jean baudrillard, ames hodges, sylvère lotringer-the agony of power-semiotext(e) (2010)

8/9/2019 Jean Baudrillard, Ames Hodges, Sylvère Lotringer-The Agony of Power-Semiotext(e) (2010)

1/90


2/90

ents

u-tion by Syl =re5otrin'er

;o#ination toHe'e#ony 3&ite Terroro+ 3orld Order re >ood>ro0sRoots o+ E il

2

59

79

J O9


3/90

“

.

'BN30 €ATIO A D !E"#IT$DE

Yhin book gathers previousl% unpu&lished te'tsin ())*+ t,o %ears &e-ore the author s death.Baudrillard read the/ at various con-erences

/d the ,orld+ in "io de Janeiro+ 0ontreal+ e, Yiik, 1uito+ etc. B% then+ he had &eco/e

an itin2 at philosopher3he never ,as /uch o- a “ho/e4 5:6iiJosopher an%,a% I 5oined hi/ in

0ontreal in late Octo&er ())*+ ,here hedelivered the -irst te't ioduded here+ “7ro/

Do/ination to Hege/on%.4 He ,as ta8ing a crac8 at the &e,ildering situation currentl% -acing us as

,e e'it the s%ste/ o-“do/ina2 tion 9&ased onslaver%+ o&edience+ alienation and enter a /ore

e'pansive ,orld o- “hege/on%+4 in ,hichever%one &eco/es &oth hostage and acco/2 plice

o- the glo&al po,er. It ,as a ver% po,er-ul te't+and I o--ered to pu&lish it right a,a% in English.Baudrillard ,as hoping to turn all the te'ts he ,as

; ,riting at the ti/e into a ne, &oo8+ so I held o--.


4/90

,ith cancer /onths later he ,as diagnosedA -e,and never regained enough strength to -ollo, Hhris Turner+ otido-l+ !eagull BO)8s () )s

³º' H ;

English ,ith a er/an2sounding accent. I a/ notsure an%one understood ever%thing that ,as said+

&ut the audience ,as ecstatic. It ,as philosoph% &%contact. This is the ,a% theor% ,as &eing acco/o2dated in an age o- /edia spectacle. But ,h%should

eor% &e spared the general deco/position o- all

values+ ,hich is turning culture+ politics+ not to/ention li-e itsel-+ into a carnival? Even !lavo5 i e8 s-avishl% said o- Alain Badiou+ pla%ing each other up+diai he ,as “ lato ,al8ing a/ong us.4 @h%not 0ao hi/sei-i As Baudrillard ,rote: “Histor%that repeats ii'el-turns to -arce. But a -arce thatrepeats itsel-ends up /a8ing a histor%.4 The event,as histor%

Very earl% on+ Baudrillard /apped out /ost o- the concepts that he ,ould ,or8 on -or decades to co/e. As he recogni ed it hi/sel-+ a

philosopher /a%; onl% have uur idea in his li-e+and &e luc8% that lic has one+ &ut he could un-oldit in such a ,a% diat no one ,ould recogni e it,henever the% pnssed &% it again. Actuall%+Baudrillard had t,o /n5or ideas: the -irst one+critical+ ,as that realit% lins disappeared and ,asreplaced &% si/ulacraL che second one+ /oreagonistic+ ,as to turn this disappearance into as%/&olic challenge.

The agonistic challenge ,as ,hat he reall%cared a&out+ &ut si/ulation and si/ulacra is ,hat

pc'iple re/e/&ered hi/ -or /ost+ o-ten ta8ing it+c 'oneousl%+ as an advocation on his part. It ,as in


5/90

-act a jubilant diagnosis o- our civili ation.Baudrillard could never Muite &elieve his e%es,hen -aced ,ith ,hat ,e 8eep doing to ourselvesin the na/e o-3,hatever. i8e Anton in Artaud+Baudrillard reali ed -ro/ the onset that our culture,as getting divorced -ro/ li-e. B% the ti/e he ,as,riting+ there ,as not /uch li-e le-t to &e divorced

-ro/. Baudrillard ,as hailed as the inventor o- “post2/odernis/+4 a concept he re5ected. The sa/econ-usion surrounded 0ichel 7oucault+ ,ho ,ascast as the stern advocate o- control+ or aul #iriliocast as the prophet o- speeNi. The pu&lication o- Simulations gave Baudrillard instant pro/inence inthe e, Cor8 art ,orld. It got hi/ pigeonholed asthe denier o- realit%+ and he ,as adulated or hated-or it. He ,as in -act alread% ,or8ing on other concepts3seduction+ -atalit%+ ecstas%3&% the ti/esi/ulation &eca/e the rage. “!i/ulation4 never

,as Baudrillard s signature concept+ the ,a% the“societ% o- the spectacle4 ,as -or u% De&ord+although the t,o notions re/ain closel% related.!i/ulation is spectacle ,ithout an agenc%. Theconcept got out o- hand+ the ,a% the Oedipus>o/ple' did -or 7reud+ ,ho onl% ,rote eight

pages all in all a&out it. The t,o parts that/a8e up Simulations ,ere onl% put together in the

&oo8 I pu&lished in English in the 7oreign Agentsseries in = P. In 7rench+ the% &elong to di--erent

&oo8s. “!i/ulation4 ,as -irst /entioned in TheConsumer

Serie pu&lished in =Q)+ a couple o- %ears aher De&ord sSociety ofthe Spectacle. 7ittingl%+ Baudrillard/anaged to turn 7erdinand de !aussure s discover%o- linguistic value 9signs as pure di--erences into astructural revolution.4 It ,as a clinical assess/ento- a societ% that ,as losing all its /oorings.Identi-%ing the code independentl% o- an% outside

re-erence allo,ed hi/ to read the sign on the ,all 3

e -loatation o- value escaping into &oundless spec2ulation. olitics aher that could never &e the sa/e.

The /a5or turn in Baudrillard s thin8ing+ para2do'icall%+ happened in A/erica. An invitation &%0ar'ist 7redric Ja/eson to teach -or a -e,/onths in !an Diego in =Q*+ together ,ith Jean27ranMois %otard+ 0ichel de >erteau+ ouis 0arinand Edgar 0orin+ turned out to &e decisive. Thei,;o ca/ps didn t al,a%s see e%e to e%e+ and there

,;ere occasional tensions and /utual e'clusions+,;hich I happened to ,itness at the ti/e+ &ut itcertainl% ,as a learning process on &oth sides+ andhad lasting repercussions. Baudrillard too8 a hugestep -or,ard ,hen he discovered the “!iliconRSalle%4 pheno/enon+ the ho/e2&ased co/puter utopia+ ,hich he hailed as the “c%&ernetic disinte2gration o- the tertiar% /etropolis.4S U6*J $ntil

(2 Jan Baudrillard+ !%VeFNc Exchange and Death, tons. Iain Ha/ilton

>W iir. ondon+ !age u&lications+ ==P+ p. 6*. All the page nu/&ers

in d5s ioniX:Auction re-er to this &oo8.


6/90

then+ he had seen the sphere o- consu/ption as a/ere appendage o- the sphere o- production+ the,a% superstructures sat on in-rastructures in0ar'ist theor%. "egistering the >ali-ornia e--ect+Baudrillard reali ed that production ,as /ovinginto consu/ption. His anal%sis o- the consu/er societ% hadn t &een a li/ited case stud%L it applied

every here. The consu/er process couldn t &estopped+ it ,ould engul- ever%thing. !oon+ theentire ,orld ,ould &e “consu/ed4 &% thee'changea&ilit% o- capital. “Ever%thing ,ithin

production and the econo/% &eco/es co/2/uta&le+ reversi&le and e'changea&le according tothe sa/e indeter/inate specularic% as ,e -ind in

politics+ -ashion or the /edia.4 U Y< >apital nolonger ,as a process o- productionL production

itsel- ,as dissolving into the code. U < He alsounderstood that there ,as no /ore gap le-t+ noinsider s distance that ,ould still allo, -or a cri2tiMue o- societ%. An% counter2discourse -ilteringinto the code ,ould i//ediatel% &e “disconnected-ro/ its o,n ends+ disintegrated and a&sor&ed4li8e ever%thing else. U(<

Be-ore leaving !an Diego+ Baurillard -everishl%co/pleted his /a ri/ nFZus+ Symbolic Exchangeand Death, ,hich he pu&lished the -ollo,ing %ear+a thic8 and ra/&ling &oo8 that served as a sca-2-olding -or ever%thing that he ,ould tr% out in the

to co/e. @hile Deleu e and uattari/ain2 s ncd that societ% 8eeps lea8ing -ro/ allsides and '&ai capital never stops investing and

disinvesting !tories ,ith its -lo,s+Baudrillard s o,n version it capital+ the

structural revolution o- value+ ,as a ivdiing &ut-luid. On the contrar%+ it ,as a cr/ogeni ing

principle &ased on repetition+ brin intogether di--erences -ro/ various sources in a

larger and larger scale. B% an “e'traordinar%coincidence+4 Baudrillard recalled+ he had

turned to 7reud 5ust at the /o/ent ,hen hereali ed that die s%ste/ o- production ,as

/oving to the sphere o- reproduction. Itda,ned on hi/ that the entire political

econo/% ,as governed &% theadi drive. U 6 < In its /ost “terroristic structural

-i:X/+ the la, o- value ,as a “co/pulsive repro2

ducrion o- the code.4 It ,as death on the /arch+and the destin% o- our culture.4 9 *(<

The death drive 8eeps un&inding energ% andicau'ung it to a prior+ inorganic state. 7reud treatedii as a &iological /etaphor+ &ut also as a /%th+/agni-icent in its inde-initeness.4 $sing 7reudagainst 7reud+ Baudrillard cele&rated it as ana/a ing &rea8through+ a /a5or anthropological discover%. This sent hi/ &ac8+ via 0auss andBataille+ to ancient cults and pri/itive -or/ations.Although he ,ould hardl% re-er to it &% na/e+ the

death drive &eca/e the 8e%stone o- his entire,;or8. The e'altation that he -elt then+ seeing


7/90

ever%thing suddenl% co/ing together+ rever&erates

through Symbolic Exchange and Drith, especiall%in the pre-ace+ ,hich ta8es on a visionar%

“Ever%,here+ in ever% do/ain+ a single +or#*re/

Air innovative -or/s o- la&or and -reer trade2!nionis" along the line o- the @o&&lies 9thela'ernational @or8ers o- the @orld ,ho hadcugani ed i//igrant ,or8ers in the =()s. 7eli'

do/inates: reversi&ilit%+ c%clical reversal and /iiari pu&licl% espoused their cause in 7rance+

annul#ent *ut anend to the linearit% o- ti/e+

Toni egri conceived it in Ital%+ and Jean

lan'ua'e. e-ono#i- e$-&an'e.a--u#ulation and po,er. Hence the reversi&ilit% o- the gi-t in the

Baudrillard drea/ed it in A/erica. The% all had,inched the sa/e conclusions: the 7ordist s%ste/+

counter2gi-t+ the reversi&ilit% o- e'change in the ,i'h co//unist parties and la&or &ureaucrac%

sacri-ice+ the reversi&ilir% o- ti/e in thV 1> le. . . Inever% do/ain it assu/es the -or/ o- e'ter/ina2

tion and death+ -or it is the -or/ o- the s%/&olic

itsel-.4 U(


8/90

a&le to oppose+ short o- capitalis/ itsel-. Theintellectual split &eca/e unavoida&le. In the

= )s+ the “,inter %ears+4 Baudrillard se'trapolations

&e read again in that light. It /a% ,ell have &een" /issed encounter.

,ere re5ected &% his peers as “,ea8 thought.4 1.ilCe 7oucault+

Baudrillard had &een deepl%

The conseMuences o- the paradig/atic change

indeed ere huge+ and the% could &e read in ;

di--erent ,a%s. I//ateriali ing la&or allo,ed the-or/ o- capital to penetrate the entire societ%. Itinvested ,or8ers &oth at ho/e and in the socialspace “as one /ight invest a to,n+ totall%occu2 p%ing it and controlling all access.4U =


9/90


10/90

ruthless in that it ,as /eant to o--sVt thV di!con2

sinuous hold o- po,er over societ%. STht( lTlé hé )

the net ,ere too &ig+4 and eluded his grasp6 Thl!

strategic v ision o- do/ination ,ent a long ,a% inaccounting -or the technological /utation o- po,er in the @est at the da,n o- the industrialrevolution. @hile out,ardl% /aintaining thei/age o- sover2 eignt%+ a ne, t%pe o- disciplinar% control san8 deeper into the social

&od%+do,n

tenuous ele/ents. @hat disappeared in the process

,as s%/&olic e'change. 7oucault s inversion o- thes%ste/ o- po,er -ro/ the top do,n+ +ro# t&eso er/

eignt% o- death to the discipline o- li+e.+ollO3S t&68 sa/e logic. The ne, s%ste/ o- po,er ,hich replaced

tr!e the slave+ and dialectics ,as a con2ga/e.Both ruled &% the -ear. Bataille ,ent on toh%poth2

esi e another -or/ o- sovereignt% that ,ould &ei Y irrd; 5oin domination. The real sovereign is@Ir+ in the iet schean sense. He doesn t derivehis po,er -ro/ his su&5ects+ &ut -ro/ his o,nit$ndi. He onl% ,aits it to co/e+ i//une -ro/ an%hunger save the one ,ho ,ill /urder hi/. It ,asii at ,a% that Bataille /anaged to reesta&lish as%/&olic e'change ,here there ,as none.

In =PP+ Bataille e'tended this sacri-icialcorn% to conte/porar% la&or through his readingit i0arcel 0auss s The %ift. 0auss opposed then:/icted econo/%4 o- capital 9utilit% and use value

the old in the nineteenth centur% had its o,ni-e replaced

-idi the orth,estern A/erican2Indian /odel o- /$ potlatch+4 a s%/&olic e'change in ,hich goods

death as a /eans o- controlling societ% at large.

Hegel s /asterFslav e dialectics ,as &:I!Vd on theslave s -ear o- death. iving it a perveT!V

cc rituall% destro%ed and rivalr% e'acer&ated to the

0#iiot o- ter/inal violence. 7or Bataille+ onl% uselesse'penditure ,as a&le to counter the deadeninge--ect

Bataille h%pothesi ed that there ,as not 5ust

&ut r,o separate -or/s o- /aster%. Theone+-irst+

c capital s e'changea&ilit%. The /ost lucid /an+ he,rote+ ,ill understand nothing i-“it does not occur

rel%ing on classical “do/ination+4 is geared to pro2 to hi/ that a hu/an societ% can have+ 5ust as he

duce o&edient su&5ects. The /aster rules &ecause clries+ an dourest in considera&le losses+ in catastro2

the slave is a-raid o- death+ and he is not. But ,ere

the /aster to actuall% die+ Bataille o&5ected+he,ould lose his lTlil!ter%. The /aster ,as no di--erent

6. 0ichel 7Ot-@t-iG+ “ es /ailles du pouvoir4 9 =QY in Di&H cc-t)Z'

pg\+ alli/ard+ ==6+ p. =).

phe that+ iuhile conforming to ell(defined need, p/vo8e tu/ultuous depressions+ crises o- dread+and+ in the -inal anal%sis+ a certain orgiastic state.4

;2 eorges Bataille+ in Allo, af E'ude+ tr. Allan !toe8l+ 0inneapolis+

>oiversir% o- 0innesota ress+ = *+ p. Q.


11/90


12/90

Bataille loo8ed upon capital as enslaving ,or8ersas &eing the sa/e thing as the sovereign i/posingo&edience on his su&5ects. Just &ecause the sover2eign chose to !rt his su&5ects live didn t /ean he letthe/ -ree. The% re/ained su&5ected to hi/ in,hatever -unction the% carried out. @hether a

prisoner o- ,ar+ ,hose li-e ,as sparedL a slaveserving in su/ptuar% do/esticit%L an e/ancipatedslaveL or a ser- in the -ields+ none o- their lives ,ere

scenario has never changed+4-on-urred. sin-e labor *o0er &as beentuted on death. Having converted his death

no a 0a'e. t&e 0or,er -ould only +reehi/sel- &% *@ ri' &is o0n deat& on t&eline

@hether the industrialist s ,ould crush their the ,or8ers slaughter their /asters 9it

$>: lle//a in =PP er/an% didn tNr t&at #u-& to &i# as lon' as a sa-ri -ial

their o,n. The% didn t have to die in order to &edeadL their death ,as differed, 8ept in suspension+

no#ytoo,ne er

o er +ro# *oliti-al e-ono#y

until the sovereign decided other,ise.And the sa/e holds true -or the -actor% ,or8er.

a&or+ Bataille /aintained+ ,as a unilateral gi-t o- capital to the ,or8ers and ,as /ranr “to conde/nthe/ to a hideous degradation.4 >ontrar% to ,hat0ar' &elieved+ the process o- production ,asn t setup to e'tract -ro/ the/ a surplus2value+ its real

purpose ,as to su&5ect the/ to a sacri-ice. AndBataille dis/issed the A/erican “su&ter-uge4 o- co/pensating ,or8ers -or the de&ase/ent that had

&een i/posed on the/. othing could /odi-% the-unda/ental division &et,een no&le and igno&le ./en. “The cruel ga/e o- social li-e does not var%a/ong the di--erent civili ed countries+ ,here theinsulting splendor o- the rich loses and degrades thehu/an nature o- the lo,er class.4

is &onor. Baudrillard 0rote in t&e sa#eThe ,orst that capital could do to a ,or8er

@ to 8eep hi/ alive+ conde/ned to “the inde-initeinCe-tion o+ a li+e o+ labor D:9

$nli8e Artaud and Bataille+ his older conte/21cs+ Baudrillard never %earned -or an inner Operience o- death reached through anguish+

eroti-is#. yet &e re#ained-on in-eddt d form internal to the system ,as the

le+t to oFset it As labor 0as slo0 deat&.stant and iolent -&allen'e >Ould possi&l%OGe +ro# it A'ainst e er % “revolutionar%4+ he insisted+ “,e /ust /aintain that the onl%

ernative to la&or is not -ree ti/e+ or non2la&or+is sacri-ice.4 UP=<

II S)imbolic Exchange and Death, Baudrillard &ed inde&ted as 0ell to Hou-ault s

'enealo'yY. eorges Bataille+ éid', p.

(Y.ID e'clusion +

&ut&e realiJed t&at e ery site o+


13/90

enclosure3as%lu/s+ prisons+ -actories+ schools3 ,ould eventuall% &e rea&sor&ed &% the s%ste/ and

Q at could have “denatured4 /en toD e'tent that+ &orn to live -ree+ the% ,ould

displa%ed as phanto/ re-erences. i&erating /ad2 lO t “the re/e/&rance o- their originalness+ or se'ualit%+ ,ould si/pl% e/pt% the/ outo- their su&versive potential. In the late =Q)s+7oucault and uattari did their ut/ost to openthe as%lu/s+ and succeeded all too ,ell3/ental

patients ,ere si/pl% du/ped into the streets. The

- d the desire to regain it4? His ans,er ,assc'd 2 people lose thelr -reedo/ through their o,n

The desire to serve the t%rant is so/e2+iin that the% the/selves ,ant. Had a

BoVtie8no'vn a&our native societies discovered at thesa/e happened to se'+ ,hich &eca/e an industr%. e in the e, @orld 9and /a%&e he did itThe onl% site le-t untouched ,as death. Or rather it ,as *t+iia!'!'eared+ in &road da%light in order toleave roo/ -or the ne, consu/er ,a% o- li-e.Instead o- /adness+ the li/it &% ,hich conte/po2rar% societ% de-ines itsel- &eca/e death. “ erhapsdeath and death alone+4 Baudrillard concluded+“&elongs to a higher order than the code.4 U6< Hedidn t /ean death as a &iological -act+ &ut therever ibili- o- death.

Etienne de la BoVtie+ a %oung "enaissance philosopher and close -riend o- 0ichel de0ontaigne+ ,rote a sli/ pa/phlet that has not

Onl% ,ould have vindicated his argu/enttrout the denaturation o- hu/anit%. It ,as proo- Hugh that voluntar% servitude ,asn t innate+

&ut21 3téd -ro/ the outside.!o/ething /ust have happened then+ a

BoVtie suggested+ a “/is-ortune U/alenrontre<din /ade people ,illing+ even eager+ to e/&race

eir t%rant. !uddenl% do/ination caught on+X-Ii':ting ever%one+

eventuall% ,earing the -aceo- die sovereign or the -or/ o- the !tate. As longas ODie ,as circular+ and societ% undivided+the dlTl " o- servitude ,as 8ept in a&e%ance.

The accident+ or /is-ortune+ 8noc8ed all thisceased to -ascinate generations o- thi nn8e

e r It ,as the &eginning o- Histor%. /ll

Baudrillard included. The argu/ent o- a BoVtie s Discourse of 0oluntary Servitude, *6 + ,as si/ple+ &ut po erful. Ho, did it happen that “so /an%/en+ so /an% villages+ so /an% cities+ so /an%nations+ so/eti/es su--er under a single t%rant,ho has no other po,er than the po,er the% give

Societies are slave societies4; ierre


14/90

>lastres+ a controversial political anthropologist+concluded in TYr /rcheolo of 0iolence, “&ecausethis love o- the su&5ects -or the /aster eMuall%denatures the relations &et,een su&5ects.4 The

people;s love -or their o,n su&5ection &eca/e the

ned+ ,as to prevent the e/ergence in their o- this cold /onster+ the !tate. @hether so2

pri/itive cultures had &een e'posed to savagel->! &e-orehand+ or pree/pted their recurrenceugh their o,n practices and institutions+

,ell2hidden secret o- do/ination. Ever% relationo- po,er is oppressive+ regardless o- ,ho+ cruel or

is an opende&ate+ id a nu/&er o- strict

&$t the% deli&eratel%

#e-&anis#s tot&at &enevolent+ co/es to assu/e it.

In Tristes Tropi1ue , >laude evi2!trauss heldTO 8eep their nu/&ers do0n. t&ey en'a'ed

ceaseless ,ars against nei gh&oring tri&es+ andon to the idea o- “innocent savages4 corrupted &% I pi civil+ religious and ,ar po,ers separate.@estern civili ation. It didn t prevent good natives-ro/ practicing tortures and scari-ications ,itheven /ore gusto and e'pertise than the sovereign shench/en ,hen the% tore the regicide s -lesh -ro/his &reast+ or &urnt it ,ith ,a' and sul-ur. But it

>tive societies ignored slaver%+ and preserved ancestral ho/eostasis &%staging ritual o- accu/ulated,ealth. This is ,hat

tch4 ulti/atel% is a&out: eradicating the evil/a8ing sure that ,hoever ,ins the ruthless

,asn t -or the &ene-it o- one+ distinct -ro/ the rest tIXnI8nge ,ould end up ,ith nothing+ and even ;o- the tri&e. To the contrar%: the ghastl% ritual ,as/eant to inscri&e on native &odies the tri&al la,that ever%&od%+ ,ithout e'ception+ ,ould haveto o&e%. The collective /e/or% created throughvio2 lence and death+ ,asn t &uried deep insidethe/+ &ut indeli&l% displa%ed on their s8in -or ever%one to see. It certainl% reMuired e'tre/ecodi-ications on the part o- Indian tri&es toresist change and re/ain e'e/pt -ro/do/ination. 7ar -ro/ &eing close to nature+ the%su&5ected the/selves to -ero2 cious /ar8ings

,hose ulti/ate outco/e+ >lastres

nothing: losing their lives. !urvivors/ore prestige+ &ut ,ere too destitute to

Int a serious threat.te po,er attri&uted to chie-s in anthropological

0arcel 0auss to evi2!trauss+ hasildl% overesti/ate d. In his cele&rated

esson+4S Vvi2!traus s recounts that heout the tri&al chie- &% hissuperior intelli2

and his eagerness to acMuire po,er -ro/ thett(>hnolog% used &% the anthropologi st to


15/90


16/90

consign his o&servations. There couldn t have &een+o- course+ a greater &etra%al in a societ% ,ithout,riting and ,ithout histor%+ ,here traditions ,ere

passed on orall% -ro/ generation to generation+than to introduce ,riting+ ho,ever rudi/entar%and ape2li8e. But so/eone+ an insider+ had to dis2sociate hi/sel- -ro/ his congeners and ta8e on the

&la/e -or the stranger ,ho ca/e -ro/ the outsideto &rea8 the secrets o- the tri&e. evi2!trauss auto2/aticall% assu/ed that the chie-+ &ecause a “chie-+4,as di--erent -or/ the others+ and ,illing toacMuire -ro/ the -oreigner a po,er that he ,ouldhave &een una&le to devise on his o,n -ro/ ,ithin.!uch ,as the price to pa% -or enlighten/ent+ and

evi2!trauss ,as eager to assu/e the @hite 0an sguilt -or it+ as long as the savages retained their assu/ed naturalness. @hat sealed this little /entaldra/a+ and got the stor% straight+ ,as the passing/ention that the chie-+ ulti/atel%+ ,as deco//is2sioned and e'pelled &% his 8in.

>ontrar% to the sovereign+ Indian chie-s arere/ar8a&le -or their co/plete lac8 o- authorit%.The onl% po,er the% o,n resides in the pm!mrs,in their capacit% to /aintain &% their speeches aneMuili&riu/ ,ithin the group. The% recapitulateout loud+ li8e a /antra+ the tri&e s genealog% andtradition+ ,hile no one+ ostensi&l%+ is pa%ingattention. As >lastres sa%s+ he doesn t have theright+ &ut the huJ to tal8. >hie-s have no po,er

0 *4 &$rli-e+ let alone appropriate so/e o- the$! ,ealth. Actuall%+ the% have to divest the/2

5# s -ro/ ever%thing the% o,n+ and tolerate a per/anent plunder4 -ro/ the other /e/&ers.67ti ,onder the position o- a chie- is not e'actl%desira&le. The% re/ain dependent on ever%one

and are granted several ,o/en+ not as a privi2; &ut &ecause the% aren t allo,ed to hunt -or

Ourselves. enerosit% is not onl% a chie- s dut%+@ an involuntar% servitude.4

O-lieu e and uattari reproached >lastres 9,ho/dcv+ consulted -or /nti(2edipus) -or assu/ing thatsocieties could e'ist in autarch% outside o- tory.But >lastres did /ore: he suggested that a 6 $$tie

hi/sel- had pulled o-- a si/ilar -eat. The on thathis DiscDurse raises+ he said+ is so

-ree4 and independent o- an% territorialit%-or it can still &e received toda% in the sa/e ,a%.

a -i'ate had a uniMue opportunit% to “step our o-his2

s. &ecause the /onarch% ,as 5ust &eginning tohiunge a/ong rival -eudal lords and divide societ%: eng a vertical a'is+ pitting against each other

reigns and su&5ects+ /asters and slaves. InAudi+ specialists agree that the D! ronrse ,as a

direct espouse to a /assive peasant uprising againstta'es ii u%enne+ the -irst o- its 8ind+ that ,as

ruthlessl%crushed &% the /onarch s soldiers in *6 .

a Boetie s purpose ,asn t to encourage su&5ectsto re&el+ &ut to re/ind the/ that an% do/ination


17/90

is illegiti/ate: “7ro/ all these indignities+ such asthe ver% &easts o- the -ield ,ould not endure+ %oucan deliver %ourselves i- %ou tr%+ not &% ta8ingaction+ &ut /erel% &% ,illing to &e -ree. "esolve toserve no /ore+ and %ou are at once -reed. . . sup2

port hi/ no longerL then %ou ,ill &ehold hi/+li8e a great >olossus ,hose pedestal has &een

pulled a,a%+ -all o- his o,n ,eight and &rea8 in pieces.4 a Boetie sho,ed no respect -or thesovereign s right+ divine or not+ let alone -or those,ho su&5ected the/selves ,illingl% to it. There,as so/ething that nothing could su&due+ evenunder the /ost vicious tortures: the po,er thatdeath a--ords. 0ontaigne+ an e'ile li8e hi/ inhis o,n ti/e+ ,rote: “ re/editation o- death is

pre/editation o- -reedo/. . . Ac8no,ledgingdeath -rees us -ro/ ever% su&5ection and con2straint.4 Onl% death resists do/ination.

#oluntar% servitude is a parado'ical state/ent &ecause servitude is not e'perienced passivel%+ &utactivel%3a-ter all+ it is ,illed. And an%thing thatis ,illed could &e un,illed. eople rather desiretheir o,n oppression. O&viousl%+ the% /ust getso/ething in return: identit%+ privilege+ securit%+even pleasure+ ho,ever perverse. Jean27ranMois

%otard once asserted+ scandalousl%+ in 3ibidinal Economy, that -actor% ,or8ers en5o%ed their lot.The% ,ere !'ro!ei, and proud to &e. Didn t the pro2letariat+ a-ter 0ar'+ &eco/e a value] The% ,ere

0 onl% ones ,ho 8ne, ,hat “rough realit%4,as. I;d:inch intellectuals+ Jean2 aul !artre

included+:8 deepl% illegiti/ate+ even d,ar-ed &% the/+

,ore their &lue overalls in de/onstrations to priate so/e o- their po,er. hilosopher

One @eil couldn t care less a&out po,er+ she

,anted to &e cruci-ied. !he 5oined the asse/2 &l% line to e'perience ,hat &eing a slave ,as li8e

roo8 hersel- -or one+ reinventing od in order in seal her o,n -ate. 7actor% ,or8ers ,ere the

o- hu/an8ind3as i- slaver% could &ring8g else than /ore slaver%. In the end

it t the dictatorship o- the proletariat that &ought out a classless societ%+ &ut capitalis/3onin:s oo, , ;nn ter/s+ o- course+ and -or i ts o,n

&ene-iit.#oluntar% servitude ,asn t so/ething that one

; c nild ac8no,ledge+ consciousl% or notL it ,as per er turned inside out+ ever%one -orever circling

'/ud each other. @hat ,as un-orgiva&le a&out-ta:v Y re&els or a&out the Autono/ia /ove2/ent at its pea4 in =QQ is that the% did nut ,antii /8e po,er. 7ranco iperno+ one o- their leaders+ad/itted to /e later on: “@e didn t 8no, ,hat,e ,ould have done ,ith it.4 As Baudrillard(rites in The /gony of 5o er. “ o,er itsel- /ust

&e A&olished3and not solel% &ecause o- a re-usal to &e eli/inated+ ,hich is at the heart o- alltraditional sO'iggles3&ut also+ 5ust as violentl%+ in

the re-usal to do/inate.4


18/90

Agony of Power


19/90

0 DO0 I ATIO TO H E E IW O C

order to grasp ho, glo&ali ation and glo&alnis/ ,or8s+ ,e should distinguishcare-ull% n do/ination and hege/on%.One could

that hege/on% is the ulti/ate stage o- do/i2nion and its ter/inal phase. Do/ination is

eri ed &% the /asterFslave relation+ ,hicha dual relation ,ith potential alienation+ a

nship o- -orce and con-licts. It has a violentr% o- oppression and li&eration. There are

do/inators and the do/inated3it re/ainslic relationship. Ever%thing changes ,ith

e/ancipation o- the slave and the internal2on o- the /aster &% the e/ancipated slave.

on% &egins here in the disappearance o- the personal+ agonistic do/ination -or the sa8e

integral realit%3the realit% o- net,or8s+ o- theand total e'change ,here there are no

do/inators or do/inated.


20/90

Indeed+ it could &e said that hege/on% &ringsdo/ination to an end. @e+ e/ancipated ,or8ers+internali e the lo&al Order and its operationalsetup o- ,hich ,e are the hostages -ar /ore thanrhe slaves. >onsensus+ &e it voluntar% or involun2tar%+ replaces traditional servitude+ ,hich still

&elongs to the s%/&olic register o- do/ination.

HE E0O /eans the one ,ho co//ands+ orders+ leads and governs 9and not the one ,hodo/inates and e'ploits . This &rings us &ac8 tothe literal /eaning o- the ,ord “c%&ernetic 9Ku&ernetil::V+ the art o- governing . >ontrar% to do/ination+ a hege/on% o- ,orld 5=O@Vr i nolonger a dual+ personal or real -or/ o- do/ination+

&ut the do/ination o- net,or8s+ o- calculation and integral e'change.

Do/ination can &e overthro,n -ro/ the out2side. Hege/on% can onl% &e inverted or reversed-ro/ the inside. T,o di--erent+ al/ost contrar%

paradig/s: the paradig/ o- revolution+ transgres2sion+ su&version 9do/ination and the paradig/o- inversion+ reversion+ auto2liMuidation 9hege2/on% . The% are al/ost e'clusive o- each other+

&ecause the /echanis/s o- revolution+ o- anti2do/ination+ as histor% de/onstrated+ can &eco/ethe i/petus or the vector -or hege/on%. @e couldco/pare hege/on% to the &rain+ ,hich is its

&iological eMuivalent. i8e the &rain+ ,hich su&or2dinates ever% other -unction+ the central co/puter

es the hege/onic hold o- a glo&al po,er can there-ore serve as an i/age o- our presentical situation.

other -eature distinguishes hege/on% -ro/and si/ple do/ination is the co/ing o- a

ental event: si/ulacra and si/ulation.

on% ,or8s through general /asMuerade+relies on the e'cessive use o- ever% sign and

it%+ the ,a% it /oc8s its o,n values+ andges the rest o- the ,orld &% its c%nicis/ivali ation4 . >lassical+ historical do/inationd a s%ste/ o- positive values+ displa%ing asas de-ending these values. >onte/porar%on%+ on the other hand+ relies on a s%/&olic

idation o- ever% possi&le value. The ter/sacru/+4 “si/ulation and “virtual su//a2

this liMuidation+ in ,hich ever% signi-ication isted in its o,n sign+ and the pro-usion o-

parodies a &% no, uno&taina&le realit%. Thistotal /asMuerade in ,hich do/ination itsel- ed. o,er is onl% the parod% o- the signs o-

^235ust as ,ar is onl% the parod% o- signs o- including technolog%. 0asMuerade o- ,ar+uerade o- po,er. @e can there-ore spea8 o-

hege/on% o- /asMuerade+ and the /asMueradehege/on%. All /eaning is a&olished in its o,n

and the pro-usion o- signs parodies a no,vera&le realit%.


21/90

Do/ination and hege/on% are separated &%the liMuidation o- realit%+ the super -ast irruption+ o- late+ o- a glo&al principle o- si/ulation+ a glo&alhold &% the virtual. lo&ali ation is the hege/on%o- a glo&al po,er and can onl% occur in the -ra/e2,or8 o- the virtual and the net,or8s3,ith theho/ogeneit% that co/es -ro/ signs e/ptied o-

their su&stance.The entire @estern /asMuerade relies on the

canni&ali ation o- realit% &% signs+ or o- a culture

&% itsel-. I use “canni&ali e4 here in the derivative

sense o- cannibali*ing a car, using it as spare parts. >anni&ali ing a culture+ as ,e do it toda%+/eans tin8ering ,ith its values li8e spare partsinas/uch as the entire s%ste/ is out o- order. Thisdistinction &et,een do/ination and hege/on% iscrucial It deter/ines the -or/s o- resistanceappropriate -or each and the various ,a%s in

,hich the present situation could evolve. Onedoesn t respond to hege/on% and do/ination inthe sa/e ,a%L the strategies should not &econ-used.

In the -ace o- this hege/on%+ the ,or8 o- thenega2 tive+ the ,or8 o- critical thought+ o- therelationship o- -orces against oppression+ or o- radical su&5ec2 tivit% against alienation+ all thishas 9virtuall% &eco/e o&solete. It has &eco/eo&vious that+ than8s to the t,ists and turns o- c%nical reason+ or the ruses o- histor%+ this ne,hege/onic con-iguration

ich is no longer the hege/on% o- capitala&sor&ed the negative+ negativit% as a ,a% o- ining the initiative. >aught in a vast !toc8hol/

o/e+ the alienated+ the oppressed+ and theni ed are siding ,ith the s%ste/ that holds

hostage. The% are no, “anne'ed+4 in thesense+ prisoners o- the “ne'us+4 o- the net2

+ connected -or &etter or ,orse.o,er has ransac8ed all o- the strategies o- ulation: parod%+ iron%+ and sel-2/oc8er%3

the e-t ,ith onl% a phanto/ o- the truth.-a/ous slogan -or the BanMue ationale de

is 9B in the =Q)s co/es to /ind: “Cour e% interests /e?4 This state/ent encapsulates

igno/in% o- capital -ar &etter than an% criticalis. Denouncing capital and all o- the &an8ing

isins ,as nothing ne,+ the scandalouse ,as that the &an8er hi/sel- had sai co/ing out -ro/ the /outh o- Evil. It ,asn tunciation+ a critical anal%sis. It ca/e -ro/ the

t po,er and en5o%ed co/plete i//unit%.d ad/it its “cri/e4 in &road da%light.

The /ost recent pro-ession o- -aith in a si/ilar ca/e -ro/ atric8 e a%+ >EO o- T7 + the

television channel: “ et s &e realistic: theo- T7 is to help >oca2>ola sell its products.

an advertising ca/paign to ,or8 properl%+vie,er s &rains have to &e accessi&le. The goalour progra/s is to /a8e the/ availa&le+ &%


22/90

entertaining the/+ rela'ing the/ &et,een t,o/essages. @hat ,e sell to >oca2>ola is rela'ed2

&rains ti/e. . . othing is harder than gettingthe/ to open up.

@e should pa% our respect to this a/a ing ad/ission and pro-essional c%nicis/. It is ,idel% shared+ as the -ollo,ing slogan -or oste

Teleco/ testi-ies: “0one% has no se'+ &ut it ,illreproduce. And it could &e conde/ned -or thesa/e reason+ as it ,as &% all -ine /inds. Butthis is not the real pro&le/. Even those ,hoconde/ned e a% s shoc8ing state/ent ,ere-ascinated &% its insolence. Doesn t thissha/eless -lippanc% /ani2 -est a greater -reedo/than the stone,alling o- critical contestation?Bur this is the Muestion: ho, could truth &eli-ted &% an “arrogant4 dis2 course that gets theupper2hand &% short2circuiting an% critiMue]

Technocratic c%nicis/ is not scandalous per se, &ut &% the ,a% it &rea8s a -unda/ental rule o- our social and political ga/e: corruption -or so/e and protesting Evil -or others. I- the corrupt have norespect -or this protocol+ and sho, their hand,ithout sparing us their h%pocris%+ then the ritual/echanis/ o- denunciation goes ha%,ire. The privilege o- telling the truth eludes our grasp3in

the -ace o- capital unveiled &% the capitalists+even.

In -act+ e a% ta8es a,a% the onl% po,er ,ehad le-t. He steals our denunciation. Thts is the

38 ÷


23/90

!> -idal. Other,ise+ ho, could %ou e'plainthe outrage ,hen he revealed an opensecret? ead o- denouncing evil -ro/ the

position o- good 9eternal /oral position + he e'presses evilno the position o- evil. It is the &est ,a% tosa% &ut it re/ains inad/issi&le. Truth /ust

&e on:side o- ood. There can &e no intelligence on

!ide o- Evil. Cet all those ,ho outdo the/2,ith arrogance 9 e en + c%nicis/ 9 e

+ pornograph% 9A&u hrai& + /%tho/aniaie . un/as8 the truth o- the s%ste/ ina&use o- it. The e--ects are &oth -ascinatingrevolting3and the% are /uch /oree--ective conventional critiMues.

A &itter truth: radicalness is on the side o- thegence o- evil. >ritical intelligence no

longer res up ro the collapse o- realit%and to the e into total realit%. The truth+or the inhu2

it%o- this situation+ can onl% &e revealed -ro/inside+ voluntaril% or involuntaril%+ &%

the ts o- the e/&e le/ent o- realit%. Onl%evil spea8 evil no,3evil is a

ventriloMuist. itical intelligence is le-t to 5u/pover its o,n o,: even in its radicalness+ it

re/ains pious denunciator%. The curse o- critical discourse is reconcile itself secretl% ,ith

those it critici es &% ouncing the/ 9and I a/,ell a,are that ,hat

D a/ sa%ing here &elongs to this discourse .

unciation ,ill never have the shoc8ing


24/90

-ran8ness o- an unscrupulous discourse. @e /ustloo8 to the side o- evil -or the clearest indications+the harshest realit%. Onl% those ,ho sho, no con2cern -or contradiction or critical consideration intheir acts and discourse can+ &% this ver% /eans+

shed -ull light+ ,ithout re/orse or a/&iguit%+ onthe a&surd and e'travagant character o- the state

o- things+ through the pla% o- o&5ective iron%.@hat is happening to critical thought3thethought o- the Enlighten/ent and the "evolution+

the thought that drove the anal%sis o- capital+ /er2chandise and spectacle throughout the nineteenthand t,entieth centuries3is ,hat happened &e-ore

to religious+ ethnic and linguistic pheno/ena. @eare presentl% ,itnessing their -or/al rene,al+ &ut

,ithout an% o- their original su&stance. The reli2

gious revival is epigonal and has nothing to do,ith the -ervor o- past centuries. It presupposesthe dilution o- -aith as s%/&olic organi ation+ thedisappearance o- transcendence 9and /a%&e eventhe death o- od . It is the speci-ic product o- adisenchanted situation o- loss ,here ever%thingthat disappears is arti-iciall% revived. It is the a&re2active product o- a ,orld ,here there is no reasonle-t to &elieve in an%thing.

>urrent critical thought continues along itstra5ector% &ut it is no longer the critical thought o- the Enlighten/ent and /odernit%+ ,hich hadtheir o,n o&5ect and their o,n energ%. It is /erel%

0 cpipheno/enon o- a ,orld ,here there is8g le-t to anal% e in the hopes o-

su&verting @ thought i s no longer current &ecause ,e 0 no longer in a “critical4 situation+

li8e the his2 do/ination o- capital. @e haveentered a

onic -or/ o- total realit%+ o- closed2circuit

po,er that has even captured the negative."" at is le-t toda% is the speci-ic product o- this piisdiu/ous situation ,here it no longer has a

:orica reason to e'ist or an% e--ectiveness.Cet it is all the /ore pro/inent. The critiMue o-

Ation and spectacle has &losso/ed and spread@ e point that it has &eco/e the /ost co//on'#4d ate &ecause it is the onl% discourse o- consola2liii that ,e have. But its tone has changedL it has

&eco/e /ore /elanchol% as su&version and trans2!ession have lost popularit% toda%.

Three si/ultaneous di/ensions -or/ the passage-ro/ do/ination to hege/on%. It is a perilous' iple 5u/p+ a three2part sacri-ice:

>apital surpasses itsel- and turns against itsel- in the sacri-ice o- value 9the econo/ic illusion .( o,er turns against itsel- in the sacri-ice o- representation 9the de/ocratic illusion .P The entire s%ste/ turns against itsel- in thesacri-ice o- realit% 9the /etaph%sical illusion .


25/90

All three 5u/p over their shado,.The shado, o- capital is value. The shado, o-

po,er is representation. The shado, o- the s%ste/is realit%. The% respectivel% /ove &e%ond #alue+"epresentation and "ealit%3in a h%perspace thatis no longer econo/ic+ political or real &ut rather the hege/onic sphere.

>apital is &oth the total reali ation o- #alueand its liMuidation. o,er is no, the -inal -or/ o- representation: it onl% represents itsel-. The s%s2te/ is the total version o- the "eal and at the sa/eti/e its liMuidation through the #irtual. This isthe hege/onic -or/.

The Econo/ic Illusion

In an% event+ the Muestion o- “capital4 /ust &e

recon-igured. Does so/ething li8e capital stille'ist+ and+ i- there is a crisis+ ,hat is the essence o- this crisis] @e /ust tr% to pass “through theloo8ing glass+4 &e%ond the /irror o- production.

Does e'ploitation still e'ist? >an ,e still tal8 a&out alienation] Have ,e &eco/e the hostages9not the slaves+ &ut the hostages o- a glo&al /ar8etunder the de-initive sign o- glo&ali ation] But can,e still tal8 o- a “/ar8et4? And hasn t capitalis/reached the point o- destro%ing the conditions o- its o,n e'istence]

One o- the pro&le/s o- generali ed e'changeis in the /ar8et is &oth its ideal and its

strategic In:ation. It /a% &e the -atal destin% o- capital to to the li/it o- e'change3to the

total corr2 uption o- realit%. In its historical9and 0ar'ist

:- ruition+ capitalis/ presided over the/ultipli2 c ion o- e'changes in the na/e o- value. The /ni8et o&e%s the la, o- value andeMuivalenc%. T1#$ li/it here is the li/it o- classiccapitalis/. ad the crises o- capital can al,a%s &eresolved &% /gulating value.

This is no longer true -or the -inancial -lo,sinternational speculation that -ar surpass the

lv2s o- the /ar8et. >an ,e still spea8 o- capital]Ehi ,e 8eep the ter/ and the concept and there2,e ac8no,ledge the e'ponential strateg% that

pushes capital &e%ond its o,n li/its+ into a ,hirl2

id o- e'changes ,here capital loses its ver%once ,hich is the essence o- the /ar8et3and@2destructs in an un&ridled circulation that

Kings the ver% concept o- e'change to an end?Or to ,e consider that it is no longer capital at

all &ut ething radicall% di--erent+ an e'changethat is onl% general &ut total3co/pletel% -reed

-ro/ value and /ar8ets3an e'change that+having lost

:s rational principle+ the principle o- value+ &e:co/es integral 5ust as realit%+ having lost its

entit% principle+ &eco/es integral realit%+ -ro/,hich there is no salvation?


26/90


27/90

In this light+ capital in its historical -or/appears to &e a lesser evil. In relation to a virtualuniverse+ realit% appears to &e a lesser evil. Invie, o- hege/on%+ do/ination itsel- appears to

&e a lesser evil. Ta8e the e'a/ple o- the @e&+ theInternet+ net,or8s+ &logs+ etc. It is all -ree+ “li&2erall%4 deplo%ed ,ithout econo/ic constraints+

&e%ond /ar8ets+ in a -ren % o- total co//unica2tion. This is a virtual catastrophe+ the catastropheo- total e'change that is not even protected &%/one% or the /ar8et. @e -ind ourselves ,arringit all to &e su&5ect to the la, o- value+ ta8en inhand &% capitalist po,er+ to slo, its e'ponentialdevelop/ent+ to escape the ecstas% o- 9-ree+ secular and o&ligator% co//unication3&ecause it isleading to the dictatorship o- -orced e'change3

&ut no one ,ill escape.The ne't stage+ ,hich can &e seen in these

/%steriousl% -ree net,or8s+ is /uch ,orse thanan%thing that ,as stig/ati ed as the /ercan2tili ation o- e'change+ ,here ever%thing isassigned a price and a /ar8et. This in-luence9,hich is not strictl% spea8ing the in-luence o- a

person+ a “capitalist4 po,er or an% political po,er is the ascendanc% o- total+ integral -reee'change+ universal ,iring+ universal connection.>apital+ /ar2 8ets+ surplus value+ /erchandiseand prices see/ li8e a lesser evil or protectionagainst so/ething ,orse. This is the virtualdi/ension o-hege/on%3

it is di--erent **o*Tl the do/ination o- capital anddi--erent -ro/ the di/ension o- po,er in itsstrictl% political de-inition.

The De/ocratic Illusion

/ight ,onder+ ho,ever+ i- hege/on% is act continuation or perpetuation o- do/ination.

h it the sa/e -or/ deplo%ed to its ulti/ate conse2Muences] Or is there a /o/ent ,here there is adiih to a noncritical -or/3&e%ond internal crises

&ut not e'e/pt -ro/ internal catastrophe or sel-2dissolution through saturation 9li8e an% s%ste/ at

e li/it o- its possi&ilities . A ,orld o- total+instan taneo us+ perpetual co//unicatio n isunthin8a&le and+ in an% case+ intolera&le.

Hege/on% corresponds to a phase o- the satu2

/uon o- po,er 9political+ -inancial+ /ilitar% andcWencultural po,er pushed &% its o,n logic &utuWa&leto acco/plish its possi&ilities -ull%3a dire

l-ldVed 9the stor% o- the u/&rella3/a% &e the-ate o- reali ing possi&ilities -ull% is the -ate o-

K'/an8ind] . Cet an% action that tries to slo,cnpiral or po,er+ that tries to 8eep the/ -ro/

/plishing all o- their possi&ilities is their last+ their last chance to survive “5ust short o- their And i- ,e let the/+ the% ,ill rush headlong

@ eir end 9ta8ing us ,ith the/ .


28/90


29/90

Is it &etter to let tht(/ dO it+ tO let thV T -OllO@

their -atal penchant -or sel-2destruction throughsaturation and ultra2reali ation3o r is it &etter to

slo, the/ do,n to avoid disaster] This is the

parado' ,e con-ront in the paro'%s/ o- pO@-?r.

9And+ once again+ the sa/e glo&al+ universal

pro&le/ -aces hu/anit% and its “h%pertelic4 -ate

,hen it rushes to its end &ecause it is too success-ul

Utechnologicall%+se'uall%+ de/ographicall% +etc.<It all depends on %our idea o- po,er. I- %ou

presuppose that intelligence or the i/aginationhold po,er+ then the persistence o- stupidit% or at

least the per/anent a&sence o- i/agination -ro/ po,er is ine'plica&le. 9$nless %ou also suppose a

general disposition a/ong people to delegate their sovereignt% to the /ost ino--ensive+ least i/agi2native o- their -ello, citi ens+ a /vFF n g6nie that

pushes people tO elect the /ost nearsighted+ cor2

rupt person out o- a secret delight in seeing the

stupidit% and corruption o- those in po,er.

Especiall%in ti/es o- trou&le+ people , VOté

/assivel% -or the candidate ,ho does not as8

the/ to thin8. It is a silent con5uration+ analogous

in the political sphere to the conspirac% o- art inanother do/ain.

@e should a&andon the de/ocratic illusion o- i/agination or intelligence in po,er that co/es

-ro/ the depths o- Enlighten/ent ideolog%.

The naive utopias o- the =Y)s /ust &e revised:

I/agination in po,er?43“Ta8e %our drea/s -or re:nJit%?43“ o li/its to pleasure?4 All o- thesedogans ,ere reali ed 9or h%perreali ed in thedcvelO


30/90

the drea/ o- revolution ,ould have disap2

peared long ago . Intelligence cannot+ can never &e in po,er &ecause intelligence consists o- thisdou&le re-usal. “I- I could thin8 that there ,erea -e, people ,ithout an% po,er in the ,orld+

then I ,ould 8no, that all is not lost4 9Elias>anetti .

The 0etaph%sical Illusion

The rea&sorption o- critical negativit% is echoed

&%an even /ore radical -or/ o- denial: the denial

o- realit%.In si/ulation+ %ou /ove &e%ond true and -alse

through parod%+ /asMuerade+ derision to -or/ an

i//ense enterprise o- deterrence. Deterrence

-ro/ ever% historical re-erence+ -ro/ all realit%in the passage into signs. This strateg% o-

desta&ili a2 tion+ o- discrediting+ o- divest/ent-ro/ realit% in the -or/ o- parod%+ /oc8er%+ or /asMuerade &eco/es the ver% principle o- govern/ent+ is alsoa depreciation o- all value.

The Muestion is no longer o- a po,er or a

“political4 po,er >Onnected to a histor%+ to -or/s

o- representation+ to contradictions and a criticalalternative. "epresentation has lost its principleand the de/ocratic illusion is co/plete3not as

/uch &% the violation o- rights as &% thesi/ulation

@values+ general uncertaint% and the dereali ation; @ all realit%. Ever%one is caught in the signs o-

$ser that occup% the entire space3and that areXiicd &% ever%one co//unall% 9ta8e -or

e'a/ple 0 resigned+ e/&arrassed co/plicit% inthe rigged 8gs o- the political sphere and

polls .

. 8onni there+ the s%ste/ ,or8s e'ponentiall%:

Knot startin' +ro# alue. but +ro#t&e liLui/ dation o+ alueKnot t&rou'& re*resentation. butt&rou'&

e liLuidation o+ re*resentationKnot +ro# reality but +ro# t&e liLuidationo+ n8a"ity

:Xcr5niiing in the na/e o- ,hich do/ination ,asX $r ised is ter/inated+ sacri-iced+ ,hich should

gIN:all% lead to the end o- do/ination. This isdNX_ the case+ &ut -or the sa8e o- hege/on%.The s%ste/ doesn t care a -ig -or la,sL it unleashes

deregulation in ever% do/ain.

K;ere'ulation o+ alue in s*e-ulationK;ere'ulation o+ re*resentation in t&e

arious +or#s o+ #ani*ulation and *arallelnet0or,sK;ere'ulation o+ reality t&rou'&

in+or#a/ tion. t&e #edia and irtualreality


31/90


32/90

Hro# t&at *oint on8 total i##unityKone -an no 'entsia t&at &as dedi-ated itsel+ tot&e longer counter the s%ste/ in the na/e o- one ! osophical and technical edi-ication o- o,n

principles since the s%ste/ has a&olished >it%. But ,hat can this concept /ean+ notthe/. The end o- all critical negativit%. >losure outside the hu/an race 9it is irrelevant -or o- ever% account and all histor%. The reign o- &e ani/al+ plant or cos/ic real/s+ the inhu/an&e'e#ony On t&e -ontrary. sin-e it is no lon'er 'eneral) but also in t&e #aCor-ultures or&er re'ulated by re*resentation. or its o0n -on-e*t. or 6an our o0n(ar-&ai-. traditional or

Eastern or the i/age o- itsel-+ the s%ste/ succu/&s to the 7in2Eastern

that do not even have a ter/ -or it or -inal te/ptation: it &eco/es h%persensitive to its in our o,n societies outside the civili ed and -inal conditions and casts itsel- &e%ond its o,n X treatedclasses ,here hu/anis/ and universal end according to the in-le'i&le decrease o- thV

>IUl es have &eco/e hereditar%. @hat does therates o+ reality ersal /ean in the e%es o- i//igrants+ popu2

The /ost serious o- all -or/s o- sel-2denial3 I-:ions le+t +allo0. entire Jones o+ +ra-tureand

not onl% econo/icall% or politicall% &ut /etaph%s2 XX lusion in our o,n “overdevelope d4societies] icall%3is the denial o- realit%. This i //ense even in the privileged -ringe+ thehigh2tech enterprise o- deterrence -ro/ ever% historical it%+ ,hat dOV! the universal/ean -or all the re-erence+ this strateg% o- discrediting+ o- divesting corporate people+4 all thehigh per-or/ance +ro# reality in t&e +or# o+ *arody. #o-,ery. or #as/ 6ou*s or

individuals according to &oth a glo&al Muerade+ &eco/es the ver% principle o- govern/ent. T anincreasing l% corporate+ isolationist+ pro2 The ne, strateg%3and it trul% is a /utation3is +

onist evolution]

t&e sel+/i##olation o+ alue. o+ e ery syste# o+ N 6ontrary to 0&at %##anuel antsaid. t&e alue. o+ sel+/denial. indiFerentiation. reCe-tion s,y lau'&s at t&isuni ersal la0. but so doesand nullit% as the triu/phant co//and. &eart o+ &u#an,ind8 riot only living

&eingst&e ast #aCority o+ &u#ans ri=Verobeyed it

And t&ose 0&o-lai# Moreo er. t&e -on-e*t o+ t&e uni ersal is t&e 9 eir

sin'ular *assions

to o&e% it happil% put &e-ore an% other ideal

speci-ic product+ ,ithin the hu/an race+ o- a 1ualit%3this is no dou&t+ despite the concept+ acertain civili ation called @estern+ and ,ithin are authentic ,a% to &e “hu/an.4 ;O t&ey


33/90

that culture+ o- a privileged /inorit%+ a /odern !VR#t(! &elieve in this ideal -inalit%] No one


34/90

8no,sL the onl% sure thing is that the% clai/ to/a8e others o&e%.

The discourse o- the universal descri&es atautological spiral: it is held &% the species thatconsiders itsel- superior to all others and ,ithinthis species+ &% a /inorit% that considers itsel- the holder o- /oral and universal ends+ -or/ing

a verita&le+ “de/ocratic4 -eudalit%.@hatever the case /a% &e+ there is a /a5or

inconsistenc% in continuing to use a discourse o- the universal as a discourse o- re-erence ,hen ithas no /eaning or e--ect an%,here3neither ,ithglo&al po,er nor in opposition to it.

To relativi e our concept o- the universal: ,iththe increasing glo&ali ation o- the ,orld+ dis2cri/ination &eco/es /ore -erocious.

The cartograph% should not con-use theseones &e%ond realit% ,ith those that still give

signs o- realit% in the sa/e hege/onic s%ste/ o- glo&al2 i ation+ even though the% do not-unction in the sa/e ,a%. @e could even sa% thatthe gap separating the/ is gro,ing andso/ething that ,as onl% a cultural singularit%in a non2uni-ied ,orld &eco/es realdiscri/ination in a glo&ali ed uni2 verse. The/ore the ,orld is glo&ali ed+ the ,orst thediscri/ination.

The t,o universes+ the h%perreal and thein-rareal+ see/ to interpenetrate &ut are light %earsa,a% -ro/ each other. The deepest /iser% and

>#A! O- lu'ur% coe'ist in the sa/e geographicGpace 9ta8e+ -or e'a/ple the oil condo/iniu/sii !audi Ara&ia and the -avelas o- "io+ &ut these

V[tte/e cases . In -act+ the entire planet is6irgLini ed on the principle o- de-initive discri/2

0ention &et,een t,o universes3,hi ch nolonger h/;e an% 8no,ledge o- each other. lo&al po,er integral conrrol over the other

,orld+ And has all the /eans necessar% -or itse'ter/ina2 tion. It is the tear in the universal.

As -or the OtnseMuences o- this tear+ theupheaval it can

9:t6&1te, ,e have no idea3e'cept -or ,hat is alread% 5nesent toda % 9although it is onl% the &eginning :

e onl% response to this increasingl% violentdiscri/ination is an eMuall% violent -or/+ ter2R[t-ls/. An e'tre/e reaction to this situation o- ii'ipossi&le e'change.

@hich leads us to Europe. In its current -or/+Europe is a nonevent. It ,as -irst an idea 9/a%&edarting in the 0iddle Ages+ a realit% &e-ore an-lea] . o, it is no longer an idea or a realit% &utX#irtual realit% re-erring to a /odel o- si/ulationto ,hich it /ust adapt. - ro/ the perspective o-

pro5ection at an% price+ the ,ill o- the people is ano&stacle or at least an indi--erent para/eter or an1%li;. The “%es4 vote co/es -ro/ on high+ and ,ec/ no, see that the people are Europe s s8eletoniWthe closet.


35/90

ii s regard. It is the &est e'a/ple o- a vital or

This virtual Europe is po,er. It ,ants to -indorder+ to represe nt an

a -ari-ature o+ 'lob l its ni-&e int&e 0orld e-ono#i-*o0er t&at

rivals the ridiculous i/age o- its A/eric an Big

Brother. Europe is organi ed according to the

sa/e li&eral principles+ and other than a -e, last

gasps O- senti/enta l socialis/+ is aligned ,iththe /odel o- -lu' and glo&al deregulation. It is

incapa&le o- inventing a ne, rule +or t&e'a#e

/scera reaction in de-ense against the consensual:Xc8/ai o- the “Ces+4 against the re-erendu/ s

9,hich is also the struggle o- thenational level .

5e+t ont&e

ld/atu/ in disguise. There is no need to have a political conscience to have this re-le': it is the

@ithout its o,n political structure or histori2cal reason+ Europe can onl% desire e'pansion and

proli-eration into thV VOld through inde-inite

aro/atic re8indling o- negativit% in the -ace o- c'N:essive positivit%+ to the coalition o- “divine4 Europe+ the Europe o- good conscience+ the one

“de/ocratic4 anne'ation+ 5ust li8e glo&al po,er. in the right side o- universalit%3,ith all others

O- course+ all o- the periphera l countries ,ant IO cost into the shado,s o- histor%.

5oin this &%2prOduct o- glo&ali ation+ CustasThe -orces o- ood ,ere co/pletel% ,rong

Europeans drea/ o- reaching the glo&al level.

Europeans have the sa/e relationship to

A/erican glo&al p o,er as other countries 9li8e

$d#

Tur8e%+ -ore'a/ple have to Europe. Tur8e% ! it a response to hege/on% that is not the ,or8 o-

entr% into Europe+ outside an% political consider2ations+ /a% &e revealing in ter/s o- this parado':

'lie negative or the result o- critical thought 9the political reasons o- the “ o4 are no &etter than

Europeans “-ro/ &irth4 are not reall% 1T1Odt6*&1 il#


36/90


37/90

@e have here the pro-ile o- the ne, t%pe o- con2-rontation characteri ing the era o- Hege/on%. Itis not a class struggle or a -ight -or li&eration onthe glo&al level 9since the “li&eration4 o- e'changeand de/ocrac%+ ,hich ,ere the counterpoint todo/ination+ are the strategies o- hege/on%. Ta8e+-or e'a/ple+ England s presence in an i&ar: &%

-reeing the slaves in the late nineteenth centur%+England ,as a&le to ta8e control o- East A-rica .It is an irreduci&ilit%+ an irreduci&le antagonis/ tothe glo&al principle o- generali ed e'change.

In other ,ords+ a con-rontation that is nolonger precisel% political &ut /etaph%sical ands%/&olic in the strong sense. It is a con-rontation+a divide that e'ists not onl% at the heart o- thedo/inant po,er+ &ut at the heart o- our individual e'istence.

—April 2005


38/90

THE @HITE TE""O" O7 @O" D O"DE"

or&ing the negative continues to &e the &le/. @hen the e/ancipated slave internali es

/aster+ the ,or8 o- the negative is a&olished./ation &eco/es hege/on%. o,er can sho, positivel% and overtl% in good conscienceco/plete sel-2evidence. It is unMuestiona&le

glo&al. But the ga/e is not over %et. 7or ,hileslave internali es the /aster+ po,er also inter2

the slave ,ho denies it+ and it denies itsel- che process. egativit% ree/erges as iron%+

ing and auto2liMuidation internal to po,er.is is ho, the slave devours and canni&ali es the

er -ro/ the inside. As po,er a&sor&s thetive+ it is devoured &% ,hat it a&sor&s. There

ce in reversi&ilit%.A catastrophic dialectic has replaced the “,or8

e negative. cal thought+ or an% atte/ptartac8 the s%ste/ -ro/ the inside+ is in a co/plete


39/90

aporia. A-ter voluntar% servitude+ ,hi>h ,as the hege/on% is a /eta3sta&le -or/ &ecause it hassecret 8e% to e'ercising do/ination+ one could a&sor&ed the negative3&ut &% the sa/e to8en+

no, spea8 instead o- involuntar% co/plicit%+consensus and connivance ,ith thV @orld Order

-uc8ing the possi&ilit% o- dialectical &alance+ itre/ains in-initel% -ragile. Its victor%+ there-ore+ is

&%ever%thing that see/s tO OU O-ltt(!


40/90

tivit% &eco/esris/. Thus

teras a ,hole is no longer driven &% historical -'irces &ut is a&sor&ed &% its -inal conditions3


41/90

hastened to its de-initive end 9li8e a tur&o enginesuc8ing in the space in -ront o- it+ creating a vac2uu/ and the -orce o- attraction o- a vacuu/ . It is

persed in an un&ridled circulation that &ringsdie ver% concept o- e'change to an end?

Having lost its rational principle+ the principlenot a progressive+ continuous evolution+ even i- it O #dlue+ e'change &eco/es total 5ust as realit%+is con-rontational and contradictor%. Instead+ it isa vertiginous+ irresisti&le attraction to its o,n end.

I- negativit% is totall% engul-ed &% the s%ste/+ i- there is no /ore ,or8 o- the negative+ positivit%

having lost lts realit% principle+ &eco/es totalrealit%. h /a% &e the -atal destinatio n o+ -a*ital

to 'o to -( >?T d O- e'change3to,

ard a total-onsu#*tiono- realit%. In an% case+ ,e are &ound -or this gen2

sa&otages itsel- in its co/pletion. At the height o- craliAed e$-&an'e. t&is +reneti6-o##uni-ation

its hege/on%+ po,er canni&ali es itsel-3and the,or8 o- the negative is replaced &% an i//ense,or8 o- /ourning.

@e can even -orget a&out capital and capitalis/.Didn t the% reach the point ,here the% ,ould

destro% their o,n conditions o- e'istence? >an ,estill spea8 o- a “/ar8et4 or even o- a classicalecono/%] In its historical de-inition+ capitalis/

and in-or/ation that is the sign o- hege/on%.The di/ension o- hege/on% is di--erent -ro/

diat o- capital and di--erent -ro/ the di/ensionNi- po,er in its strictl% political de-inition. It is nolonger a Muestion o- political po,er tied to a his2"or% and a -or/ o- representation. "epresentation

el- has lost its principle and the de/ocraticillusion is co/p I]te. Ot through the violation o-

9 Tts &ut through the si/ulation o- values anddle dereali ation o- all realit%. The /asMuerade

presided over the /ultiplication o- e'changes again+ ever%one caught in t&e si'ns o+*o0er

under the auspices o- value. The /ar8et o&e%s thela, o- value and eMuivalenc%. And the crises o- capital can al,a%s &e resolved &% regulating value.

This is no longer true -or the -inancial -lo,sand international speculation that -ar surpass thela,s o- the /ar8et. >an ,e still spea8 o- capital

d co//uning in the ri''ed un+oldin' o+t&e

political stage.

the election o- Arnold !ch,ar enegger ase/ or o- >ali-ornia+ ,e are deep in the

,hen -aced ,ith an e'ponential strateg% that #asLuerade.

,here politics is onl% a ga/e o-

pushes capital &e%ond its li/its in a ,hirl,ind o- e'changes ,here it loses its ver% essence and is

idolatry and /ar8eting. It is a giant step to,arde end ) thV ! Qste/ o- representatio n. This is the


42/90


43/90

destin% o- conte/porar% politicians3those ,holive &% the sho, ,ill die &% the sho,. This is true-or &oth “citi ens4 and politicians. It is thei//anent 5ustice o- the /edia. Cou ,ant the

po,er o- the i/age] Then %ou ,ill die through itsrepla%. The carnival o- the i/age is also 9sel-canni&ali ation through the i/age.

One should not conclude too hastil% that thedegradation o- A/erican political practices is adecline in po,er. Behind this /asMuerade+ there isa vast political strateg% 9certainl% not deli&erateL it,ould reMuire too /uch intelligence that &eliesour eternal de/ocratic illusions. B% electing!ch,ar enegger 9or in Bush s rigged election in())) + in this &e,ildering parod% o- all s%ste/s o- representation+ A/erica too8 revenge -or thedisdain o- ,hich it is the o&5ect. In this ,a%+ it

proved its i/aginar% po,er &ecause no one can

eMual it in its headlong course into the de/ocratic/asMuerade+ into the nihilist enterprise o- liMui2dating value and a /ore total si/ulation thaneven in the areas o- 7inance and ,eapons. A/ericahas a long head start. This e'tre/e+ e/pirical andtechnical -or/ o- /oc8er% and the pro-anation o- values+ this radical o&scenit% and total i/piet% o- a people+ other,ise 8no,n as “religious+4 this is,hat -ascinates ever%one. This is ,hat ,e en5o%even through re5ection and sarcas/: this pheno/2enal vulgarit%+ a 9political+ televisual universe

&rought to the ero degree o- culture. It is also the-ret o- glo&al hege/on%.

I sa% it ,ithout iron%+ even ,ith ad/iration: thisB hO( A/erica+ through radical si/ulation+ do/i2-tales the rest o- the ,orld. It serves as a /odel

&e ta8ing its revenge on the rest O- the ,orld+,hich is in-initel% superior to it in s%/&olic ter/s.The challenge o- A/erica is the challenge o- des2

#$rate si/ulation+ o- a /asMuerade it i/poses oni-? test O- the ,orld+ including the desperate simu(-XrrX/ o- /ilitar% po,er. >arnivali ation o- po,er.And that challenge cannot &e /et: ,e have neither a -inalit% or a counter2-inalit% that can oppose it.

In its hege/onic -unction+ po,er is a virtualcon-iguration that /eta&oli es an% ele/ent toserve its o,n purposes. It could &e /ade o- countless intelligent particles+ &ut its opaMue

5uncture ,ould not change. It is li8e a &od% that

changes its cells constantl% ,hile re/aining theR /e. !oon+ ever% /olecule o- the A/ericannation ,ill have co/e -ro/ so/e,here else+ as i-

&v trans-usion. A/erica ,ill &e Blac8+ Indian+Hispanic+ and uerto "ican ,hile re/ainingA/erica. It ,ill &e all the /ore /%thicall%A/erican in that it ,ill no longer &e “authentical2l% A/erican. And all the /ore -unda/entalist indiat it ,ill no longer have a -oundation 9even

ough it never had one+ since even the 7ounding7athers ca/e -ro/ so/e,here else . And all the


44/90

/ore &igoted in that it ,ill have &eco/e+ in -act+/ultiracial and /ulticultural. And all thV lTlO*éi/perialist in that it ,ill &e led &% the descendantso- slaves. That is the su&tle and unassaila&le logico- po,erL it cannot &e changed.

This glo&al /asMuerade o- po,er passesthrough several phases. 7irst+ in the na/e o- uni2

versals+ the @est i/poses its political andecono/ic /odels on the entire ,orld along ,ith its

principle o- technical rationalit%. That ,as theessence o- its do/ination &ut not %et itsMuintessence. Be%ond econo/ics and politics+ itsMuintessence relies on the hold o- si/ulation+ anoperational si/ulation o- ever% value+ ever%culture3that is ,here hege2 /on% toda% assertsitsel-. o longer through e'porting techniMues+values+ ideologies &ut through the universale'trapolation o- a parod% o- these values.

$nderdeveloped countries 8eep align2 ingthe/selves on a si/ulacru/ o- develop/ent andgro,thL the% get their independence -ro/ asi/ulacru/ o- de/ocrac%+ and ever% endangeredculture drea/s o- a staged reha&ilitation3all -asci2nated &% the sa/e universal /odel 9o- ,hl>hA/erica+ ,hile &ene-iting -ro/ it+ is the -irstvicti/ . Thus+ a-ter i/posing its do/inationthrough Histor%+ the @est is no, i/posing itshege/on% through the 7A">E o- Histor%. lo&al

po,er is the po,er o- the si/ulacru/.

: I values through consensus or -orce.A-ter the sacri-ice o- value+ a-ter the sacri-ice o-

representation+ aher the sacri-ice o- realit%+ the@est is no, characteri ed &% the deli&eratesacri-ice o- ever%thing through ,hich a hu/an

&eing 8eeps /i/e value in his or her o,n e%es.The terrorists potlatch against the @est is their

death. Our potlatch is indignit%+ i//odest%+o&scenit%+ degradation and a&5ection. This is the/ove/ent o- our culture3,here the sta8es 8eep

rising. Our truth is al,a%s on the side o- unveiling+ i8su&li/ation+ reductive anal%sis3 the truth o- die repressed22222e'hi&ition+ avo,al+

nudit%3nothing is nue unless it is desecrated+o&5ecti-ied+ stripped

ci- its aura+ or dragged onstage.Indi--erentiation o- values &ut also indi--erence

ii ourselves. @e cannot involve our o,n deathliecause ,e alread% are dead. @e thro, this indi-28:rence and a&5ection at others li8e a challenge:

e challenge to de-ile the/selves in return+ ton% their values+ to strip na8ed+ con-ess+ ad/it3

a giant pro5ect /eant to s%/&olicall% liMuidate


45/90

to respond ,ith a nihilis/ eMual to our o,n. @etr% to ta8e it all -ro/ the/ &% -orce: through thehu/iliations o- A&u hrai&+ prohi&iting veils inschool. But it is not enough -or our victor%: the%have to co/e on their o,n+ sacri-ice the/selves onthe altar o- o&scenit%+ transparenc%+ pornograph%and glo&al si/ulationL the% have to lose their s%/&olic de-enses and ta8e the path o- neoli&eralorder+ total de/ocrac% and integrated spectacle.

In this sense+ ,e can+ ,ith Boris ro%s+ con2ceive o- the h%pothesis o- a dou&le potlatch: the@estern potlatch o- nullit%+ sel-2degradation+sha/e+ and /orti-ication opposed to the terrorist

potlatch o- death. But the deli&erate sacri-ice &%the @est o- all its values+ o- ever%thing through,hich a culture holds value in its o,n e%es+ inthis prostitution o- the sel- thro,n into the -aceo- the Other as a ,eapon o- /ass deterrence3

seduction through e/ptiness and challenge tothe Other 9Isla/+ &ut also the rest o- the ,orldto prostitute itsel- in return+ to unveil itsel-+ togive up all its secrets and lose all sovereignt%3 does this i//ense sel-2i//olation constitute averita&le s%/&olic response to the challenge o- theterrorists] 9 et s not spea8 o- ,ar or a -ight“against evil+ ,hich are ad/issions o- a totalina&ilit% to respond s%/&olicall% to thechallenge o- death.

otlatch versus potlatch3does one &alance

the other? One /ight sa% that one is a potlatch &%

/cess 9the potlatch o- death and the other a potlatch &% de-ault 9sel-2/oc8er% and sha/e . Indiat case+ the% do not /atch each other eMuall%Od One should spea8 o- an as%//etrical potlatch.Or should one thin8 that+ in the end+ no -or/+not even the challenge o- death+ o- e'tre/e sacri2-ice+ can &e considered superior+ nor can the ter2

rorist challenge &e seen as superior to rhe inverse@estern challenge+ and there-ore send each one

&ac8 to its respective deliriu/?@hat is at sta8e in glo&al con-rontation is this

provocation to generali ed e'change+ theun&ridled e'change o- all di--erences+ thechallenge -or other cultures to eMual us indeculturation+ the de&ase/entW- values+ the adhesion to the /ost disenchanted/odels. This con-rontation is not Muite a “clash o- crvili ations+4 &ut it is not econo/ic or political

cicher+ and toda% it onl% concerns the @est andIsla/ in appearance. 7unda/entall%+ it is a duel+and its sta8es are s%/&olic: ph%sical and /entalliMuidation+ a universal carnivali ation i/posed &%tile test at the cost o- its o,n hu/iliation+ itss5 ir&olic e'propriation3against all o- the singu2larities that resist it. >hallenge versus challenge?

&tlatch versus potlatch] Does the slo,2death"rateg% or s%ste/atic /orti-ication eMual the sta8eso- a sacri-icial death? >an this con-rontation co/ecc an end and ,hat could &e the conseMuences i- one or the other ,ins?


46/90


47/90

T&e res*onse to do#ination is 0ell,no0n8 sla e re olt. -lass stru''le. all t&e&istori-al +or#s o+ re olt and re olutionKt&e #eta#or*&oses o+ t&e 0or, o+ t&ene'ati e History. as 0e ,ne0 it andre0rote it alon' its e olution to an idealend T&e res*onse to &e'e#ony is not assi#*le8irredentis# . dissiden-e. anta'onis#.

iolent

abrea-tionKbut also +as-ination and totala#bi alen-e Hor 0e all are *art and*ar-el o+ t&is &e'e#ony (unli,e t&e-lear distin-tionbet0een do#inants and do#inated)

3&en-e bot& a ital. is-eralresistan-e to 'eneraliJed e$-&an'e. tototal eLui alen-e and -onne-tion. to ast*rostitution and a erti'i/ no us attra-tionto t&is te-&nolo'i-al +air. t&is s*e-ta-ular#asLuerade. t&is nullity At botto# it is-lear t&at t&is a*o'ee o+ 'lobal *o0er isalso t&e a*ot&eosis o+ t&e ne'ati e. t&etriu#*& o+ resi'nation. o+ t&erenun-iation by t&e s*e-ies o+ its o,nvalues. There is nothing /ore e'citing than thisvertigo3no longer the ,or8 o- the negative &utthe vertigo o- denial and arti-ice? @hence thisdual+ insolu&le postulate: opposing

this glo&al po,er and losing onesel- in it. Ana/&ivalence that ,e all e'perience at each

/o/ent and ,hich is the /irror in each one o- us o- the glo&al antagonis/.

T&is &e'e#oni- si#ulation. a-on 'uration t&at -#s triu#*&ant andunyieldin'. &as its re erse.

8s re ulsi e eFe-ts By irtually yieldin'to t&is

'lobal dyna#i- and e$a''eratin' itin se eral 0ays. all o+ t&ese 0ould/be

e#er'in' -ountries '#dually be-o#esub#er'in' instead T&ey slo0ly 0ade t&e3estern s*&ere. not on a -o#*etiti e

, el. but li,e a 'round s0ell T&is in asion o--urs in #any 0ays. li,e

a iral ililtration It is t&e *roble# o+ 'lobal. #ore or %ess -landestinei##i'ration (His*ani-s are literally#nnibaliJin' t&e


48/90

Kall o+ t&ese -ountries 0&i-& #a,e u* dierest o+ t&e 0orldKt&ey 'i e us t&ei#*ression (in BraJil +or e$a#*le) t&att&ey 0ill ne er be a--ultured to t&is

e$o'enous #odel o+ -al-ulation #d'ro0t&. t&at t&ey are dee*ly aller'i- to itAnd


49/90

in -act do ,e+ @esterners+ /asters o- the ,orld+still have its ends and /eans? Do ,e still /easureup to this universal underta8ing o- /aster% thatno, see/s to surpass us in ever% do/ain and

-unction li8e a trap o- ,hich ,e are the -irstvicti/s] Histor% itsel- is a product -or @estern

e'port.@e du/p on others a desire -or histor% 9throughnational con-licts+ international institutions+ accessto the glo&al /ar8et ,hile -or us+ in realit%+ histo2r% is over+ in the sense that it un-olds on its o,n+

and si/ultaneousl% resist it. A dou&lecontradictor% State#ent o+ 0&i-& Tur,ey is aline e$a#*le8 to Coin Euro*e +or t&e Tur,s#eans lea in' an ar-&ai- #u-ture to enter /odernit%+ to &eco/e a part o-

e technological universe o- consu/eris/ andsi#ulation. o+ the cos/opolitan e'change o- signsQod the -or/al li&ert% to use the/ at one s leisure.

$! !lllTle ti/e+ it /eans parta8ing in a radicalcritiMue o- this political econo/%+ a denunciationW-the culture that -ascinates the/ and re/aining

on auto/atic pilot and /ore o-ten than not in a deepl% allergic to the principle o- e'change andloop. 7or us+ the /irror o- histor%+ the continuit%o- histor% is shatteredL ,e live in an instant anddisincarnate currentness in ,hich ,e ta8e no /oretrou&le+ according to Dosto%evs8% s phrase+ than to

prolong histor% or rather the end o- histor%+i//ersed in the euphoric &analit% that Heidegger called the second 7all o- hu/anit%. But the others+those ,ho did not e'perience this historic stage+this /irror stage+ can onl% ,ant to en5o% it the/2selves3drea/ing o- the @estern po,er in ,hichever%thing that too8 the -or/ o- histor% cul/i2nates+ and perhaps drea/ing to destro% its s%/&olsand ta8e a stand against it. It is a strange situation,herein all these peoples ,ho at the sa/e ti/edrea/ o- entering histor%+ or rather toda% in the

paci-ied+ securi ed+ e'traterritorial+ e'tranationalone o- universal -ree trade+ in the @orld Order o-

undi--erentiated e'change that reMuires the sacri3 -i>t: O- their distinctive cultural traits.

In the end+ i- ,e loo8 closel%+ ir s the sa/e situa2tion ,e are in as individuals at the heart o- /odern/cieties 3,e all e'perience an irresisti&le urge -or

!O>iet% o- signs and si/ulacra that is at the endci- histor% and a deep resistance to this voluntar%

Attitude So #u-& so t&at 0e #i'&tretros*e-ti ely Tlde- @hether all this histor%+ all

o- this @estern rationality and #odernityreally too, *la-e or ,hether this is all a

parod% o- an event that had ,i**ened. lea in'us to s&are its spoils. T&is 0ould I$ the“-arce4 o- histor% that 0ar' /entions and ii

,hich ,e involved as acco/plices those ,ho didat e en bene t +ro# it

Hlstor% that repeats itsel- turns to -arce. But atree that repeats itsel- ends up /a8ing a histor%.

@el-are o- ,hich A/erica is o&viousl% the /odel+ This /eans that &% repeating and dou&ling


50/90

t&e#sel es u*. e en si#ula-ra end u*+or#in' our #aterial destinyKt&e onlyday o+ re-,onin' 0e have the right to no,.9And /a%&e the onl% retro2 spective truth o- histor% that+ in this h%pothesis+ did not even ,ait to

&e repeated to beCOlTlé a -arce.

@e can in this sense spea8 o- the ephe/eral+

insta&le and reversi&le character o- /odernit%

9and o- realit% in general + and a di--erentrate o-

universali ation o- rational values and the principleo- realit% that presides over the/.

One should not &elieve that realit% is eMuall% distri&uted over the sur-ace o- the glo&e as i- ,e

,ere dealing ,ith an o&5ective ,orld that eMual -or ever%one. :O&lé , Vntire continents have

not seen the appearance o- realit% and its princip Ie: the% are underdevelope d in this generic sense that is #ore *ro+ound t&an t&e econo/ic+technical or

*oliti-al T&e 6&est. a+ter passing through a9his2 toric stage o- realit%+ entered the 9virtualstage o-

ultra2realit%. B% contrast+ a /a5orit% o- therest o+ the ,orld4 have not even reached thestage o+ reality and (e-ono#i-. *oliti-al. et- )rationalit%. Bet0ee t&e t0o. t&ere areJones o- realit%+ interstices+ alveoli+ shreds o- realit% that survive in the heart o- glo&ali ation andthe h%per2realit%o- net,or8s3a &it li8e thV !hredso- territor% that -loat to the sur-ace o- the /apin BorgVs -a&le. One could spea8 o- an inde' o- realit%+ a rate o- realit% on the planet that could &e/apped out li8e

&irthrates or the levels o- at/ospheric pollution.Fhat ,ould the /a'i/u/ rate o- realit% &e?

It re/ains to &e seen ,hether this underdevelop2/ent is a curse+ i- the non2access to the real and

e rational is an a&solute traged%+ or its contrar%.One can as8 this Muestion ,hen considering the

advanced ones+ the h%per3/odern ones li8eour o,n that are alread% -ar -ro/ realit%+ that havelost rinciple+ that have devoured it in a ,a%+ in thespace o- t,o centuries+ li8e an% /ineral -uel or

natural deposit 9/oreover+ the e'hausting o- realit% goes hand in hand ,ith the e'hausting o-

natural resources . H%per2real ones+ still su&2lunar &ut alread% e'traterrestrial+ at once

glo&ali ed anddeterritoriali ed.

Opposition to glo&al hege/on% cannot &e the/ine as opposition to traditional oppression. It

inn onl% &e so/ething unpredicta&le+ irreduci&leto the preventive terror o- progra//ing+ -orcedcirculation+ irreduci&le to the @hite terror o- the,orld order. !o/ething antagonistic+ in the literaluse+ that opens a hole in this @estern agon%.!o/ething that leaves a trace in the /onoton% o-

e glo&al order o- terror. !o/ething that rein3 troduces a -or/ o- i/possi&le e'change in thisgenerali ed e'change. Hege/on% is onl% &ro8en/% this t%pe o- event+ &% an%thing that irrupts asan une'changea&le singularit%. A revolt+ there-ore+


51/90

t&at tar'ets syste#ati- dere'ulation undert&e -o er o+ +or-ed -on i iality. t&attar'ets t&e total or'aniJation o+ reality

The high point o- the struggle againstdo/ination ,as the historic /ove/ent o- li&eration+ &e it political+ se'ual or other, ise3a

continuous /ove/ent+ ,ith guiding ideas andvisi&le actors.

But li&eration also occurred ,ith e'changesand /ar8ets+ ,hich &rings us to this terri-%ing

parado': all o- the li&eration -ights againstdo/ination onl% paved the ,a% -or hege/on%+the reign o- general e'change3against ,hichthere is no possi&le revolution+ since ever%thingis alread% li&erated.

Total revolt responds to total order+ not 5usr dialectical con-lict. At this point+ it is dou&le or

nothing: the s%ste/ shatters and drags the uni2versal a,a% in its disintegration. It is vain to,ant to restore universal values -ro/ the de&riso- glo&ali ation. The drea/ o- rediscovered uni2versalit% 9&ut did it ever e'ist] that could put astop to glo&al hege/on%+ the drea/ o- a reinven2tion o- politics and de/ocrac% and+ as -or us+ thedrea/ o- a Europe &earing an alternative /odelo- civili ation opposed to neoli&eral hege/on%3 this drea/ is ,ithout hope. Once the /irror o- universalit% is &ro8en 9,hich is li8e the /irror stage o- our /odernit% + onl% -rag/ents re/ain+

scattered -rag/ents. lo&ali ation auto/aticall%Ottails, in the sa/e /ove/ent+ -rag/entationand deepening discri/ination3and our -ate is -or a universe that no longer has an%thing universala&out it3-rag/entar% and -ractal3&ut that nodou&t leaves the -ield -ree -or all singularities: the0orst and t&e best. t&e #ost iolent and

t&e #ost *oeti-

8#ontreal, 2ctober 9&&


52/90

HE " E OO D "O@!

0ar': :ntil noin philosopher erecontent uiith interpreting the orld. 7oit has to e changed.

Against 0ar': Today transforming the orld is not enough. ;t mill happen no matter iuhat.that rue urgently need today is to interpret this transformation8so that the iuorld doesnot do it iuitht < , /nd ends :p being at orld ithout < .

e current revolution is di--erent than previousistorical revolutions3it is a trul% anthropological

olution: a revolution in the auto/atic per-ectiontechnical devices and in the de-initive disMual2cation o- hu/an &eings+ o- ,ho/ the% are noten a,are. At the hege/onic stage o- technolog%+


53/90

o- ,orld po,er+ hu/an &eings have lost their -reedo/+ &ut the% have also lost their i/agina2tion. The% have &een /ade une/plo%ed in a,a% that goes -ar &e%ond ,or8: it is a /entaland e'istential une/plo%/ent+ replaced &%do/inant /achines. These technical la%o--ssuggest the opposite o- ,hat the ter/ usuall%

/eans: the /achines are not de-ectiveL the% areso e--icient that there is nothing le-t to do ,ithone s li-e+,hose ver% reproduction has &eco/e auto/atic.The o&solescence o- hu/ans has reached its ter/i2nal phase. Their -ate is de-initivel% &e%ond their

reach. In the end+ hu/an &eings ,ill onl% have &een an in-antile illness o- an integraltechnological realit% that has &eco/e such agiven that ,e are no longer a,are o- it+ e'cept inits transcendental di/en

jean baudrillard, ames hodges, sylvère lotringer-the agony of power-semiotext(e) (2010)

Documents