUNA AND VIRTÙ 111 4.4.3. POLITICS OF RUPTURE: THE POLITICAL PROCESS OF DESUBSTANTIALIZATION WITH THE PRINCE AND FORTUNA 115 4.5. THE CASE OF CESARE BORGIA: POLITICAL VOID? 121 4.6. MACHIAVELLI’S NOTES ON THEORY OF REVOLUTION 124 CHAPTER 5: ALTHUSSERIAN THEORY OF REPRODUCTION: STATE, IDEOLOGY AND LAW 131 5.1. MACHIAVELLI’S CONCEPT OF LO STATO: STATE WITHOUT SOVEREIGNTY? 131 5.1.1. MACHIAVELLI’S MANTENERE LO STATO: FROM REVOLUTION TO REPRODUCTION? 133 5.1.2. MANTENERE LO STATO AS AN INSCRIPTION OF CONTINGENCY IN THE NEW STATE? 136 5.2. ALTHUSSERIAN NOTES ON THE THEORY OF TRANSITION TO CAPITALISM 139 5.2.1. MACHIAVELLI MEETS MARX: “PRIMITIVE POLITICAL ACCUMULATION” 145 5.2.2. MACHIAVELLI’S THEOREM: CLASS COMPROMISE IN THE IDEOLOGICAL AND POLITICAL STATE APPARATUS? 149 5.3. THEORY OF REPRODUCTION: SHORT GENEALOGY FROM QUESNAY TO MARX 152 5.4. ALTHUSSERIAN THEORY OF REPRODUCTION: MODE OF REPRODUCTION 156 5.4.1. TOPOGRAPHY REVISITED: OSCILLATING DEFINITIONS OF REPRODUCTION? 162 5.4.2. LOGIC OF REPRODUCTION: FROM “STRUCTURAL CAUSALITY” (“ABSENT CAUSE”) TO “ABSENT” OBJECT OF CLASS STRUGGLE? 164 5.5. THREE FIELDS OF REPRODUCTION: STATE, LAW (AND IDEOLOGY) 171 5.6. ON STATE: APPARATUS OR MACHINERY? 173 5.7. LAW: A REFLEX OF ECONOMIC BASE OR THE INSTANCE OF CAPITALIST REPRODUCTION? 183 5.7.1. CRITIQUE OF “DIVISION OF POWERS”: RISE OF LEGAL STATE 188 5.7.2. LAW: BETWEEN REPRESSION AND MORAL IDEOLOGY 190 5.8. THE WITHERING AWAY OF THE STATE, LAW AND IDEOLOGY? 193 PART III: POLITICAL RUPTURES AND CRITIQUE OF REPRODUCTION ON THE CASE OF SOCIALIST YUGOSLAVIA 196 CHAPTER 6: THREE REVOLUTIONARY HISTORICAL SEQUENCES: PARTISAN POLITICS, SELF-‐MANAGEMENT AND THE NON-‐ALIGNED MOVEMENT 196 6.1. POLITICS OF RUPTURE: FROM PARTISAN POLITICS TO SOCIALIST TRANSITION 196 6.2. WWII AND THE PEOPLE’S LIBERATION STRUGGLE (PLS) 199 6.2.1. THE FIGURE OF THE PARTISAN AS A MILITANT POLITICAL SUBJECTIVITY IN WWII 200 6.2.2. SHORT PREHISTORY AND BEGINNINGS OF YUGOSLAV PARTISAN STRUGGLE 204 6.2.3. …AND PEOPLE’S LIBERATION STRUGGLE AS POLITICS OF ENCOUNTER 208 4 6.2.4. THE END OF THE PLS: REVOLUTIONARY TERROR AND PERSONAL REVENGE? 221 6.3. THE SPLIT WITH STALIN: MANY ROADS TO SOCIALISM? 225 6.4. ALIGNMENT TO THE NON-‐ALIGNED MOVEMENT (NAM) 229 6.5. YUGOSLAV SOCIALIST SELF-‐MANAGEMENT/AUTO-‐GESTION/SELF-‐GOVERNING 236 CHAPTER 7: A CRITIQUE OF SOCIALIST REPRODUCTION IN THE TIMES OF MARKET REFORM 1965-‐1971: THE CRISIS OF YUGOSLAV SOCIALIST DEVELOPMENT 241 7.1. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS ON STUDIES OF YUGOSLAV SOCIALIST EXPERIENCE 241 7.2. ANTINOMY OF SELF-‐MANAGEMENT MODEL 252 7.3. MARKET REFORM IN 1965: SOCIALIST REPRODUCTION SHIFTS FROM DECENTRALIZED PLANNING TOWARDS THE MARKET 254 7.4. CRITIQUE OF SOCIALIST REPRODUCTION: CLASS STRUGGLE IN SOCIALIST YUGOSLAVIA AFTER THE MARKET REFORM 258 7.5. SEPARATION 1: COMPETITION OF ENTERPRISES, FORMATION OF MARKET DISCIPLINE 264 7.5.1. THE NEW ROLE OF BANKS AND GROWING EXTERNAL DEBT IN MARKET SOCIALISM 266 7.5.2. (UNDER)DEVELOPMENT IN YUGOSLAVIA: KOSOVO RELOADED 270 7.6. THE SECOND SEPARATION WITHIN THE ENTERPRISE: THE TECHNOCRACY VS. THE WORKERS 274 7.6.1. WORKERS’ POLITICS: BETWEEN THE TECHNICAL COMPOSITION OF CAPITAL AND WILDCAT STRIKES 277 7.6.2. POLITICS OF EXCLUDED: THE UNEMPLOYED AND AN ADDITIONAL NOTE ON THE NEW TYPOLOGY OF WORK 282 7.7. THE ROLE OF LAW IN YUGOSLAV SOCIALISM 288 7.7.1. LAW AS DOMINANT POLITICAL IDEOLOGY OF SOCIALIST LEADERSHIP AND AS THE OTHER SIDE OF THE PRIMACY OF PRODUCTION FORCES 289 7.7.2. FEW NOTES ON SOCIAL PROPERTY: LEGAL/ECONOMIC ASPECT AND DISPLACEMENT OF CLASS ANTAGONISM 292 7.8. FROM JURIDICAL IDEOLOGY TO IDEOLOGY CRITIQUE: THE HUMANIST FIGURE OF THE SELF-‐ MANAGER, RISE OF NATIONALISM AND LIBERALISM IN THE LATE 1960S 297 7.8.1. FROM THE WORKER TO THE MAN AS KEY AGENT OF SELF-‐MANAGEMENT? 299 7.8.2. THE COGNITIVE FRAME OF MARKET REFORM AND ECONOMIC CRISIS: LIBERALISM AND NATIONALISM COMPETING FOR IDEOLOGICAL HEGEMONY 306 7.8.3. LIBERALISM AND MARKET FORCES 307 7.8.4. NATIONALISM AND NATION-‐STATE 311 7.9. SUMMARY 316 8. CONCLUDING REMARKS: FROM ALTHUSSER’S BREAK TO ADDITIONAL NOTES ON THE BREAK-‐UP OF YUGOSLAVIA 319 APPENDICES 330 BIBLIOGRAPHY 332 SLOVENIAN-‐LANGUAGE SUMMARY 353 5 Abstract The dissertation starts with the diagnosis of the post-Yugoslav context marked by the historical experience of the failure of Yugoslav self-management socialism with its transition to neoliberal capitalism and new nation states. The historical transformation was accompanied by the burial of Marxist theory and theoretical transition to various postmodernist theories and openly nationalist historiographies that legitimize the present state of affairs. Chapter 1 considers thoroughly how to return to two, not only physically, but in the horizon of “post” also symbolically dead objects: Louis Althusser and socialist Yugoslavia. Some perceive these two referents as a historical curiosity, others as spectres that haunt the present. However, more than curious spectres, the author’s wager is to re- animate the scandal that they presented for thought and politics: Althusser’s touching of a traumatic point in the Marxist theory and Yugoslavia representing the first rupture in the international working class movement. How then to extract this core scandal in order to use it for continuous engagement in Marxian theory and to contribute to the necessary historicization of communist sequences and critique of the contradictory development of Yugoslav socialism. The dissertation consists of three equally important parts, which loosely correspond to major fields of Althusser’s work: philosophy and its role (part I); Althusserian theory of politics and reproduction (Part II); and historical study of revolutionary sequences and decline of Yugoslav socialist transition (Part III). The absence of a concrete study of class struggles, which can be perceived as a major limit in Althusser, is taken seriously and expanded in the case study of socialist Yugoslavia. Part I begins with a discussion on the theoretical development of the concept of the break and its relationship with another, less familiar notion of solitude (chapter 2). In the second step I disclose a reading of two post-Althusserian thinkers that in a particular way diagnose a solitude of Althusser’s philosophy: Gregory Elliot, one of the biggest scholars in Althusserian studies and Jacques Rancière, a former student of Althusser, who later turned his pen fiercely against his teacher. While Elliot condemns Althusserianism as the in-between transitional form between Marxism and post-Marxism, Rancière wants to restore Althusser to solitude, where he would be separated from the always-presupposed union of (Marxist) theory and (communist) practice. This question is tackled and answered 6 in detail throughout Chapter 3, where I reconstruct the question of theoretical and political practice through reading of Theses on Feuerbach. This is the central point where Althusser’s definition of the role of philosophy takes a radically different direction that opposed his earlier “theoricist” external position of philosophy that divides between correct/false and his more “politicist” stance of philosophy as revolutionary weapon. His renewed proposal of Marxist philosophy embraces a much more paradoxical position that I named “taking side at a distance”, or “engaged distance”. Criticizing the pragmatist and Stalinist temptation to register and translate theoretical slogans into politics, and thereby subordinates theory to politics, Althusser opens a more intriguing thesis on philosophy, which continues to take sides, but remains at work primarily on its own field, between “scientific” and “ideological” that is “at a distance” from political reality. Philosophical effects are most often “theoretical” and cannot be prescribed with political value and efficacy. In other words, philosophy will participate in the change of the world and not change it. Part II proposes that the most vital contributions of Althusser need to be taken together and not isolated from one another. Against the binary opposition of conjuncture and structure, these two chapters take Althusser’s return to Machiavelli and Marx as essential in understanding Althusser’s intellectual enterprise. In chapter 4 I show how Machiavelli traced a first modern conception of revolution, or what Althusser named as encounter of virtù and fortuna. In some respects, the detour to bourgeois revolution and birth of Modernity represented some crucial steps for Althusser’s position to upgrade unsatisfactory theory of “weakest link” and understanding of socialist revolution. And secondly, in chapter 5 I deal with the most under-researched topic in Althusser, that is, the theory of reproduction with a special emphasis on the Marxian theory of State and Law, which were perceived as major limitations in Marx. I attempted to reconstruct a more systematic theoretical frame for thinking reproduction especially via his posthumously published Sur la Reproduction and some of his late works. In Part III I rely on few of the above mentioned conceptual innovations that work on the historical analysis of communist sequences and socialist transition in Yugoslavia. Chapter 6 analyses three historical experiences that marked new Yugoslavia: (1) the People’s Liberation Struggle that waged a fight against fascist occupation and became a 7 mass revolutionary movement resulting in a new political form: the federative and socialist state of Yugoslavia. Furthermore I problematize the political and theoretical consequences of Yugoslavian split with Stalin in 1948 that I explain in two moments: (2) the invention and experimentation of the workers’ self-management model (1950-1961) and (3) the non- aligned movement that undermines the bipolarity of the Cold War era (1955-1963). This chapter rereads communist history by stressing the emancipatory dimension of ideas and struggles. However, the analysis does not want to fall into a romantic temptation of heroic past and simultaneously provides elements for a critique of the socialist transition. Drawing from multiple theoretical sources and largely inspired from chapter 5, chapter 7 deals with one special historical episode within the Yugoslav experiment, the so-called “market socialism” between 1965 and 1971. This sequence manifested the shift towards post-socialism that emerged due to the strengthening of a capitalist tendency, which consequently led to the internal failure and exhaustion of the Yugoslav model: the accumulation of economic contradictions (class stratification, the inherent tension between plan and market, underdevelopment and structural rootedness of core-periphery regions, rise of unemployment, and the entrance to the world market via financialisation and dependency on IMF) that coincided with an unprecedented articulation of nationalist and liberal ideology. My critique joins one of the major theoretical observations that Althusser’s work never ceased to discuss: insisting on the critique of the (socialist and capitalist) State in the light of rigorous differentiation between socialism and communism within the horizon of capitalist world system. Keywords Louis Althusser, new materialism, Marxist theory, return to Marx, break, theoretical solitude, politics of rupture, Jacques Rancière, Machiavelli, reproduction, structural causality, ideological and repressive state apparatus, state as machine, socialist Yugoslavia, communist sequences, encounter, virtù and fortuna, partisan struggle, non-aligned movement, self-managed model, market reform 1965, socialist transition, capitalist tendency, role of law, structural coupling of state and capital, social ownership, class struggle, technocracy, bureaucracy, workers struggles, contradictions and antagonisms in socialism, post-socialism, post-Marxism. 8 Acknowledgment It has been 5 years, in November 2007, since I wrote my initial PhD proposal, 5 years of a great intellectual journey comprised of productive encounters and failed attempts, but all in all an experience worthy being called a part of Bildung. The economic conditions soon pushed me to search for different financial possibilities and from my hometown Ljubljana I moved to two other countries and worked in very different institutional settings, which in their particular way influenced me as a personality, but also left traces in my theoretical work. As different chapters grew in different periods, one can find many different echoes that I integrated through a whole series of different political and theoretical discussions, presentations and book projects, in which I have participated with many other researchers and activists. At this place I would like to express the gratitude to all those that have been accompanying me in one way or another. Let me start with mentioning the institutional support: first of all I have to thank ZRC SAZU (and University of Nova Gorica) for opening the program on philosophy and supported my research proposal, especially I would like to thank Teja Komelj, the Faculty’s secretary who has always giving me assistance. Secondly, I have to thank the JvE Academy (Maastricht) which granted me a fellowship and an unforgettable experience, where I have conducted parts of my PhD research. Perhaps the most important event that directly touched on my dissertation was the organization of the conference Encountering Althusser, which I did together with Peter Thomas, Sara Farris and Katja Diefenbach. I have to thank them all for some guidance and comments during these and later years. Finally, I would like to express my appreciation to the ICI (Berlin), where I have enjoyed the great liberty of pursuing both work- and PhD-related projects. Also, the ICI librarians gave me a particularly warm helping hand in finding certain rare references. On a more theoretical note I must thank Ozren Pupovac whose work, especially his dissertation, has deeply influenced my perspective on Yugoslavia and how to read it in a different way. I deeply appreciate Slobodan Karamanić's and Boris Buden's continuing support and intellectual exchange in those years. Certainly, my supervisor Rado Riha at many different points offered me important theoretical insights through which I got a firmer grip over some weaker theoretical points. To this I am extremely grateful. Another 9 important thank goes to Rastko Močnik, who already at the undergraduate level in many ways encouraged my interest in Louis Althusser and other politically engaged topics. Frieder Otto Wolf is another person that I would like to express my deepest gratitude, who has in many ways supported my well being on the aleatory journey through Althusser and in Berlin. Some other important references and comments I received from Lev Centrih, Primož Kraševec, Katja Kolšek, Catherine Samary and Miklavž Komelj. The latter’s fascinating work on partisan art was a true inspiration and light during some dark times. Most importantly, I need to express my appreciation to those closely related to particular sections of the dissertation, especially for editing and commenting on early versions of the manuscript: Angela Facundo and Rachel Forse, who successfully blurred the border between comradeship and teaching. Also, my deep appreciation goes to Nathaniel Boyd, who was patient enough to work with me through the final editing session of the whole dissertation and give me some additional feedback. Also, I have to thank Jernej Habjan for helping me with the summary. Moreover, I would like to thank a few friends that commented on some chapters: Samo Tomšič, Mirt Komel and Ernst van den Hemel. Last but not least for their precious suggestions I would like to thank Ben Dawson, Chiara Bonfiglioli, Zlatko Jovanović, Sezgin Boynik, Ivan Rajković, Darko Suvin, Srećko Pulig, Nebojša Jovanović, Dubravka Sekulić, Žiga Testen, Dušan Grlja, Michal Fraczek, Agon Hamza, but also Yugoslav Black Wave, Workers-Punks’ University and FC Görli for some existential inspiration. The theoretical process confirmed yet again that individual theoretical work does not exist. And at the very end I reserve my deepest gratitude and love for the indispensable and loving support of my closest family: to my mother Nada, a real partisan mother and my father Srečo, a real fighter and my theoretical partner, who were both there whenever I needed them; and to my brother and best friend Bor, who in many ways supported me and cheered me up during the process. Both grandmothers each in their own way helped me with a lot of care. Without all their support this dissertation would not be possible. And lastly, I have to thank Niloufar Tajeri, my love to whom my debt is greatest. She has patiently and warmly stood at my side, supported me intellectually and emotionally, infused me with enthusiasm and love. This has been quite a ride and this temporary end seems only as a prelude to new beginning. 10
Description:The list of books you might like
