Abstraction of the Political in Post-Marxism

7/27/2019 Abstraction of the Political in Post-Marxism

1/22

Austere Politics: The Abstractionof the Political in Post-Marxism

Tim FiskenUniversity of [email protected]

On August 6, 2011, following the shooting of ark !uggan "y the etro#olitan

$olice, riots "roke out in %ottenham, &orth 'on(on, which s#rea( s#ora(ically over

the ne)t seven (ays to other areas of 'on(on an( other cities in *nglan(. %he riots

an( the looting that followe( were wi(ely con(emne( for violence an( lawlessness,

"ut in a((ition some +inclu(ing some on the left who s#oke #ositively of the #olitical

significance of earlier 'on(on riots, chose to critici-e these riots for "eing a#olitical.1

hy was the #olitical or otherwise nature of these events the groun( on which #eo#le

chose to make their criti/ue hy has a#olitical "ecome a term of a"use, an(

#olitical a term of #raise, #articularly for those on the left %his is har(ly an isolate(

inci(ent3 the (ecline of the #olitical is a common com#laint on the left, with the

#olitical a##arently "eing wi#e( out "y economics or technocracy, sometimes

com"ine( un(er the name 4neoli"eralism5.

A #osition that values the #olitical "y shar#ly (istinguishing #olitics, on the "asis

of certain essential characteristics, from the non#olitical, #ro(uces its own #olitical

#ro"lems. A (efinition which (raws a shar# line "etween #olitical an( non#olitical,

risks missing the #olitical significance of events an( activities which, intertwine( with

1 7ee An(rew 7wallow, 4$oliticians 8on(emn %ottenham 9iots5, The Guardian, 2011, as well asBauman5s claim that those involve( in the riots e)hi"ite( literally no su":ective agency at all, thattheir min(s containe( only 4the e)#lanations they hear( on %; an( rea( in the #a#ers5, an( so theevents can only "e e)#laine( in terms of causes, not meanings, 4can "e only e)#laine( in terms of"ecause of, not in terms of in or(er to5 + +2012, 11?6 +#. 12.

%im =isken 1


2/22

the su##ose(ly non#olitical, fall outsi(e the strictly(rawn lines of the #olitical. %he

case with which o#ene(, the 2011 U riots, is one e)am#le where a strict (efinition

of #olitics le( theorists to miss the significance of events, "ut such cases seem to "e

increasingly the norm. f #olitics is tie( to #articular organi-ations +#arties, unions,

#articular sites +legislatures, the me(ia or #articular forms of action +from electoral

#artici#ation to #etitions an( (emonstrations, the #olitical seems to "e a contracting

an( ever less relevant s#here. =rom the new social movements of the 0s an( C0s

+critici-e( as a#olitical for their focus on single issues to the antiglo"ali-ation

movement of the >0s an( early 2000s +critici-e( as a#olitical for its unwillingness to

unite issues into a coherent criti/ue of contem#orary institutions, to the Occu#y

encam#ments which arose in U7 an( *uro#ean cities in 201112 +critici-e( as

a#olitical for their unwillingness to make (eman(s or e)#ress a #ositive vision of the

society they (esire(, the last few (eca(es have "een characteri-e( "y collective action

in o##osition to the #revailing organi-ation of society in ways which are not fully or at

least not straightforwar(ly ca#ture( "y (efinitions of the #olitical. A #olitical theory

which is concerne( with maintaining the (istinctiveness of the category of the

#olitical "y #urifying that category, "y (etermining #recisely what is #olitical an(

what is not, #revents us from seeing these movements as #olitical, an( in #articular it

#revents us from consi(ering that it might "e their 4im#urity5, their com"ination of

#olitical, social, economic, an( other tro#es, which allows them to "e #olitical.

call this #olitics, which is (isconnecte( from a consi(eration of society an( the

economy, 4austere #olitics5. t is austere "ecause it attem#ts to (efine #olitics in the

narrowest #ossi"le way, an( it treats any e)#ansive or im#ure (efinition of #olitics as

(angerous, as a lu)ury we cannot affor(. t is this (isconnection of #olitics from a

consi(eration of society an( the economy which makes austere #olitics a #ro"lematic

%im =isken 2


3/22

form of #olitical theory. A #olitical theory #re(icate( on the autonomy of the #olitical

encourages us to e)#lain #olitical conce#ts only "y reference to other conce#ts which

we can "e sure are also #oliticalD in(ee(, any attem#t to relate #olitics to non#olitical

categories comes to "e viewe( with sus#icion, as involving a re(uction of the #olitical

to some other, non#olitical, s#here. y view is that any satisfactory investigation

into #olitics will involve e)#laining how what a##ear to "e #olitical conce#ts are

necessarily relate( to other, less o"viously #olitical, conce#ts. %his is not a re(uctivist

move, "ecause the a##arently non#olitical conce#ts im"ricate( with #olitics are no

more #urely non#olitical than #olitical conce#ts are #urely an( solely #olitical. f

#olitics involves action, that action takes #lace in a worl(, an( that worl( cannot "e

e)#laine( solely in #olitical termsD therefore any a(e/uate theory of #olitics will nee(

to "e o#en to all the categories an( areas of stu(y necessary to un(erstan( the worl(

in which #olitical action takes #lace. e cannot say anything useful a"out :ustice

without consi(ering the economic organi-ations which control (istri"ution, nor can

we say anything useful a"out #ower without consi(ering the institutions through

which #ower is e)ercise(, nor a"out i(entities without consi(ering the histories

which have #ro(uce( an( continue to ascri"e these i(entities. Austere #olitics, "y

focusing our attention on #olitics consi(ere( as autonomous, encourages us to forget

these necessary su##lements to our #olitical categories.

%his #a#er has two #ur#oses. %he first is to #ersua(e you that 4austere #olitics5 is a

coherent conce#t an( one which usefully characterises certain elements of

contem#orary #olitical theory. %he secon( #ur#ose is to suggest that that austere

#olitics lea(s to "a( #olitical theory. n the course of making my case on this secon(

#oint, will also suggest that ar)5s work can "e hel#ful in (evelo#ing a #olitical

theory which #rovi(es an alternative to austere #olitics. "egin the #a#er "y

%im =isken E


4/22

(escri"ing some current work in #olitical theory from Alain Ba(iou, $eter Fallwar(,

an( Go(i !ean, which think #articularly e)em#lifies austere #olitics. then turn to a

much "roa(er (iscussion of mo(ern #olitical theory to show how austere #olitics is

roote( in features of #olitical theory which we can fin( more wi(elyD in (oing this,

also offer some :ustification for my use of the term 4austere #olitics5. =inally, (evelo#

a more (etaile( rea(ing of !ean5s work to show what think are the #ro"lem that

result from austere #olitics.

Post-Marxist austerity

One use of this theme of the central im#ortance of a narrow, #urifie( notion of

#olitics is of #articular interest. n recent years what we might call a neoGaco"in or

neo'eninist tren( in #olitical theory from the ar)ist or #ostar)ist tra(ition. %his

tren( has insiste( that the lack of attention to #olitics, narrowly (efine(, has #lace( a

limitation on the ra(ical #otential of leftwing #olitical theory an( #racticeD the

e)am#les of this tren( will e)#lore here are Ba(iou, Fallwar( an( !ean. %his

neoGaco"in tren( can "e (istinguishe( from the more general theme of a mo(ern

4(ecline of #olitics5 "ecause the neoGaco"in #osition (oes not necessarily i(entify a

general, e#ochal (ecline of #olitics, "ut instea( sees the #ro"lem as a lack of #olitical

will s#ecifically on the left.2%hese authors #ro#ose a reinvigorate( #olitics of will as

the solution, which is why call them 4neoGaco"in5D this #olitics of will is also central

to the features of this account of #olitics which lea( me to la"el it 4austere5. Before

turn to this /uestion of austere #olitics, however, will e)#lain in more general terms

how the category of the #olitical is constructe( "y these authors.

2 n(ee(, the #o#ularity, on the left, of accounts of a (ecline of the #olitical is "ecause they #rovi(e atheoretical ali"i for the failure of actual left #olitics, accor(ing to Go(i !ean, 4$olitics without

$olitics5, inReading Rancire, e(. "y $aul Bowman +8ontinuum, 2011, #. 2E.

%im =isken H


5/22

=or Ba(iou, #olitics is one of the (istinct (omains in which true novelty, a ra(ical

"reak with e)isting con(itions, is #ossi"le.Ehat (istinguishes #olitics from other

areas of ra(ical ru#ture is that #olitics is collective, in(ee( #olitics is the situation 4in

which the collective "ecomes intereste( in itself5.HIiven this (efinition of #olitics, it is

no sur#rise that for Ba(iou the /uintessential #hiloso#her of #olitics is 9ousseau.

hat is "oth most im#ortant an( most novel in 9ousseau +who, Ba(iou writes,

4forever esta"lishes the mo(ern conce#t of #olitics5J is the i(eas that #olitics is not

natural or given, "ut nee(s to "e create(, or rather (e#en(s on a creation, the

creation of the "o(y #olitic3 4#olitics is a creation, local an( fragile, of collective

humanity5.6hat allows 9ousseau5s account of #olitics to inaugurate this new era is

that 4it (iscerns an a"solutely novel term, calle( the general will5.

%he general will is also central to Fallwar(5s re#u"lican, or, as he calls it

4(ialectical voluntarist5, #olitics. %he (efining feature of this voluntarism is that 4what

is ultimately (eterminant is not the given economic or historical constraints "ut free

human action ? the a"ility of each single in(ivi(ual to #rescri"e their own en(s an(

make their own history5.C$olitics, for Fallwar(, (e#en(s on (etaching the will from

material con(itions. t is true that Fallwar(5s voluntarism is (ialectical inasmuch as it

recogni-es that this will is reali-e( in a worl( of material necessity, where 4the

#olitical e)ercise of will (istinguishes itself from mere wish or fantasy through its

ca#acity to initiate a #rocess of genuine realisation5.>Fowever, it is im#ortant to

note that this (ialectic "etween will an( circumstances arises at the #oint of the will5s

E $olitics is one of #recisely four such (omains, the other three "eing art, science, an( love +AlainBa(iou,Being and Event+'on(on D &ew Kork3 8ontinuum, 200J, ##. EE>?H0

H Ba(iou, #. EH0.J Ba(iou, #. EHJ.6 Ba(iou, #. EHJ Ba(iou5s em#hasis. Ba(iou, #. EHJ.C $eter Fallwar(, 4%he ill of the $eo#le5,Radical Philosophy, 200>, #. 26.

> Fallwar(, #. 2J.

%im =isken J


6/22

realisationD material constraint (oes not #lay a role in the will5s conce#tion or

creation.10Because #olitics is the ela"oration of a collective will, then, for Fallwar( it

has at its origins a narrowing or (etachment3 #olitics is (efinitely not +even if it might

later encounter the material circumstances Fallwar( lists as 4a##etite L causality L

conte)t L ha"it L tra(ition L history L #ower L the unconscious L convention L

writing L (esire L (rive5.11

hen #olitics is narrowe( to the e)ercise of will, it has a #articular name3

sovereignty. n a theory of #o#ular will, this sovereignty must "e s#ecifically #o#ular

sovereignty, a sovereignty e)ercise( "y the #eo#le rather than an e)ternal ruler. %his

is the key Gaco"in moment in the i(ea of communism #ro#ose( "y !ean, a theory of

4communism as the sovereignty of the #eo#le5.12$o#ular sovereignty is the

sovereignty of 4the #eo#le as a collective"o(y5,1Ean( what the naming of the #eo#le as

the sovereign intro(uces is this crucial (istinction "etween the #eo#le asthe

sovereign ? as singular "o(y, a ruler ? an( the #eo#le as (is#erse( in(ivi(uals, the

#eo#le as su":ects. !ean is e)#licit a"out em"racing this 4noni(entity "etween the

#eo#le an( its sovereignty, that is to say, the ga# "etween the government an( the

governe(5,1Han( it was this (istinction that was 9ousseau5s great innovation within

re#u"lican theory. %he similarity with 9ousseau is interesting "ecause it "rings into

focus a continuity "etween a su##ose(ly ra(ical mo(el of #olitics an( a much more

general tren( in mo(ern #olitics. %he mechanism of #o#ular sovereignty, in which the

#eo#le is sovereign when an( "ecause it is re#resente( as such, is a central theme of

mo(ern #olitics, the general constellation of #olitical systems calle( 4li"eral5 in the

10 A genuine will is not 4a(a#te(5, to use Fallwar(5s term, to circumstances +Fallwar(, #. 111 Fallwar(, #. 21.12 Go(i !ean, The Communist Horizon+&ew Kork3 ;erso, 2012, l. HE. 9eferences to this te)t are to

locations in the in(le e(ition.1E !ean, The Communist Horizon, l. C2.

1H !ean, The Communist Horizon, l. C26.

%im =isken 6


7/22

"roa( sense. will show in the final #arts of this #a#er that the criti/ue of li"eralism

+an( its material infrastructure, ca#italism which the neoGaco"ins are so keen to

un(ertake in fact re/uires a criti/ue of the #urifie(, a"stract #olitics that they

a(vocate. n or(er to make that argument, however, first nee( to e)#lain in more

(etail the centrality of this a"stract #olitics to mo(ern #olitical thought, which will

also involve clarifying what mean "y calling this #olitics 4austere5.

A history of austerity

One of the foun(ing moments of estern #olitical science is an attem#t to

(istinguish the #olitical from the non#olitical. Aristotle o#ens thePolitics"y telling

us that there is one #articular kin( of 4association which is #olitical5 an( that 4it is an

error to su##ose, as some (o, that the roles of a statesman, of a king, of a househol(

manager an( of a master of slaves are the same.51J%his foun(ing moment has "een

ren(ere( in mythological terms "y 7trauss, as a time of (irect access to 4#olitical

things5, a (irect access now lost to us.16hile we are unlikely to e)#licitly acce#t this

7traussian myth to(ay, something like it (oes, think, continue to e)ert an influence

on how we un(erstan( #olitical theory. e are still likely to think that locating the

s#ecificity of the #olitical is, historically an( #ractically, the starting #oint of #olitical

theory, an( that a failure to atten( to this s#ecificity is "oth a theoretical an( #olitical

(anger. n this #a#er, want to #ick a#art this assum#tion that #olitical theory

1J Aristotle, The Politics, trans. "y %. A. 7inclair an( %revor G. 7aun(ers +'on(on3 $enguin Books,1>>2, 12J2a. t is, strictly, anachronistic to refer to Aristotle as 4foun(ing5 estern #oliticalscience, as the relevant category of the 4est5 was constructe( centuries after Aristotle5s (eath.9ather the retroactive mythologisation of Ireek #hiloso#hy asa foun(ing moment was itself amoment in the #ro(uction of the i(ea of the est. n what follows, will concentrate on thetem#oral s#ecificity of a 4mo(ern5 un(erstan(ing of #olitics, "ut it is worth kee#ing in min( thatthis mo(ernity is also eurocentric.

16 'eo 7trauss, What Is Political Philosophy+Ilencoe, '3 =ree $ress, 1>J>, #. 2. n fact, for7trauss, "y the time Aristotle was writing, (irect access to #olitical things was well on its way out.

%hat the #olitical is alwaysalrea(y lost for 7trauss of course enhances its mythic allure.

%im =isken


8/22

(e#en(s on the s#ecificity of the #olitical, to historici-e the i(ea "y #aying attention

to the various (ifferent ways in which we might (istinguish the #olitical, an( what it

might mean that mo(ern #olitical theory has chosen a #articular mo(e of (istinction,

an a"straction of the #olitical from material circumstances which refer to as 4austere

#olitics5.

itro#oulos #oints out that the (ifferent uses of Aristotle5s (istinction "etween

#olitics an( 4economics5 +oi!onomia, which is the etymological root of 4economics5,

(oes not mean the same thing as the mo(ern term, from achiavelli onwar(s, at

least, say more a"out the concerns of the authors making use of Aristotle than they (o

a"out some su##ose(ly foun(ational category of greek #olitical theory.1itro#oulos

(raws #articular attention to the mo(ifications to the un(erstan(ing of the

relationshi# "etween #olitics an( economics which coinci(e with the (evelo#ment of

ca#italism an( the rise of social contract theory,1Can( it is this early mo(ern

reconfiguration of the (istinctiveness of #olitics that want to focus on. n the early

(evelo#ment of social contract theory from Fo""es to 9ousseau, #olitics is first

(efine( through an a"straction from material circumstances, an( all the

circumstances that are now 4e)ternal5 to #olitics are conceive( as an e)cess, a kin( of

lu)ury which is a (istraction"rom#olitics.

%he (istinctive i(ea intro(uce( into the un(erstan(ing of #olitics in the

earlymo(ern #erio(, which continues to "e central to theories of the #olitical to(ay,

is that the #olitical s#here is artificial. %his innovation can "e trace( "ack to Fo""es,1>

summe( u# in the o#ening lines of#eviathan, which (escri"e the stu(y of #olitics as

1 Angela itro#oulos, Contract and Contagion$ %rom Biopolitics to &i!onomia+Brooklyn, &K3inor 8om#ositions, 2012, #. J, an( ch.2 more generally.

1C itro#oulos, ##. J2, 61.1> As with any theory, Fo""es5s account of the artificiality of #olitics has #rece(ents, "ut it has a

central im#ortance for Fo""es that it (oes not have for his #re(ecessors. 7ee !avi( 9unciman,

Pluralism and the Personality o" the 'tate+8am"ri(ge University $ress, 1>>, cha#. 2.

%im =isken C


9/22

the stu(y of artifice, 4for "y Art is create( that great 'eviathan calle( a

8ommonwealth, or 7tate +in latine 8ivitas which is "ut an Artificiall an5.207o, the

#olitical s#here is a creation, a (istinct an( se#arate thing "rought into "eing "y

human artifice.

t is worthwhile em#hasising the novelty of Fo""es5s claim that the #olitical s#here

is artificial, "oth "ecause it seems so o"vious to(ay an( "ecause it was so

counterintuitive in Fo""es5s time. n working out the logic "ehin( the Fo""esian

conce#t of #olitics, it is useful to think a"out why this "ecame a #ossi"le way of

thinking a"out #olitics in the early mo(ern #erio( s#ecifically. e can certainly

locate reasons within the intellectual tra(ition Fo""es was working in an( against,

#articularly the emerging criti/ue of scholastic meta#hysics.21Fowever, there were

also (evelo#ments outsi(e of #hiloso#hy to which Fo""es5s theory #rovi(es a

res#onse. %he early mo(ern #erio( saw the (issolution of the feu(al system in which

the organisation of (aily life an( material re#ro(uction was (irectly tie( u# with the

organisation of rule. %his system "roke (own with what ar) calls 4#olitical

emanci#ation5 in 4On the Gewish Muestion5 an( the 4(ou"le free(om5 of the worker in

Capital.22%he social reorganisation which "egan in the early mo(ern #erio( involve(

the creation of a s#ecifically economic s#here an( so, at the same time, a (istinctively

#olitical s#here. As ar) #uts it, the en( of feu(alism 4unleashe( the #olitical s#irit

20 %homas Fo""es,#eviathan+8am"ri(ge University $ress, 1>>6, #. >.21 %homas A. 7#ragens, The Politics o" (otion$ The World o" Thomas Ho))es+'e)ington K3

University of ansas $ress, 1>E. an( Allen 7 Fance, 4$ru(ence an( $rovi(ence3 On Fo""es5s%heory of $ractical 9eason5,(an and *orld, 2H +1>>1, 1JJ?6. #rovi(e (ifferent accounts ofFo""es5s thought which "oth locate it in relation to Aristotelian meta#hysics. 8ees 'ei:enhorst,4Fo""es5s %heory of 8ausality an( ts Aristotelian Backgroun(5, The (onist, > +1>>6, H26?HH.suggests ways in which some of Fo""es5s i(eas emerge( out of mo(ifications ma(e withinscholasticism. =or the more general climate of antischolastic thought in Fo""es5s time, seeMuentin 7kinner, 4Fo""es5s 'ife in $hiloso#hy5, in +isions o" politics, E vols. +8am"ri(ge38am"ri(ge University $ress, , 1?E.

22 arl ar), 4On the Gewish Muestion5, inEarly *ritings, trans. "y 9o(ney 'ivingstone an( IregorBenton +'on(on3 $enguin, 1>>2, ##. 211?2H2 +#. 2E2D arl ar), Capital$ , Criti-ue o" Political

Economy, trans. "y Ben =owkes +'on(on3 $enguin Books, 1>>2, #. 22.

%im =isken >


10/22

which has, as it were, "een (issolve(, (issecte( an( (is#erse( in the various

cul(esacs of feu(al societyD it gathere( together this s#irit from its state of

(is#ersion, li"erate( it from the a(ulteration of civil life5.2En the early mo(ern

#erio(, that is, the #olitical state as a se#arate s#here was "eing materially

constructe(D thus the /uestion of how such a se#aration could)econstructe( "ecame

a matter of #hiloso#hical concern, an( we can see this concern "eing worke( out in

Fo""es.

%he solution Fo""es (evises to this /uestion of how #olitics might "e constructe(

is the conce#t of re#resentation.2H9e#resentation is first a mo(e of se#aration, a way

of se#arating some or all of a #erson5s acts from that #erson themselves. Fo""es

connects the wor( 4#erson5 with the 'atin 4persona5, meaning outwar( a##earance or

mask, an( this connects re#resentation with a kin( of im#ersonation, in which acts

#erforme( "y one #erson are taken as "eing the acts of someone elseD2Ja

re#resentative acts on "ehalf of the #erson "eing re#resente(. %his #ro(uces a

meta#hysics of agency in which acts can "e (etache( from concrete in(ivi(uals an(

transferre( to others.

9e#resentation is a ty#e of se#aration for Fo""es, then, "ut what makes it so

im#ortant for his #olitical theory is that this se#aration is the "asis for a su"se/uent

unification. Because re#resentation allows for the ar"itrary transfer of acts from one

#erson to another, it also allows for the transfer of acts from many #eo#le to one

#erson. %his creates the #ossi"ility of unity, "ecause 4it is the .nityof the re#resenter,

2E ar), 4On the Gewish Muestion5, #. 2EE.2H Fo""es, cha#. 16. One of the earliest authors to (raw attention to the centrality of re#resentation

for Fo""es5s theory was Fanna =enichel $itkin, The Concept o" Representation+University of8alifornia $ress, 1>6, #. ch 1. %his remains one of the most e)tensive (iscussions of Fo""es5stheory of re#resentation, although it is confine( to re#resentation in#eviathan. =or a (iscussion ofre#resentation throughout Fo""es5s work, see Nnica Brito ;ieira, The Elements o"Representation in Ho))es$ ,esthetics/ Theatre/ #a*/ and Theology in the Construction o"Ho))es0s Theory o" the 'tate+B9'', 200>.

2J Fo""es, #. 112.

%im =isken 10


11/22

not the .nityof the re#resente(, that maketh the #erson &ne5.26%his moment of

re#resentation is crucial for Fo""es as it is the only way in which many #eo#le can "e

un(erstoo( as a unityD an(, furthermore, they can only "e un(erstoo( as a unity

"ecause, in transferring their acts to a single re#resentative, they have create(

something new3 the single #erson that the re#resentative 4"ears5.2%his is how #olitics

works through a"straction in Fo""es3 (iverse in(ivi(uals se#arate out #art of

themselves, some of their actions, an( transfer these to anotherD this act of

re#resentation #ro(uces an 4artificial #erson5 which su"stantiali-es the unity

#ro(uce( out of #rior (iversity.

%he central role of a"straction to #olitics is ma(e e)#licit in the cha#ter of

#eviathanfollowing that on re#resentation, where Fo""es (escri"es how a

commonwealth, or sovereign, is create( through a universal alienation an(

unification of #eo#le5s wills. t is 4as if every man shoul( say5, Fo""es writes, that 4 L

give u# my right of Ioverning myself,5 which lea(s everyone to 4conferre all their

#ower an( strength u#on one an5.2C%his theory is share( "y 9ousseau, who

(escri"es the fun(amental #rinci#le of the social contract as 4the total alienation of

each associate together with all his rights5 which 4creates a cor#orate an( collective

"o(y5.2>t is "ecause this alienation, or se#aration an( unification, of #owers is the

"asis of #olitics that ar) sees 9ousseau as a #articularly goo( e)am#le of 4the

a"straction of the #olitical man5,E0"ut the similarity to Fo""es also reinforces ar)5s

"roa(er #oint that this a"straction is characteristic of mo(ern #olitics ? from the

authoritarian Fo""es to the com#aratively ra(ical re#u"lican 9ousseau.

26 Fo""es, #. 11H.2 Fo""es, #. 11H.2C Fo""es, #. 120.2> GeanGac/ues 9ousseau, The 'ocial Contract and 1iscourses, trans. "y I. !. F 8ole +'on(on3

*veryman, 1>>E, #. 1>1.

E0 ar), 4On the Gewish Muestion5, #. 2EH.

%im =isken 11


12/22

t is also useful to look at 9ousseau "ecause 9ousseau is much more concerne(

than Fo""es "y the am"iguities an( com#le)ities of re#resentation. Fo""es

(escri"es re#resentation using the language of acting an( theatre, "ut (oes not seem

concerne( "y the #ossi"ility that the similarity "etween the way a #erson is

4counterfeite( on stage5E1an( the way they are re#resente( in #olitics might cast

(ou"t on the seriousness or reality of the #olitical s#here he analyses an(

constructs.E29ousseau, however, is alert to the #ara(o)es of re#resentation, where"y

a falsehoo( +a re#resentation stan(s in for the thing it re#resents. t is in 9ousseau5s

re#eate( insistence on the nee( to (istinguish "etween #ro#er an( im#ro#er

re#resentations that we can see why the a"straction at the heart of mo(ern #olitics is

also a form of austerity.

One of the central features of 9ousseau5s #olitical theory is his contention that

#olitics is threatene( "y lu)ury, ostentation, an( e)cess +he is of course inheriting a

long tra(ition of re#u"lican theory on this #oint. n 9ousseau5s #resentation, this is

tightly connecte( to his views of gen(er, which (ou"tless e)#lains why the "est

writing on this theme comes from feminist inter#reters of 9ousseau. hile think

the austere mo(el of #olitics len(s itself to antifeminist #ositions to(ay as much as it

(i( in 9ousseau5s time,EE want here to use these (iscussions of gen(er in 9ousseau

to ela"orate on how #lacing austerity at the centre of a conce#tion of the #olitical

#ro(uces a more general logic of #olitics which e)ten(s "eyon( 9ousseau. n

E1 Fo""es, #. 112.E2 Fo""es is not in general very concerne( a"out /uestions of falsity or (issimulation. Fis (iscomfort

with rhetoric, which is an im#ortant motivation for much of his theory, is not that rhetoric useswor(s in ways that are"alse, "ut in ways that are varia"le, as when one rhetorician (escri"es an actas courageous when another (escri"es it as reckless, lea(ing to (isagreement an( conflict. 7eeMuentin 7kinner,Reason and Rhetoric in the Philosophy o" Ho))es+8am"ri(ge University $ress,1>>6, es# ch. .

EE Although (on5t have s#ace to make this argument in any (etail, my contention is that austere#olitics, "y ren(ering the non#olitical irrelevant to #olitics, is likely to ignore the kin(s of material

con(itions that #articularly o##ress women.

%im =isken 12


13/22

#articular, 9ousseau5s an)iety a"out gen(er makes his a #articularly clear case in

which to see a more general mo(ern an)iety a"out #rotecting the #ro#er of #olitics

from im#ro#er a(ulteration "y the non #olitical.

ingrove writes that 9ousseau5s 4re#u"licanism consists in the #ro#er

#erformance of masculinity an( femininity5,EHan( the i(ea of 4#ro#er #erformance5 is

crucial to the gen(er of re#u"lican #olitics. 4$erformance5 is an interestingly

(ou"lee(ge( wor( "ecause it can mean "oth to act an( to counterfeit actionD this is

why in 9ousseau5s theory #erformance always nee(s to "e tie( to #ro#riety.

$erformance in the first sense, of activity, is central to #olitics for 9ousseau +as

in(ee( it was for earlier re#u"licans. hat is com#aratively new in 9ousseau is that

what makes #olitical acts genuine actsis that they have the right relationshi# to will.

$olitics involves the (irect, uninterru#te( conversion of the general will into actionD

see for instance 9ousseau5s (escri#tion of the i(yllic state in which 4the first man to

#ro#ose them lawsP merely says what all have alrea(y felt, an( there is no /uestion

of faction or intrigue or elo/uence in or(er to secure the #assage into law of what

every one has alrea(y (eci(e( to (o, as soon as he is sure the rest will act with him.5EJ

%he cause of this i(yllic situation is that 4men who are u#right an( sim#le are (ifficult

to (eceive "ecause of their sim#licityD lures an( ingenious #rete)ts fail to im#ose

u#on them, an( they are not even su"tle enough to "e (u#es5.E6%hat 9ousseau refers

to 4men5 here is not at all acci(ental or conventional, "ut lies at the heart of

9ousseau5s gen(ering of #olitics3 #olitics is a masculine (omain "ecause it is (irect

EH *li-a"eth 9ose ingrove,Rousseau0s Repu)lican Romance+$rinceton University $ress, 2000, #.6.

EJ 9ousseau, #. 2H. Another e)am#le of this trans#arent relation of will to action is 9ousseau5sfamous assertion that 4the sovereign, merely "y virtue of what it is, is always what it shoul( "e5+9ousseau, #. 1>H.

E6 9ousseau, #. 2H. 7ee the (iscussion of this #assage in ngri( akus, 4%he $olitics of =eminine8oncealment an( asculine O#enness in 9ousseau5, in%eminist interpretations o"2ean32ac-ues Rousseau, e(. "y 'yn(a 'ange +University $ark, $a.3 $ennsylvania 7tate University

$ress, 2002, ##. 1C?211 +#. 1>.

%im =isken 1E


14/22

an( men are ca#a"le of this kin( of (irectness, at least they are if they have not "een

corru#te(.E

t is here that the o##osing sense of #erformance, as counterfeit, is relevant,

"ecause this ty#e of #erformance is the threat to #olitics an( this #articular threat is

resolutely #resente( "y 9ousseau as feminine. %he #rimary #laces where 9ousseau

locates this feminine or feminise( #erformance are the theatre an( the salon. *ven in

these circumstances, however, 4the natural man is still (iscerni"le un(er the vile

ornaments of the courtier5 an( 4not content to "e #assive an( "eautiful, he also wants

to "e active an( useful5.EC%he #erformance which is 4"eautiful5 rather than 4active5,

that is, is a kin( of mas/uera(e or ornamentation in which an ostentatious costume

conceals the #ro#erly masculine citi-en ca#a"le of of an honest an( (irect

#artici#ation in the general will. As

At the centre of mo(ern #olitical theory, then, is a kin( of austerity, a re:ection of

ostentation or ornamentation. %his (erives from this theory5s organisation aroun(

the conce#ts of #o#ular sovereignty an( the general will3 will must flow (irectly an(

trans#arently from the #eo#le through the sovereign into action, an( any e)cess of

a##earance threatens this trans#arency. %his way of un(erstan(ing #olitics (e#en(s

on a norm of re#resentation as #ro#er a##earance, in which what isa##ears as:ust

E akus, #. 1CC.EC 'in(a


15/22

what it is an( nothing else, as against im#ro#er a##earances which, through lu)ury or

theatricality, a##ear as something other than what they are.H0%his austere conce#t of

re#resentation is at the centre of mo(ern #olitical theory, from Fo""es through to

to(ay5s ra(ical #olitical theory. %his contem#orary ra(ical theory, furthermore,

insists that what makes it ra(ical is this #articular a##roach to #olitics which have

"een calling austerityD "ut the u"i/uity of austerity to mo(ern #olitical theory might

make us a little sce#tical a"out whether it can really function as a hallmark of the

ra(ical. ar) e)#resse( :ust this sce#ticism in his early work, an( much of his mature

work can "e seen as an attem#t to work out an alternative to austere #olitics. n the

remain(er of this #a#er, will attem#t to e)#lain how ar) shows us the limits of

austere #olitics.

The limits of austerity

%he a(vocates of austere #olitics "ase their claim to "e #olitical ra(icals on what they

see as the s#ecial role of #olitics in resisting our contem#orary late ca#italist or

neoli"eral con(ition. %he #ro"lem these authors i(entify is the (omination of the

economy, that is, the way our lives are controlle( "y economic structures which

themselves are not su":ect to our control. 7e#arating off the #olitical as a (istinct

s#here of sovereign will makes it #ossi"le to conceive of a #ro:ect in which the

#olitical takes control over the economic. !ean is #articularly clear in her insistence

that the weakness of the contem#orary left is (ue to giving u# on this #olitical logic of

sovereignty an( control in favour of logics of com#le)ity an( consensus which are

com#ati"le +or in(ee( (irectly (erive from economic logics.H1

H0 4%o "e an( to seem "ecame two totally (ifferent thingsD an( from this (istinction s#rang insolent#om# an( cheating trickery, with all the numerous vices that go in their train.5 +9ousseau, #. >J

H1 !ean, The Communist Horizon, l. C0E, 11. !ean5s claims a"out the #ro"lems of 4the left5

throughout The Communist Horizonare weakene( "y the "ook5s lack of clarity a"out who its

%im =isken 1J


16/22

!oesn5t this concern with the #ower of #olitics overeconomics un(ermine my

claim that 4austere5 #olitics is cut off from economic an( material concerns &o,

"ecause it turns out that the attem#t to construct a #olitics which is ca#a"le of ruling

over economics is selfun(erminingD this is ar)5s central criti/ue of 9ousseau an(

mo(ern #olitics more generally. %o un(erstan( how construing #olitics as sovereign

over economics un(ermines itself, we can start "y looking at !ean5s attem#t to

groun( her account of #olitics in an account of class struggle. One a##arent (ifference

"etween !ean5s an( 9ousseau5s accounts of the #eo#le is that, for 9ousseau, the

#eo#le may contain all who will to :oin it, while !ean makes the #eo#le a class

conce#t in that the #eo#le e)clu(es 4the rich5 an( is ma(e u# of 4the rest of us5.H2

Fowever, although 9ousseau (oes not e)#licitly e)clu(e the rich from the #eo#le, he

(oes (o so im#licitly, "y insisting on the nee( for e/uality, an( a certain economic

austerity, among the #eo#le. $o#ular sovereignty is un(ermine( through 4i(leness

an( money...through the hustle of commerce an( the arts, through the gree(y

selfinterest of #rofit, an( through softness an( love of amenities an( #ersonal

service5.HE%hus 9ousseau sets u# a (istinction "etween the #eo#le #ro#er an( the

rich, who are not really #art of the #eo#le an( work against it. %amQs #oints out the

e)istence of a tra(ition within socialism, heavily influence( "y 9ousseau, which

focuses on a /ualitative (istinction "etween rich an( #oor which is then morali-e(3

targets are. Although the "ook often seems to "e an intervention into the milleu) aroun( Occu#yall 7treet, when s#ecific criticisms are ma(e they ten( to "e of leftli"eral aca(emics such as'aclau an( ouffe. %he im#ression that aca(emics are the real targets an( inten(e( au(ience ofthe "ook is strengthene( "y the ten(ency to refer to aca(emics as 4we5 or 4us, as when !ean suggestthat 4leftists5 fear the 'eninist #arty "ecause 4we fear the unsto##a"le force of the #eo#le mo"ili-e(against the system, a force that university gates are inca#a"le of "locking5 +l. J1>. %his lack ofclarity means that !ean (oesn5t engage with the (e"ates which informe( the tren(s she isostensi"ly criticising, such as the e)tensive (iscussions among anarchist an( antiauthoritarianactivists using formal consensus (ecision making a"out the a(vantages, (isa(vantages, an(a##ro#riate occasions to use consensus. One of the "est summaries of these (e"ates is 8ommonheel 8ollective, Collective Boo! on Collective ProcessesRhtt#3SSwww.geocities.comScollective"ookSintro.htmlT accesse( 2H =e"ruary 201HP.

H2 !ean, The Communist Horizon, l. 6>>.

HE 9ousseau, #. 26J.

%im =isken 16


17/22

the rich have an illegitimate concern for their economic selfinterest an( this

economic concern (isru#ts the #ro#er, #urely #olitical, functioning of the general will

an( #o#ular sovereignty.HHAs %amQs argues, however, this 9ousseauist socialism is

/uite (ifferent from the theory an( #olitics of ar), which is concerne( with material

an( structural (ivisions which e)#lain the functioning of #olitical economy, the

(ivision "etween those who control the means of #ro(uction an( those who (o not.

!ean is firmly within the 9ousseauist tra(ition, an( this is why her suggestion of 4the

#eo#le as the rest of us5 as a re#lacement for 4the #roletariat5 is so ina(e/uateDHJshe

#rovi(es no account of how this (ivision o#erates, e)ce#t for a few morali-ing

references to 4theft5 carrie( out "y the 4su#er rich5.H6=urther, as %amQs #oints out,

class struggle is a feature s#ecifically of the economic an( #olitical organi-ation of

ca#italismD it is not , contra !ean, a timeless meta#hysical name for 4the fun(amental

antagonism through which society emerges5 or 4the fact that there is not set of or(ere(

relations constitutive of society as such5.H!ean5s account of class struggle is one that

avoi(s the economic an( reinter#rets class #urely in #olitical termsD an(,

furthermore, in terms of a #hiloso#hical, a"stract, an( ahistorical account of #olitics.

%his re(uction of class to a #olitical a"straction is a necessary conse/uence of

!ean5s theoretical a##roach, which (e#en(s on (rawing a shar# (istinction "etween

#olitics an( economics, an( in making this (istinction !ean is very much in the

mainstream of mo(ern #olitical theory. ar) a((resses #olitical theory, inclu(ing

that of 9ousseau, in his early work, #rior to 1CHJD in(ee(, it was his growing

i(entification of the #ro"lems with #olitics as (escri"e( "y mo(ern #olitical theory

HH IQs#Qr iklNs %amQs, 4%elling the %ruth A"out 8lass5, Grundrisse$ 4eitschri"t "5r lin!e Theorie 61e)atte, 200 Rhtt#3SSwww.grun(risse.netSgrun(risse22Stelling%he%ruthA"out8lass.htmTaccesse( 2H =e"ruary 201HP. 7ee also 9ousseau, #. 20E.

HJ !ean, The Communist Horizon, l. 62>.H6 !ean, The Communist Horizon, l. HE>.

H !ean, The Communist Horizon, l. 6>C.

%im =isken 1


18/22

which motivate( his turn towar(s the stu(y an( criti/ue of #olitical economy which

woul( occu#y the rest of his life. Although a fuller (iscussion woul( have to inclu(e

ar)5s (iscussion of Fegel5sPhilosophy o" Right, for the s#ecific argument am

making here the most relevant te)t is 4On the Gewish Muestion5, which at first a##ears

to "e a res#onse to Bauer on the /uestion of Gewish emanci#ation, "ut (evelo#s into a

criti/ue of the conce#t of #olitical emanci#ation, an( in(ee( of 4the #olitical5 as such.

ar)5s criticism turns on what have alrea(y i(entifie( as the central conce#tual

move of the mo(ern li"eral state, the role of re#resentation in taking a #o#ulation of

(iverse in(ivi(uals an( uniting them into one #olitical community. ar) notes that

this unification (oes not a"olish (ifference "ut merely claims that (ifference has no

#olitical significance3

&evertheless the state allows #rivate #ro#erty, e(ucation an( occu#ationto actan( assert theirparticularnature in theirown way, i.e., as #rivate#ro#erty, as e(ucation an( as occu#ation. =ar from a"olishing thesefactual (istinctions, the state #resu##oses them in or(er to e)ist, it onlye)#eriences itself as apolitical statean( asserts its universalityin

o##osition to these elements.HC

%hat is to say, the e)istence of the #olitical state (e#en(s on the e)istence of the

#rivate, economic, s#here of civil societyD the 4#rivate interest5 of egoistic "ourgeois

society is the 4#resu##osition5 of the #u"lic interest of the state,H>an( the state must

thus continually re#ro(uce this s#here of civil society if it is to remain in e)istence.

ar) realises that 9ousseau has correctly un(erstoo( this as#ect of mo(ern society,

an( /uotes 9ousseau5s (escri#tion of the #olitical community which 4must take man5s

own #owers away from him an( su"stitute for them alien ones which he can only use

with the assistance of others5, an( glosses this as3 4#olitical emanci#ation is the

HC ar), 4On the Gewish Muestion5, #. 21>.

H> ar), 4On the Gewish Muestion5, #. 221.

%im =isken 1C


19/22

re(uction of man on the one han( to the mem"er of civil society, the egoistic,

independentin(ivi(ual, an( on the other han( to the citizen, the moral #erson.5J0

%his #uts a (ifferent s#in on the history of the (evelo#ment of li"eralism which

!ean tells, (rawing on =oucault. =oucault follows ar) in connecting the arrival of

the mo(ern li"eral state with the "ifurcation "etween economic man an( #olitical

man3 4'i"eralism ac/uire( its mo(ern sha#e #recisely with the formulation of this

essential incom#ati"ility "etween the nontotali-a"le multi#licity of economic

su":ects of interest an( the totali-ing unity of the :uri(ical sovereign.5J1!ean errs,

however, in inter#reting this incom#ati"ility as necessitating tem#oral succession, in

which :uri(ical sovereignty is re#lace( "y economic rationality. On the contrary, as

ar) an( =oucault "oth know, the incom#ati"ility of #olitical sovereignty an(

economic rationality is (ue to the mutual (e#en(ence of the two se#arate s#heres

into which mo(ern society carves human life, setting the market to rule over one an(

the state to rule over the other. %his misun(erstan(ing lea(s !ean to miscite ar) to

the effect that #olitical economy lea(s to 4an inca#acitating of collective strength, a

fragmenting of it into su##ositions of in(ivi(uals alrea(y com#eting an( o##ose(5,J2

forgetting that for ar) it is this fragmentation which lea(s to the #olitical form

taken "y 4collective strength5, the #olitical form of the state.JE!ean, in other wor(s, is

caught in the i(eology of the li"eral ca#italist state "ecause she "elieves the

conce#tual #olarity of state an( economy means that the state can (ominate the

economy, when in fact the economy is the #resu##osition of the state.JH%he i(ea of

#o#ular sovereignty over the economy, that is, (e#en(s on the illusory se#aration of

J0 ar), 4On the Gewish Muestion5, #. 2EH.J1 =oucault, /uote( in !ean, The Communist Horizon, l. >6.J2 !ean, The Communist Horizon, l. C0J.JE ar), 4On the Gewish Muestion5, #. 2EE.

JH ar), 4On the Gewish Muestion5, #. 222.

%im =isken 1>


20/22

#olitics from economic, an illusion #ro(uce( "y an( central to the (istinctive

con(itions of ca#italist society.

%o #ut it another way3 austere #olitics wants to #urify #olitics of any e)tra#olitical

influence in or(er to strengthen #olitics, to make #olitics ca#a"le of asserting

collective, #o#ular, control over these e)tra#olitical forces. But austere #olitics has

:ust the o##osite effect3 the se#aration of the #olitical from the non#olitical #ro(uces

the situation where we are (ominate( "y e)tra#olitical forces over which we have no

control, an( #revents our #olitical conce#ts from gaining any #urchase on these

forces. As ar) writes3

%he more #owerful a state an( hence the morepoliticala nation, the lessincline( it is to e)#lain the general#rinci#le governing socialills an( toseek out their causes "y looking at theprinciple o" the state, i.e. at theactual organization o" societyof which the state is the active,selfconscious an( official e)#ression.Politicalun(erstan(ing is :ust

politicalun(erstan(ing "ecause its thought (oes not transcen( the limitsof #olitics. %he shar#er an( livelier it is, the more inca#a"le is it ofcom#rehen(ing social #ro"lems.JJ

n a sense, this #a#er has "een an e)ten(e( attem#t to make this /uotation from

ar) #lausi"le. Austere #olitics is a way of thinking a"out #olitics which intentionally

cuts #olitics off from 4the actual organi-ation of society5, an( as a result it is 4inca#a"le

of com#rehen(ing social #ro"lems5. %his is an a##roach to #olitics with (ee# roots in

the history of #olitical thought, an( it has this e)ten(e( history "ecause it reflects

something real in the history of #olitical (evelo#ment3 mo(ern li"eralca#italist

society (oes in(ee( (e#en( on a #rocess of se#aration of #olitics from the

non#olitical. t is im#ortant, however, that #olitical theory un(erstan(s the

historical contingency of this se#aration rather taking it as a selfevi(ent conce#tual

starting #oint. t is es#ecially im#ortant that left #olitical theory, which is attem#ting

JJ arl ar), 48ritical &otes on the Article %he ing of $russia an( 7ocial 9eform. By a $russian5, inEarly *ritings, trans. "y 9o(ney 'ivingstone an( Iregor Benton +'on(on3 $enguin, 1>>2, ##.

H01?H20 +##. H12?E.

%im =isken 20


21/22

to think against li"eral ca#italism, recognises that it cannot (o so if it continues to

un(erstan( #olitics an( the non#olitical as necessarily (istinct.

Bibliography

Aristotle, The Politics, trans. "y %. A. 7inclair an( %revor G. 7aun(ers +'on(on3$enguin Books, 1>>2

Ba(iou, Alain,Being and Event+'on(on D &ew Kork3 8ontinuum, 200J

Bauman, +2012, 11?6

8ommon heel 8ollective, Collective Boo! on Collective ProcessesRhtt#3SSwww.geocities.comScollective"ookSintro.htmlT accesse( 2H =e"ruary201HP

!ean, Go(i, 4$olitics without $olitics5, inReading Rancire, e(. "y $aul Bowman+8ontinuum, 2011

, The Communist Horizon+&ew Kork3 ;erso, 2012

Fallwar(, $eter, 4%he ill of the $eo#le5,Radical Philosophy, 200>

Fance, Allen 7, 4$ru(ence an( $rovi(ence3 On Fo""es5s %heory of $ractical 9eason5,(an and *orld, 2H +1>>1, 1JJ?6

Fo""es, %homas,#eviathan+8am"ri(ge University $ress, 1>>6

'ei:enhorst, 8ees, 4Fo""es5s %heory of 8ausality an( ts Aristotelian Backgroun(5,The (onist, > +1>>6, H26?HH

akus, ngri(, 4%he $olitics of =eminine 8oncealment an( asculine O#enness in9ousseau5, in%eminist interpretations o" 2ean32ac-ues Rousseau, e(. "y'yn(a 'ange +University $ark, $a.3 $ennsylvania 7tate University $ress,2002, ##. 1C?211

ar), arl, Capital$ , Criti-ue o" Political Economy, trans. "y Ben =owkes +'on(on3$enguin Books, 1>>2

, 48ritical &otes on the Article %he ing of $russia an( 7ocial 9eform. By a$russian5, inEarly *ritings, trans. "y 9o(ney 'ivingstone an( Iregor Benton+'on(on3 $enguin, 1>>2, ##. H01?H20

, 4On the Gewish Muestion5, inEarly *ritings, trans. "y 9o(ney 'ivingstone an(Iregor Benton +'on(on3 $enguin, 1>>2, ##. 211?2H2

%im =isken 21


22/22

itro#oulos, Angela, Contract and Contagion$ %rom Biopolitics to &i!onomia+Brooklyn, &K3 inor 8om#ositions, 2012

$itkin, Fanna =enichel, The Concept o" Representation+University of 8alifornia$ress, 1>6

9ousseau, GeanGac/ues, The 'ocial Contract and 1iscourses, trans. "y I. !. F 8ole+'on(on3 *veryman, 1>>E

9unciman, !avi(,Pluralism and the Personality o" the 'tate+8am"ri(ge University$ress, 1>>

7kinner, Muentin, 4Fo""es5s 'ife in $hiloso#hy5, in +isions o" politics, E vols.+8am"ri(ge3 8am"ri(ge University $ress, , 1?E

,Reason and Rhetoric in the Philosophy o" Ho))es+8am"ri(ge University$ress, 1>>6

7#ragens, %homas A., The Politics o" (otion$ The World o" Thomas Ho))es+'e)ington K3 University of ansas $ress, 1>E

7trauss, 'eo, What Is Political Philosophy+Ilencoe, '3 =ree $ress, 1>J>

7wallow, An(rew, 4$oliticians 8on(emn %ottenham 9iots5, The Guardian, 2011

%amQs, IQs#Qr iklNs, 4%elling the %ruth A"out 8lass5, Grundrisse$ 4eitschri"t "5rlin!e Theorie 6 1e)atte, 200Rhtt#3SSwww.grun(risse.netSgrun(risse22Stelling%he%ruthA"out8lass.htmT

accesse( 2H =e"ruary 201HP

;ieira, Nnica Brito, The Elements o" Representation in Ho))es$ ,esthetics/Theatre/ #a*/ and Theology in the Construction o" Ho))es0s Theory o" the

'tate+B9'', 200>

ingrove, *li-a"eth 9ose,Rousseau0s Repu)lican Romance+$rinceton University$ress, 2000

Documents

Abstraction of the Political in Post-Marxism