ads without products

jane dark responds…

leave a comment »

Jane Dark has a helpful response to my recent stuff on nationalization and discursive norms. Here’s the end of it:

So one might say that we are seeing not the tender creep of socialist possibilities into the national discourse, but their further erasure. Every time that we agree that the word “socialism” might refer to something other than, at a minimum, worker ownership if not indeed the end of surplus value extraction; every time that we misrecognize state corporatism as something other than a moment in capital’s “equilibrium in motion,” we “turn the wheel of discursive normativity a click” away from socialism. We forget what that word promises. Perhaps the most optimistic memory, as Jasper reminded us, is that the corporatist regimes have arisen historically in the fact of popular socialist challenges — but that in no way guarantees the motion will summon forth such a movement via some blind mechanism of counterweights.

To change metaphors: we stand with CR and many others in identifying this as a moment when the chinks in capital’s armor are visible. But this talk of nationalization, this strategy of planning, is an attempt to anneal the fissure in capital’s domination, not to open it wide. It serves as the sign of an opportunity, but is not itself in any way opportune.

I don’t think I disagree with much of what Jane has to say in this piece, and I’m glad that Jane noted that I’m not necessarily writing in support of any of the moves that have recently taken place. It may well be that I locate the critical moment of what is to come at the juncture where we parry with the right / left distinction between various modes and ends of nationalization, even if that moment comes after the act of nationalization itself. And I do fully understand that it’s a parry were very likely to lose. And it may be that I extend a slightly more generous line of credit (foolishly perhaps – I mean, now? even only metaphorically?) to the populace, its capacity for ideological adjustment under the pressures of the real.  And it may be, when we’re talking about the USA or the UK for that matter, that it’s hard either to see an alternative to the nationalizations themselves or an alternative to laying our chips on the future possibilities in this line as our best bet in bleak times. Sadly, honestly, I am not a believer in American revolution, nor am I an accelerationist, as the marginal human costs are far too high.

Written by adswithoutproducts

December 13, 2008 at 11:29 pm

Posted in crisis

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: