Situationist inheritors: Julien Coupat, Tiqqun and the Coming Insurrection

In twenty-nine issues and more than 1,500 published pages, Le Tigre has succeeded in never making a close study of the work of Guy Debord. Not without reason, the invocation of the situationist movement having become a banality in the media. In the preceding issue of Le Tigre, devoted in part to the texts of Julien Coupat and those close to him, there wasn't a precise analysis of the filiation between them and the situationists. Here's one.

Around the time of the arrest of Julien Coupat and the [other] people accused of sabotaging the lines of the SNCF[1] in the autumn of 2008, among all the names, more or less fanciful, used by the Minister of the Interior and the police to describe the nebulous political ideology to which these "terrorists" adhered, there was one -- a single one -- that had some legitimacy: "ultra-left." Contrary to what one might believe, this term wasn't created for the occasion, like the rather comic expression "anarcho-autonomous." And even if its usage gas sometimes been contested by those to whom it was supposed to designate, it undoubtedly possesses a descriptive value. Indeed, although it remained attached to the communist project, the movements that one groups together under the name "ultra-left" are still distinguished from the extreme left by their opposition to Lenin, Trotsky and their inheritors.

What also particularizes the ultra-left is the critique, even the pure and simple rejection, of the modes of action proper to the extreme left: organization into parties or unions; parliamentarianism; and the support of anti-fascist or national-liberation struggles. The ultra-left has always privileged anti-hierarchical forms of organization, based upon direct democracy and the concentration of all of its forces upon a single goal: revolution.[2]

This is why it can be said, without exaggeration and perhaps even
with praise, that Julien Coupat -- as well as those who published in
the journal Tiqqun or in the works with which this name is
associated[3] -- are parts of the ultra-left. Indeed, by consigning
the traditional formulations of the extreme left to the Gemonies,[4]
the movement inspired by Tiqqun and its successive avatars only
recognized itself in an "imaginary party": the party of those "who
choose to live in the interstices of the market world and participate in whatever is connected to it."[5] Which does not
prevent this movement from once again taking up the question of
communism in a new light, not as a political or economic system --
"Communism can do very well without Marx. Communism doesn't give a
fuck about the USSR." -- but as the instauration of a form of
authentic community: "A thing is mine to the extent that it enters
into the domain of my usage, and not by virtue of some legal title.
Legal property has no other reality, in the final analysis, than the
forces that protect it. The question of communism is thus, on the one
hand, the suppression of the police and, on the other, the elaboration
of modes of sharing, of usage, among those who live together" (The
Call
).

More exactly -- and the police have themselves recognized it[6] --
Tiqqun, Coupat et al inscribe themselves in the
filiation of the Situationist International (SI), which was a singular
movement from all points of view. Guy Debord, who was one of its
principle leaders, defined it thus in 1963: "at once an artistic
avant-garde, experimental research into the free construction of
everyday life, and finally a contribution to the theoretical and
practical edification of a new revolutionary contestation."[7] Born in
the 1950s from the encounter between several artists who came from
Surrealism and Lettrism, this group progressively came to adopt the
political positions of the ultra-left of its time, which was a
singular trajectory that can be explained by the group's encounters
with certain "heretical" Marxist intellectuals (Henri Lefebvre,
Cornelius Castoriadis, etc) as well as by its ardent research into
means capable of rendering life completely poetic, beyond the
limits that are imposed on it by a certain ordering of the social
world.

When the first two issues of Tiqqun appeared, almost ten
years ago, the journal was instantly identified by all its prospective
buyers as a new component in the small milieu that keeps the spirit of
the SI alive, even today. They could recognize among the people
associated with Tiqqun the names of Joel Gayraud, a habitue of
post-situationist circles,[7] and even Coupat himself, the author a
short time previously of a university thesis on the SI, was thanked by
the sociologist Luc Boltanski, who utilized Tiqqun's
conclusions in a work written at the same time.[9] But even more than
names, it was the style [facture] of the journal that signaled
its adherence to post-situationist movements: a burning style, one
that "burns like ice," in the words of Baudelaire; the recurring usage
of the concept of the spectacle as it was elaborated by Guy Debord;
and a beautiful and sober presentation, which contrasted with the
radicality of the texts. There were even several small polemics within
the milieu, against this or that remarkable figure -- for example,
Jean-Pierre Voyer and Jaime Semprun[10] -- in perfect conformity with
"the old leftist tradition that consists in hitting as hard as
possible the currents that one believes to be the closest [to oneself]
and that one wants to distinguish oneself from at all costs."[11]
Thus, Tiqqun resembled all of those publications that were
distributed in the hundreds through the classic bookstores of the
post-situationist milieu in Paris: Actualites, on the rue
Dauphine (since closed); Un regard moderne, on the rue
Git-le-Coeur; and the basement of the Compagnie bookstore.

"Theory of the Flower," "Theory of the Young Woman," "Theses on the
Terrible Community" . . . . Someone who turns the pages of
Tiqqun today will think they are reading the words of
theorists, not terrorists. In the pages of the journal, there
developed a manner of thinking that was greatly nourished by
philosophy and inspired by a simultaneously demanding and inventive
reading of the works of Hegel, Heidegger and Carl Schmitt, but also
Gilles Deleuze, Michel Foucault, Giorgio Agamben and many others.
Especially Agamben, who became a friend of Debord at the beginning of
the 1990s,[12] held the work of Tiqqun in high regard,[13] and
ended up close to several of its editors, including of course Julien
Coupat, whose public defense he has taken up;[14] Joel Gayraud, who
became Agamben's translator in France; and even Fulvia Carnevale, with
whom Agamben had the occasion to lead seminar in Venice.[15] A
discreet homage in return and a pledge of loyalty, The Coming
Insurrection
-- the last treatise published in the Tiqqun
line,[16] which the police considered to be a manual for terrorists --
alluded in its title to The Coming Community, an enigmatic and
seminal book published by Agamben in 1990.

The passion for theory was always constitutive of the situationist
movement, which -- so as to launch its accusations against the
ensemble of social life -- was strongly inspired by the masters of
suspicion: Marx, Nietzsche and Freud. To such an extent that this
philosophical passion sometimes turned to drunkenness among some of
its continuers. The curious reader can even convince herself of this
by consulting, for example, the texts published in a neo-Hegelian
style and interrupted by choleric flashes that was published during
the last 20 years by the team at the center of the Bibliotheque des
Emeutes, then the Observatoire de Teleologie,[17] which was a small
group whose doctrine is not without analogy to that of Tiqqun
in its fascination for diverse figures of the contemporary
lumpenproletariat (gangs, the youth of the banlieus, marginals and
others who have been demoted).[18] In a general fashion, the theory of
the situationists and their followers is still managing to be
maintained at a sufficiently estimable level to keep the attention of
a good number of intellectuals. The influence of the situationists
thus has been decisive for thinkers such as Jean Baudrillard, Philippe
Lacoue-Labarthe and Paul Virilio;[19] and even today the publications
of the Encyclopedia of Nuisances, for example, are read with interest
in the leftist circles of the university-based intelligentsia.[20]

It is not necessary to believe, as the result of all this, that the
situationist and post-situationist movements have remained as pure
theory. What made their reputation was their capacity to give to this
theory a striking force, to engage it in practice, to make the arms of
critique transform themselves into a critique of arms (to take up an
expression from Marx for which the SI had particular affection).
Contrary to a certain vulgate who wants the situationists to have been
a bunch of schoolkids, that is, the arty version of the great
student parade [monome of '68, it is necessary to recall that
the situationists brought fire to the powders at the faculte de
Nanterre, fought at the barricades in the Latin Quarter before they
took part in the first Occupation Committee at the Sorbonne and
organized the provision of supplies for the factory workers who were
on strike.[22] The authorities did not deceive themselves about the
subversive character of the SI: its publications were seized several
times; and its members were pursued by the courts, surveilled by the
police and sometimes put in prison or physically threatened.

The care of putting their ideas and actions into accord has pushed
many movements issued from the situationist nebula to continue this
tradition, either by involving themselves directly in social conflicts
or by intervening punctually in a more isolated fashion. For example,
let us cite several instances of brilliance, such as the 1990 public
divulging by the Cangaceiros[23] of the secret plans for
several French prisons so as to prevent their construction; or even
the two sabotage campaigns that revealed to the public at large the
noxiousness of GMO [genetically modified organisms] -- the first begun
in January 1998 on the initiative of Rene Riesel, an ex-situationist
connected to the Encyclopedia of Nuisances[24] and the second launched
in the summer of 1999 by a multitude of small groups whose tracts
clearly showed situationist inspiration. No doubt it was this
tradition of sabotage and active participation in contestatory
movements -- that is to say, its capacity for perturbation --
that drew the attention of the police to Coupat and his companions.
Tiqqun's declarations of intention in favor of illegalist
strategies and a generalization of social chaos no doubt were
accompanied by a humor typical of the situationist milieus: one
remembers the very scholarly "Society for the Advancement of Criminal
Science," founded by Tiqqun in the pages of issue #2, and which
proposed the use of recipe cards that would allow someone to realize a
fictive use of a Molotov cocktail. But does not humor constitute an
aggravating circumstance when it passes from black to red and
threatens to explode all social contradictions?

In the midst of many perspicacious ideas and very exact
formulations about our era, it is perhaps the insurrectionism of
Tiqqun that poses the most problems. In their desperate quest
for an intensity of words and acts, Coupat and his fellows have
systematized and carried to its summit a certain discourse of struggle
that is proper to radical movements. They have thus forged a veritable
ideology, which desires that the exercise of domination is
understood as a permanent war and that a revolutionary attitude
consists in taking note of this situation, that is, in carrying the
conflict that is in this situation to the end. "We protest nothing, we
demand nothing. We constitute ourselves in force, in material
force, in autonomous material force at the heart of the global
civil war," The Call announces. And [they constitute
themselves] by dreaming that this force will emerge in the manner of a
guerrilla who has "his farms, schools, weapons, medicines, collective
houses, editing tables, print shops, covered trucks and beachheads in
the metropolises." And that, one fine day, a series of subversive
actions will converge upon a general tipping-point . . . in what?
That's the question. Simone Weil, who lived in the middle of the
Spanish [Civil] War that Tiqqun has presented as a model,
nevertheless foresaw that, in this armed upheaval, "the necessities,
the atmosphere of civil war, have the upper hand over the aspirations
that one seeks to defend by the means of civil war."[25] Which he had
already formulated several years before in the following manner: "It
seems that a revolution engaged in a war has only the choice between
succumbing under the murderous blows of the counter-revolution and
transforming itself into counter-revolution by the very mechanism of
military struggle."[26]

(Written by Patrick Marcolini, a professor of philosophy at the
University of Nice, and published in Le Tigre, volume 30,
March/April 2009. Translated by the French by NOT BORED! May 2009.
Footnotes by the author, except where noted.)

[1] Translator: the Societe Nationale des Chemins de fer
francais
is the National Railway of France. It provides high-speed
train travel to the rest of Europe.

[2] In France there is only one synthetic work on the ultra-left,
the one by Christophe Bourseiller, which is unfortunately blemished by
a certain number of errors and misinterpretations: Histoire
generale de l'ultra-gauche,
Denoel, 2003.

[3] The journal Tiqqun came out with two issues: February
1999 and October 2001. Several texts were extracted from them and
published by diverse publishers. A Call was then distributed
anonymously in 2004. The Coming Insurrection was published in
2007 by Editions La Fabrique under the signature of "The Invisible
Committee." A preface to a collection of writings by Blanqui was also
published by La Fabrique in 2006 (signed "Several Agents of the
Imaginary Party"), and finally a long tract from the Invisible
Committee entitled "Mise au point" and distributed since the end of
January 2009. All these documents are available at HREF="http://bloom0101.org">bloom0101.

[4] Translator's note: Staircase in Rome where the bodies of
murdered prisoners were displayed.

[5] Several formulae from "Theses on the Imaginary Party," in
Tiqqun #1.

[6] In its report to the procurer of Paris, the anti-terrorist task
force of the judicial police wrote that the thought of Julien Coupat
was formed "in the school of situationism, an international anarchist
movement that extols struggle against the current structures of
society." This report is available HREF="http://www.mediapart.fr/files/PV-TGV.pdf">on-line.

[7] Guy Debord, "The situationists and the new forms of action in
politics and art," reprinted in his Oeuvres, Quarto Gallimard,
2006, p. 647.

[8] Joel Gayraud is also known for having attached his name to
French translations of the writings of the Italian section of the SI
(published by Editions Contre-Moule in 1988), as well as more
classical translations of the works of Giacomo Leopardi. He is also a
member of the Surrealist Group of Paris. Note that La peau de
l'ombre,
a poetic-political essay that was published by Editions
Jose Corti in 2004, also reveals a certain "Tiqqunian" spirit.

[9] Luc Boltanski and Eve Chiapello, Le Nouvel esprit du
capitalisme,
Gallimard, 1999. The work of Julien Coupat -- a term
paper for the course "History and Civilization," under the direction
of Nicolas Tertulian, EHESS, Paris, 1996-1997 -- was entitled
Perspective et critique de la pensee situationniste.

[10] Translator's note: Jean-Pierre Voyer once worked with
Guy Debord on his film La Societe du Spectacle (1973). After
being dismissed by Debord and having some of his books refused by
Editions Champ Libre, Voyer became a dedicated anti-Debordist. A
couple of Jaime Semprun's books were published by Champ Libre in the
1970s. In 1984, Semprun -- attempting to defend Champ Libre in the
aftermath of the murder of its founder, Gerard Lebovici -- founded the
Encyclopedia of Nuisances.

[11] Le Cauchemar de Don
Quichotte: Sur l'impuissance de la jeunesse d'aujord'hui, Climats,
2004.

[12] Translator's note: While it is true that Agamben and
Debord exchanged letters in 1989 and 1990, and that Agamben helped
publish Italian translations of Debord's two books on the spectacle,
the two were not "friends." According to Debord, Agamben wasn't
discriminating enough in his praise for other writers. In his letter
to Agamben dated HREF="http://www.notbored.org/debord-6August1990.html">6 August
1990, Debord states: "You have spoken so well, in all of your
texts, of so many authors, chosen with the greatest taste (about which
I am reassured, with the exception of several exotics of whom I am
very regrettably ignorant and four or five contemporary Frenchmen whom
I do not want to read at all), whom one finds inevitably honored with
figuring in such a Pantheon."

[13] See, among others, "Une biopolitique mineur," interview with
Giorgio Agamben, conducted by Stany Grelet and Mathieu
Potte-Bonneville for the journal Vacarme #10, Winter 2000.

[14] Translator's note: see HREF="http://www.monkeywrenchbooks.org/free-tarnac-nine-commentary-agamben-french-police-repression">Terrorism
or Tragicomedy, dated November 2008.

[15] Seminar held 11-15 October 2005 at the University Institute of
Architecture in venice. In 2004, Fulvia Carnevale, along with the
artist James Thornhill, founded the HREF="http://www.clairefontaine.ws">Claire Fontaine collective,
which mostly adopted the theses of Tiqqun on an artistic plane
by utilizing the codes of conceptual art in an ironic manner.

[16] Beyond the identity of style and thought between Tiqqun
and The Coming Insurrection, the name "The Invisible Committee"
appeared in Tiqqun #2, p. 84, at the end of a short narrative
that appears to have been a sketch of the passage that closes The
Coming Insurrection
and that describes the harbingers of the
revolution announced by its authors.

[17] Editions Belles Emotions being the point of contact between
the two. Today, the members of the three groups pursue their
activities under the name HREF="http://www.teleologie.org">Teleologie Ouverte.

[18] One will note furthermore that the writer and philosopher
Medhi Belhaj Kacem, who participated in the Tiqqun adventure
for a while, had fashioned his first arms in the Bibliotheque des
Emeutes. See EvidenZ / Medhi Belhaj Kacem, Theory of the
Trickster,
Paris, Sens & Tonka, 2002 and Medhi Belhaj Kacem,
Pop philosophie, interview with P. Nassif, Paris, Denoel,
2005.

[19] Translator's note: A Maoist in the 1960s, Jean
Baudrillard tried to convince his readers in the 1970s that Debord's
theory of the spectacle was no longer relevant to contemporary
society. Debord detested him.

Philippe Lacoue-Labarthe was the co-author of a book on psychoanalysis
that was translated into English by the ex-situationist Donald
Nicholson-Smith. Paul Virilio is in fact an HREF="http://www.notbored.org/art-and-fear.html">anti-situationist.

[20] Before becoming a publishing house in 1993, the
Encyclopedie des Nuisances was at first a journal of
post-situationist and anti-industrial social critique, founded by
Jaime Semprun and Christian Sebastiani (a former member of the SI).
Guy Debord briefly participated in it in 1985-1986.
[Translator: this version of the events in question completes
side-steps the roles of Jean-Francois Martos and Jean-Pierre Baudet,
co-authors of The
Encyclopedia of Powers: Public circular relative to several
theoretical nuisances verified by the strikes during the winter of
1986-1987
.]

[21] Translator's note: English in original.

[22] Years previously, in fact in March 1965. The SI was at the
origin of the demonstrations against NATO troop maneuvers in Danmark.
These demonstrations turned into riots and durably marked [people's]
minds.

[23] Translator's note: For Os Cangaceiros, follow HREF="http://www.revoltagainstplenty.com/index.php/archive/16-archive-global/58-os-cangaceiros">this
link

[24] Translator's note: For Rene Riesel, see HREF="http://www.notbored.org/riesel-interview.html">this
interview, which took place in 2001.

[25] Simone Weil, "Reflexions pour deplaire" (1936), reprinted in
his Oeuvres, Gallimard, 1999, p. 401.

[26] Simone Weil, "Reflexions sur la guerre" (1933), ibid. p. 459.

okay. so this was awesome

okay. so this was awesome because it cleared up a bunch of historics i didn't know about tiqqun, etc

but i also contest the last part of this essay's point that these folks want military struggle, as part of their global civil war.

maybe it is just lost in the translation, but i have always interpreted tiqqun, invisible committee, etc to be calling for generalized rebellion, insurrection, not total militarized revolution.

if so fuck that, but i still think their theory lends itself to the prior.

thanks notbored! for translating!

I miss writers that you

I miss writers that you didn't have to 'interpret', ones that would clearly state what they were about.
But hey, being vague sells better.

yeah it is all that french

yeah it is all that french post-modern residue i know...it can be confusing.

but what would you favor instead. a discourse on philosophy that shared strict objective rules on how to present itself in order to be "accessible" what might be accessible to north americans could be totally inaccessible to continental europeans for all we know.

We agree. Remember: this

We agree. Remember: this article was written by an academic who "specializes" in the situationists. His attempt to divert the conversation to Simone Weil and the traps of civil war should be resisted. A good antidote: the text by the Uncontrollable in the Iron Column: http://www.notbored.org/incontrolado.html

Our purpose in translating this relatively impoverished text about the "Situationist Inheritors" was not only to offer some historical background, but also to show that the Tiqqun/Invisible Committee folks have *nothing* to do with Semiotexte's advertising pitch for their translation of "The Coming Insurrection" (Italian autonomia, Negri, et al).

NOT BORED!
http://www.notbored.org

beautiful...i was pretty

beautiful...i was pretty sure this translation was to expose the "academics" take on things, but notbored! cleared it up awesomely...it is great for us non-francophones to be able to come into contact with this writing. i find it really ridiculous that they are trying to bring that connection together, when it barely exists. (spanish civil war vs global civil war [which is more a metaphor for low intensity conflict {at least that's how i see it}]) hopefully you releasing this translation will help nip at the same sort of criticism in the future.

"Global civil war": the term

"Global civil war": the term originates, at the theoretical level, with Carl Schmitt. See his Theory of the Partisan. It has been used, recently, by Agamben and by Negri and Hardt. It is referred to, as this text mentions, on occasion by Tiqqun. It is not an important element, however, in their most important text--to my eyes--"Introduction to Civil War," published in the second issue of the journal.

Wishy-washy Leftists should

Wishy-washy Leftists should stop taking cues from fascist jurists. Its an embarrassment to even be vaguely associated with those asshats.

Tiqqun are not leftists,

Tiqqun are not leftists, they are communists. First point. As for Schmitt, his work was a very important point of reference for Walter Benjamin, something of a communist who spent his mornings reading L'action francaise over his morning coffee while in Paris. It is not a matter of doing the Vatican thing and putting books on an index. Schmitt, the fascist, was also something of Maoist sympathisizer.

I was talking about Negri

I was talking about Negri (who should know better), Hardt and Agamben.

Fair enough, but there's

Fair enough, but there's plenty of Schmitt chez Tiqqun. What they do with it is what counts: not the "what," but the "how."

communists are leftists, by

communists are leftists, by definition, given a clear understanding of the term and the political spectrum as a tool.

Leftist=leftwing=any number of positions on the political spectrum. leftwing=wanting to spread wealth and power out, to distribute wealth and power to those who do not have it.

rightwing=wanting to conserve/constrict/restrict wealth and power to those who already have it.

communist/anarchist/liberal/etc.=left

look, i am not saying you have to use the term to describe yourself. frankly i don't care. of course the political spectrum is an imperfect tool, and i welcome revisioning of this and other models used to explain political/social ideologies. but i think it is important that you understand what many people mean when they use the terms leftwing and rightwing. saying someone is on the left is a very broad thing. it is a broad, overarching term, that explains a wide range of ideologies and perspectives, many of which have divergent methods, tactics, understandings, etc. i am not saying that liberals, communists, and anarchists are all the same thing because they are all on the "left," i am just saying, lets actually understand the term.

No. Communism is the

No. Communism is the abolition of systemic alienation in social relations. Anarchy is the negation of coercive authority.

What you're describing sounds vaguely like socialism. Socialism is not a requisite for communism or anarchy, if not utterly opposed to both. I'm an anarchist and a communist, and I despise socialism; which is only fair, as historically, the majority of socialists hated/hate anarchists.

Let me ask you something, in all earnest, and I've asked this before in basically the same wording (I've yet to receive a response): is the distribution of power and wealth (by, presumably, an institution external to those being given the power and wealth) a truly self-determined and autonomous way of reclaiming social wealth and power? Or is it merely an allowance? An administrative solution that only amounts to handouts?

If the answer is yes (I doubt you'll concede to the factual content of what you're proposing; so I'm expecting a 'no'), then I would oppose your program just as I oppose all other programmatic schemes for revolution. I've had enough of administrations and institutions. I've had enough of politics as well. So I'll clearly have to destroy everything you stand for. Where does this leave us?

my program? i never proposed

my program? i never proposed a program.

i understand the myriad definitions of all of these words: communism, socialism, anarchism. i understand that there are many and diverse opinions on these matters. i don't think your definitions are the only exclusive possible definitions of these words. I am not saying they are good or bad, and really my opinion on your definitions are irrelevant to my point. My point is simply to say that as the term Left has developed, and as the Political Spectrum has developed as a tool, the common understanding of the term has a meaning that includes Socialism, Anarchism, Communism, Liberalism, etc., even given that what constitutes these ideas is always up for debate.

Okay, in answer to your questions: forget that i said the word distribution. i don't really want to haggle over semantics. my very simple point is this: when people say someone is on the "left", they are saying something very broad, and it is an imperfect word meant to describe a variety of viewpoints, all of which have at least ONE thing in common (and many things NOT in common), that they want people who have no power in their lives, who are poor and fundamentally oppressed, to have more power in their lives, and that the wealth society should be shared more equitably and that class distinctions should be broken down. that is what the term LEFT means.

Again, I am not saying that it is a particularly good term, or that anyone should use or disavow the term. do what you like. all i am saying is that LEFT infers any number of ideologies, all of which have the idea of greater equality and the breaking down of class distinctions and privileges.

Aside from your lack of

Aside from your lack of interest in making the completely (and, I would argue, deliberately) vague term "left" have any descriptive power, your assertion is historically untenable. Socialism in its broadest sense may include some stuff about "greater equality" but usually only in the realm of public (parliamentary) politics and perhaps in the workplace. In terms of "breaking down class distinctions" well that's merely lip service. What socialist (social democrat, Leninist, or Democratic Party official) has done anything to do that? And breaking down class privilege? Surely you jest. Nowhere has any socialist regime or parliamentary majority done anything to eliminate, or even lessen, the institutionalization of privilege. The state is the repository and maintainer of privilege (which means private law), the repository and maintainer of class division and the maintainer of class rule and capitalist social (and production) relations. The issue of the state is precisely what separates anarchists from all other socialists; it is the deal-breaker. If a socialist does not repudiate the use of the state to "break down" social hierarchies and institutions of domination, then that socialist is no ally of any anarchist. And if there's no basis for alliance, then there's no basis for referring to anarchists by the same generic term as socialists. It's really that uncomplicated. Anarchism has been saddled with the umbrella terms "socialist" or/or "leftist" for far too long; what benefits accrue to anarchists by being considered anti-state socialists or anti-state leftists? We become automatically dismissed as a lunatic fringe of anti-revolutionaries. It's much easier to explain that anarchy does not equal chaos than it is to explain how we're not the same as the mass murderers of workers and peasants and intellectuals and artists.

From the anonymously

From the anonymously produced pamphlet "Appel," or Call, which appears on the bloom0101.org / Tiqqun website:

Thus the communism we are talking about is strict-
ly opposed to what has been historically caricatured
as “communism”, and that was most of the time so-
cialism, monopolist state capitalism.

And:

The ‘we’ that speaks here is not a delimitable, isolated
we, the we of a group. It is the we of a position. In these
times this position is asserted as a double secession:
secession first with the process of capitalist valorisa-
tion; then secession with all the sterility entailed by
a mere opposition to empire, extra-parliamentary or
otherwise; thus a secession with the left. Here “seces-
sion” means less a practical refusal to communicate
than a disposition to forms of communication so in-
tense that, when put into practice, they snatch from
the enemy most of its force.

And:

The Left is periodically routed. This amuses
us but it is not enough. We want its rout to
be final. With no remedy. May the spectre of
a reconcilable opposition never again come to
haunt the minds of those who know they won’t
fit into the capitalist process. The Left – eve-
rybody admits this today, but will we still re-
member the day after tomorrow? – is an integral
part of the neutralisation mechanisms peculiar
to liberal society.

it is not that i want to

it is not that i want to strip the term "left" of any descriptive power, but that i want to see the strength in people trying to fight for what they believe is a better world, even when their struggles go tragically wrong. i agree with a lot of what you are saying. your tone again makes it seem like you assume that we fundamentally disagree, when in many ways we probably fundamentally agree on a lot of things. but i get frustrated when people make wide sweeping generalizations about people and movements. i see dignity and inspiration in many people who called themselves socialists, communists, anarchists, leninists, trotskyists, syndicalists, etc. throughout history and today. i guess you dont have to feel the same way, but it seems to me like the anarchist movement is so marginal and insignificant right now, and i don't feel in any position to be condescending and dismissive towards everyone who doesn't see the world exactly as i do. regardless of political ideology, i try to treat people with respect, and if i think their motives are good, why wouldn't i want to be in solidarity with these people.

The political specturm is a

The political specturm is a pretty useless "tool" for our purposes. It's used by those in power to create a simple binary into which they can fit all of their preconcieved statist notions about ideology and then foist them on us. "Doesn't everyone know that the Left cannot manage an economy succesfully?" That is a typical thing that a fox news pundit would say/imply and by doing so they force the assumptions that 1. Communism has anything to do with countries that claimed to be communist but did not follow that ideology. 2. Communism is always and eternally associated with "the left". 3. "The Left" will always fail because of the historical example of these states. 4. We must have an economy. 5. It must be "managed."

"The Left" is to be understood as a term under which any movement which can vaguely be linked to the idea of socialization can be catogorized and discredited by association. If we understand the term, we should understand that it doesn't benefit us to help in this generalizing of our ideas.

this article comes from a

this article comes from a stupid hipster magazine called Le Tigre. It's really full of non-sense, historical mistakes and misinterpretations. Finally, the kind of article worth being translated by Bill Not-Bored. Anyone interested in Tiqqun should not pay attention to this bullshit. And yeah, fuck the situs.

pay attention to Tiqqun but

pay attention to Tiqqun but fuck the sits? you don't make any sense and seem like the type who simply pisses on everything because it relieves the pressure on your brain.

And by the way, the

And by the way, the translation is bad and stupid too.

It's not a "fictive molotov cocktail" it's " A fictive job paid by the state AND special molotov's that ignite by themselves called Juliot-Curry"

bullshit. this is the French

bullshit.

this is the French and it clearly doesn't say what you insist it says.

on se souviendra de la très docte Société pour l’Avancement de la Science Criminelle fondée par Tiqqun dans les pages de son numéro 2, et qui proposait des fiches-recettes permettant de réaliser tout aussi bien un emploi fictif qu’un cocktail molotov.

Why am I not surprised that your objection to the translation is totally and transparently phony?

Morale of the story: When you want to talk shit, make sure you wipe your mouth.

No, your translation is

No, your translation is wrong, as the poster above suggested. This is a fairly simple construction: "tout aussi bien...que..." This is bizarre coming from a gasbag who spends his time giving the rest of the world lectures on translation (first rule, do it alone, in a closet, etc.).

"Theory of the Flower"!!!

"Theory of the Flower"!!! Are you kidding. That is how you translate "Theorie du Bloom"?! You obviously have absolutely no clue. Please, you don't even have to read the fucking book. Just google around a bit and you will learn that Bloom is not a flower, but a conceptual figure "named" after a certain character in a little-known novel by Joyce.
Christ!

calling your

calling your bluff:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=safari&rls=en&q=%22theory+of+the+bloom%22&btnG=Search

This is absurd. Please stop.

This is absurd. Please stop. You are being perversely stupid. Just stop for a second and try to figure out what you are talking about. Seriously. This sucks.

bluff successfully called.

bluff successfully called.

We stand corrected. Bloom it

We stand corrected. Bloom it is.

NOT BORED!
http://www.notbored.org

Bloom is derived from

Bloom is derived from Leopold Bloom. From a fairly well-known novel by James Joyce.

the original poster claimed

the original poster claimed that this phrase was part of the French --

"that ignite by themselves called Juliot-Curry"

-- when it isn't.

If you have real corrections to make, I am happy to listen to them and even make them when appropriate.

you should be able to figure out how to contact me.

It's the syntax that the

It's the syntax that the poster was calling attention by capitalizing "AND." This is basic, not Mallarme. No lectures on translation anymore, please.

I fixed the single error in

I fixed the single error in the entire text that you've found (thank you!) so it reads "which proposed the use of recipe cards that would allow someone to possess a fictive job as well as a Molotov cocktail" but of course ignored the bullshit about "special molotov's that ignite by themselves called Juliot-Curry" because it is an obvious and rather strange imposition.

As for "Bloom": the google search you suggested did not turn up the results that you claimed it would.

As for the quality of the translation: as is typical of anonymous snarks, you've focused on a single detail and haven't paid any attention to the text as a whole, the fact that it is freely available, or the explanatory footnotes and other valuable comments.

You've found a typo! Let the whole translation be damned! So you say. . . .

Ocelot's rule!

Ocelot's rule!

we agree! fuck the

we agree! fuck the reactionary translation nazis, got your back notbored! ;)

Because they boss alot?

Because they boss alot?

Tuer le chatte dictateur!!!

Tuer le chatte dictateur!!!

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.