LEFT CURVE No. 34 EDITORIAL

 After the outbreak of the global financial crisis in 2008, a central issue of discussion within mainstream media became that what is at stake is the survival of capitalism in lieu of which complete societal breakdown would ensue. Before the crisis, it was “free markets”, “capitalism” was rarely mentioned. The implication having been that since the collapse of “State socialism,” “free markets” was the only possible remaining socio-economic system of governance and the issue was how best to ensure continued “growth and development” in the age of “globalization” by the unfettered operation of “free markets” throughout the world. The crisis has brought this assumption of neo-liberal “free-market fundamentalism” to an end. The issue facing the ruling elite now is what kind of State (re)regulation of markets is necessary to stabilize the system and prevent future crises and, in so doing, continue neo-liberal hegemony, albeit in a scaled back version. For those who work for a radical alternative to capitalism, this is a positive development in that it at least puts the actual, underlying socio-economic structure of the contemporary world on the agenda, after decades of being covered up through “postmodern” obfuscation/mystification and the trumpeting of a “new economy” of endless growth. Another take on it is, as Franco “Bifo” Berardi says: “The dark side of the soul—fear, anxiety, panic and depression—has finally surfaced after looming for decades in the shadow of the much taunted victory and the promised eternity of capitalism.” (The Soul at Work, from Alienation to Autonomy, p. 207, Semiotexte, 2009) It’s not possible to come to terms with anything, whether it be one’s personal life, not to mention a whole socio-economic structure, without striving to come to an honest, realistic awareness of the determinations that constitute what is.

And the stakes could not be higher. As the article, “Considerations on the Global Economic Crisis and Ways Beyond the Logic of Capitalism”, by Csaba Polony, says: “[A]s long as the logic of capitalism remains dominant, on the horizon dystopic scenarios appear of either techno-pipe fantasies of the genetically-engineered “post-human” machine-augmented body, robotization, artificial intelligence, space colonization, etc.; or destruction through societal disintegration, a recourse to fascistic forms, war, or ecological catastrophe.” The article also brings into question the assumptions of the half-millennium or so historical process of “modernity” (techno-scientific capitalism), while drawing on lessons from the failures of past attempts to replace the current, dominant system. From another angle, Yahia Lababidi’s article addresses “Crisis” from a broad historical overview, drawing on Western and Eastern traditions, with special emphasis on ancient traditions such as the Stoics of the classical Greco-Roman world and ancient Chinese Taoism, specifically the Tao Te Ching.

Another important consideration in trying to analyze any phenomena is to become aware of how the method of representation one employs shapes the results of the investigation. Gene Ray’s article, “Radical Learning and Dialectical Realism: Brecht and Adorno on Representing Capitalism,” is a noteworthy exercise in applying such a methodology. Ray goes on to affirm the validity of Bertolt Brecht’s method of “dialectical realism,” arguing that such an approach can bring out truth effects by keeping in sight specific historical contexts—contra Adorno who, according to Ray, overemphasized structural determinates that lacked sufficient historical specificity—within which a work is created. An underlying corollary of the article’s argument is the need for analysis to be “orientated toward a radical political practice aiming at a passage out of capitalism.”

We are pleased to introduce the work of Chto Delat (“What is to be done” in Russian), which hopefully is a sign of the rejuvenation of the revolutionary tradition in the land of the first attempt to construct a post-capitalist world, by publishing, “A Declaration on Politics, Knowledge & Art: On the Fifth Anniversary of the Chto Delat Work Group.” In the principled, well thought-out document, they declare that, “The first thing that motivates us is the rejection of all forms of oppression, the artificial alienation of people, and exploitation. That is why we stand for a distribution of the wealth produced by human labor and all natural resources that is just and directed towards the welfare of everyone.”

Immigration, particularly undocumented, has become one of the salient concerns in the “developed world” during the recent past. Markus Euskirchen, Henrik Lebuhn and Gene Ray’s article, “Big Trouble in Borderland: Immigration Rights & No-Border Struggles in Europe,” is a good overview of the issues involved. The authors note the importance of migration struggles as, “one of the most active, creative and engaging fields for radical politics in Europe, and grassroots groups increasingly bring together topics such as environmentalism, international migration, police brutality and precarious labor in inventive and compelling ways.” The article also gives an appraisal of the strength and weaknesses of current migration struggles in Europe.

An ongoing, unresolved conflict in Europe that goes back centuries is that of the Basque people’s struggle to maintain their unique culture and language and realize self-determination. There has been scant attention paid to this issue, so the article by Diarmuid Breatnach, “Report on the Basque Struggle for National Liberation Today,” is much welcomed.

Another long-standing conflict, which however is always in the news and at the heart of much of the instability in the mid-east, is the continued Israeli occupation and oppression of the Palestinians. The Obama administration on taking office, as part of its spin to be inaugurating an era of “change,” announced with much PR fanfare a concerted effort to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian issue. A year and a half later, they haven’t gotten any further than any other U.S. administration has since the inception of the conflict. Anymore than they have with their other “promises”: close Guantánomo, end the war in Iraq, open a dialogue with Iran, provide affordable health care to all, create three million jobs, etc., etc. The only promise that they have kept was to escalate the war in Afhganistan, while throwing in a bonus to their deluded supporters in expanding the war into Pakistan. The article, “Shadows Over Yanoun,” by Michael Cooper presents the view of anti-Zionist Jews, who hope to salvage a “two-state” solution by bringing to a halt the ever- expanding Jewish “settlements” in the West Bank. In the process, the article also gives as an insight into the twisted mind-set of the “settlers.” In contrast, the poem, Gaza, by Maram Al-Massri well expresses the unbearable suffering—“I am dying,/ dying,/ and no one cares…”—of the Palestinians.

The unending U.S. wars are the subject matter of two short stories: “Section 60” by Ken Dickerson and “A Necessary War” by G.D. McFetridge. “Martyrs” by Ron Savage, can be read as a good metaphor for the mid-east conflict. Susan Galleymore’s “War and the Environment,” points to the devastating environmental damage that wars produce. Burson Richard’s “Since You’re Going to Die Anyway,” gives us a heart-wrenching example of our dysfunctional health care system from the viewpoint of a practicing physician.

Worthy of mention is the poetry of Attila Balogh (p.64), whose poems we’ve selected from his manuscript, Gypsy Drill. Balogh is an Hunagrian Gypsy (a term he uses rather than “Roma,” as part of his gruff contrarian attitude of eschewing “political correctness.”) His visceral, raw flesh torn words evoke a life’s ravages more effectively then—what is too often the case in expressions of “oppression”—sentimental words of victimization. In so doing, the concreteness of his people’s condition opens up to us, emeshed as they are in a world—not just in Hungary but throughout “post-communist” Eastern Europe—of poverty, joblessness, crime, discrimination and often outright violence.

“Problematizing Asian-American Cultural Politics and the Commodification of Jose Garcia Villa,” by E. San Juan, Jr., is an in-depth, engaged survey of the role of Asian-American culture under neo-liberal hegemony. Impossible to summarize in a few words, this two part work aims, on the one hand, at exposing neo-liberalism’s formal tactic of inclusiveness via “multicultural diversity”; whereas San Juan concludes instead that what is necessary is “…forg(ing) a synthesizing plot of collective emancipation of working peoples across color-lines and ethnic boundaries…”. On the other hand, in part two, San Juan forcefully unmasks avant-garde aestheticism with its “…desire to free oneself from all historic determinations, apotheosizing the imagination as the creator/ demiurge of one’s world… whose value, while pretending to be absolute, is also absolutely zero,” —which, under conditions of “the unchallenged reign of commodity-fetishism,” are but “…swallowed up in the homogenizing universe of cultural commodities...”

This issue also features an important work of philosophy: “Digital Dissolution of Being” by Michael Eldred. In this tightly argued text, Eldred brings into question Western metaphysics since its inception in ancient Greece, from which the “mathematical casting of nature” (the reduction of phenomena to number and mathematical calculation in order to realize human “will to power” over nature) became presupposed by modern science since the 17th century; the consummation of which, Eldred argues, is in progress today as the “digital dissolution of being,” through which direct sensual and/or reasoned apprehension is supplanted by unseen, automated binary cybernetic machine code to which human beings become subjugated in just about all aspects of life. The result of which creates an overwhelming sense that “everything is out of control”: Defensive responses range from attempts to regain “authentic emotionality” to explosions of pure violence. This sheds light on the prevalence of such themes, taken to more and more extreme forms, in contemporary mass culture (Productions such as the “Terminator” series, the popularity of the TV program “24” and the success of “Avatar” come to mind.) and daily life. The article also probes into the similarities and differences between the essences of technology and capitalism. Though Eldred’s article is undoubtedly difficult, a concerted effort to carefully read through it is very much worthwhile, as it can help us to come to a better understanding of our bewildering, incomprehensible world. Harvey Whitney’s article, “The Screen Deity and the Challenges of Unchecked Technophilia,” gives us some good examples of the problematic effects that the ever increasing presence of technical devices have in our daily lives.

Lastly, I wish to bring attention to the article by Steve Redhead, “Mobile Accelerated Nonpostmodern Culture: On Theorising the New Era.” The article addresses similar themes referred to in the preceding paragraph, through more from within the debates of contemporary sociology. In so doing, Redhead argues for a “nonpostmodern culture” by locating the “postmodern… already within modernity,” while referencing primarily the important work of Paul Virilio and Jean Baudrillard.

There’s a lot more good material in this issue then space allows for comments. In particular, I encourage the reader to not miss the excellent poetry throughout this issue (pp. 21, 87, 89-94, 125).

Finally, please do contact us with any comments, criticisms and help us keep this journal alive by ordering copies or subscribing.—the editor