Today I will speak about the riots in Tunisia. We will not turn the theme of this year's seminar - What does "change the world?" - An expression which I have indicated equivocal nature.
If we mean by "disturbances" acting in the streets of people who want to achieve the overthrow of the government through violence of varying degrees, we must first note the rarity of these disorders in Tunisia were victorious. There was a regime that for 23 years seemed strong and yet it was overthrown by a popular action to retroactively immediately established its nature "weakest link."
Why is it necessary to analyze this phenomenon, when we could limit ourselves to rejoice? Because it blunts some concern related to the binding of the satisfaction of which character, say consensual, it should be noted despite the illegality inherent in these events. Today is not easy to say: "I like Ben Ali and I am sorry you had to give up power." If we find ourselves in an awkward position. For that reason we must pay a tribute to the Minister Alliot-Marie, who lamented having delayed in providing "skills" of the police forces of France in the service of Ben Ali, saying out loud what his colleagues thought to himself. Sarkozy Beside him is a hypocrite and a coward, like all those, on both the right and the left, which only weeks ago were pleased to have Ben Ali in a solid wall against Islam and an excellent student of the West and today are compelled, by a consensus of opinion, to pretend that they are happy leaving with their tails between their legs.
repeat: a government overthrown by popular violence (and especially youth, who was the spearhead) is a rare phenomenon for which, if we find a similar precedent, it takes back thirty years, namely the Iranian revolution of 1979 [1]. Thirty years during which the prevailing conviction that such phenomena were no longer possible. It is, in particular, which proclaimed the thesis known as "end of history." This thesis is clearly not meant it would not happen any more. "End of history" meant "to historical events" to which the organization could be put back into the game thanks to a moment in which, as Trotsky said, "the masses make their appearance in history. " The normal course of things was the alliance of the market economy and parliamentary democracy, an alliance that was the only sustainable standard of general subjectivity. That is the meaning of the term "globalization": the subjective world turned into subjectivity. Which, moreover, is not inconsistent with punitive wars (Iraq, Afghanistan), civil wars (in the degraded African States), the repression of the Palestinian Intifada etc. Thus, the most fascinating developments in Tunisia is its history, the demonstration of an intact ability to create new forms of collective organization.
The set consists of the market economy and parliamentary democracy, viewed as an insuperable, I propose naming it: "West", on the other hand, is as he calls himself. Among other names circulating, we can say 'international community', 'civilization' (where it conflicts, as appropriate, to various forms of barbarism, see the word "clash of civilizations"), "Western powers" ... I remember that more than thirty years the only group that consistently claimed this name - "West" - was a small fascist group with reinforcing bars iron (with whom I had a crash in my youth). That one word can change so dramatically respect can only mean that the world itself changed. The world no longer has the same significance.
Are we in a time of riots?
would think so seeing the recent events in Greece, Iceland, England, Thailand (the Red Shirts), the food riots in Africa or major revolts in China. In France itself is a kind of pre-revolutionary power, through phenomena such as factory occupations, the people are on the verge of accepting revolt.
To put there, of course, the systemic crisis of capitalism that appeared about 2 or 3 years (which is far from over) with its succession of social stagnation, poverty, and the growing sense that the system is not feasible or as great as they said, the emptiness of political systems has become evident and justifiable only as servants of the economic system (the episode of "saving the banks" was particularly demonstrative), which contributes greatly to deprive them of credibility. In the same period, precisely because they are the agents of the system's survival, States took action dramatically reactionary sectors (railways, post offices, schools, hospitals ...).
I would like to place these phenomena within the framework of a historical period. I think that the conditions for the disturbances appear in periods "between intervals." What is a period "between intervals?" A sequence in which the revolutionary logic is clarified and in which it is explicitly presented as an alternative, followed by a period "between intervals" in which the revolutionary idea is disabled and there is still no substitute other than where they do not has built an alternative arrangement. It is during these periods when the reactionaries can say, precisely because the alternative is weakened, that things have returned to their natural course. It is typically what happened in 1815 with the restorers of the Santa-Alliance. In periods "between intervals' are disgruntled but are not structured, they can not draw its strength from a shared idea. Its strength is essentially negative ("you go"). For that reason, how to act in a collective mass for a period "between intervals' are the disturbances. Take the 1820-1850 period: it was a great period of riots (1830, 1848, " Révolté des Canuts [industrial revolt Silk, n. t.] de Lyon ...), but was not in vain, on the contrary, was very fruitful though invisibly. From this period came the great global policy guidelines structured the next century. Marx said it best: "the French labor movement was one of the sources of his thought (along with German philosophy, English political economy)."
What is the endpoint of the riots?
The characteristic problem of the riots, as elements that question the power of the state, exposing the state to political change (the possibility that sink), but the rioting is not the change: what will happen in the state is not expected before the riots. Is the main difference with a revolution that aims, in itself, an alternative. This is the reason why, in all ages, revolutionaries complain that the new regime is the same as before (we have the prototype after the fall of Napoleon III with the Constitution, Sept. 4, a system formed by the political staff of the former regime). They said the party, as the concept was created by the RSDLP (Russian Social Democratic Labour Party, ed t) and then by the Bolsheviks, is a structure specifically suitable to establish itself as an alternative to the established power. When the figure of the disturbances becomes a political figure, ie when it has political staff you need and need not resort to the "old political horse", then you can announce the end of the period "between intervals' .
revolt back to Tunisia, is likely to continue-fragment-to proclaim that the power model to be installed is so disconnected from the popular movement that is not accepted. So what criteria can assess the disturbances? Firstly there should be some empathizing with them, absolutely necessary condition. Is the recognition of negative capability, the disgraced power sinks, at least their symbols. But what is said? The Western press has already replied saying that there is expressing a desire of the West. What we can say is that it is a desire for freedom and that this desire is, indisputably, a legitimate desire against a regime as despotic and corrupt as that of Ben Ali. Why this desire as such is a desire of the West is more doubtful.
should be remembered that the West as a power so far has given no evidence that any worry about how to organize freedom in places where it operates. What counts for the West is: "Are they with us or not?", Giving the term "be with us" the meaning of belonging to a market economy, if necessary in conjunction with a police counter. The "friendly countries" such as Egypt and Pakistan also are despotic and corrupt as it was Ben Ali's Tunisia, but did not hear much about this matter which appeared on the occasion of the events in Tunisia, as ardent defenders of freedom.
How to define a movement that can be reduced to a "desire of the West"? Could say, and this definition can be applied to any country, it is a movement that embodied in the figure of a riot "antidéspota" negative power which takes the form of popular mass and which has no affirmative power rules those prevailing in the West. A popular movement that responds to this definition has many chances to run out in the elections and there is no reason to originate another political perspective. I think the end of a process we will have witnessed such a phenomenon of western inclusion. What Western media tells us is that this phenomenon is the inevitable departure of the process of the riots, in this case Tunisia.
If it is true, as Marx predicted that the realization space of emancipatory ideas is the world space (which, incidentally, was not the case of revolutions of the twentieth century), including a phenomenon of Western not be considered a real change. What would be a real change would be a departure from the West, a "desoccidentalización" and it would take the form of an exclusion. Fantasy, I say, but it is just a typical fantasy of a period "between intervals' as we are living.
If there was a different development in the evolution towards including Western What could verify this? Here you can not give any formal response. We can simply say that there is nothing to expect from the analysis of the state process itself which necessarily long and difficult, will eventually lead to elections. What is needed is a patient and thorough research among people in search of what, at the end of an inevitable division process (because there are always two who have the truth, not one), will be led by a part of the movement: those already announced. Do not be chosen that are not soluble in western inclusion. If you are among those announced, they are easily recognized. It is with the status of these new advertised as can imagine a process of organizing collective action.
To conclude, we return to empathy. The Tunisian education events, the minimum lesson is that what seems a foolproof stability may end up sinking. And this, it gives pleasure, even a lot of pleasure.
NOTE:
[1] The fall of communist regimes in Eastern Europe last twenty years is not comparable. This drop was carried out with the consent of the USSR, symbolized by the meeting between East German leader Honecker and their guardians Russians when Honecker asked permission (which was required to ask) to fire on the crowd refused. The change of the communist power structure was carried out with the same "apparatchiks" were installed in power on the ruins of the system they themselves had led to the implosion.
Daniel Fisher * Transcript of Alain Badiou seminar at the Ecole Normale Superieure in Paris on January 19, 2011.
Source: Tunisia Watch
Translated to Rebellion (12-02-2011) by Jorge Aldana and reviewed by Caty R.
0 comments:
Post a Comment