deleuzeneoliberalism
-
Upload
jack-patterson -
Category
Documents
-
view
215 -
download
0
Transcript of deleuzeneoliberalism
-
7/31/2019 deleuzeneoliberalism
1/10
Jack Patterson
5/17/12
Deleuze and American Neoliberalism
Gilles Deleuzes work on capitalism has a lot to offer contemporary analysis of
neoliberalism and the financial crisis. His work with Guattari inA Thousand Plateauspursued a
definition of capitalism adequate to the times, including a consideration of the increasing
abstraction of labor and the rise of globalization. Since Deleuze considered both he and Guattari to
have remained Marxists (Negotiations: 171), their work inA Thousand Plateaus can be taken as
a kind of heavily modified Marxian analysis of capital. Not only prescient with regard to lately
emerging trends in the world economy, Deleuzes work also has a lot to offer the political
dimension of contemporary capitalism, although not directly in terms of public policy, but rather
through an affective intervention.
Deleuze, of course, uses Marx without subscribing to Marxs weaker philosophical
assumptions. Deleuze rejects the Hegelian dialectic view of history close to the heart of Marx,
because for Deleuze there is nothing historically determined or determinable. In their non-
evolutionist, genealogical account of the progression of capitalism, Deleuze and Guattari believe
that history can in fact be understood in the light of capitalism, but only if capitalism is taken to be
an aleatory universal history, which may never have happened (the only universal history is the
history of contingency [Anti-Oedipus 224]). Capitalism only came into being, in their account,
through the meeting of free labor and independent capital: Capitalism forms when the flow of
unqualified wealth encounters the flow of unqualified labor and conjugates with it (ATP453).
In their genealogical account of capitalism, capitalism forms by way of a specific type of
social organization of flows. Previous societies operated only by means of overcoding, i.e., the
1
-
7/31/2019 deleuzeneoliberalism
2/10
fixing of certain ways of living and existing according to a set of transcendent laws -- for example,
the archaic imperial State overcodes the way of life of agricultural communities (428).
Capitalism, as a state proceeding after the imperial-despotic State, is the exception to this rule:
instead of working by overcoding flows, capitalism is a regime of constant decoding, and operates
by an axiomatic as opposed to laws; an axiomatic deals directly with purely functional elements
and relations whose nature is not specified, while codes are relative to domains and express
specific relations between qualified elements (454). The capitalist axiomatic is, of course, to
ultimately equate everything with money. The concept of the axiomatic is clearly influenced by the
passage from the Communist Manifesto in which Marx describes the novel conditions of the
bourgeois epoch: All fixed, fast-frozen relations, with their train of ancient and venerable
prejudices and opinions, are swept away. All that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is
profaned... (Marx 476). The universal equivalence of money empties flows of their originally
belief-laden meanings and turns them into mere money relations. What is particularly important for
the present paper is that, though Deleuze and Guattari believe capitalism works by continually
decoding flows, continually displacing its own limits, it is not possible for capitalism to entirely
decode all flows. According to Jonathan Roffe, this is impossible: There can be no total decoded
society -- an oxymoronic phrase (Roffe 41). For example, there are structures of State society that
are alive in capitalism, as well as structures of religion and the family. Even if these structures are
still present, they may be fundamentally alteredby capitalism -- they may have conjoined with
capitalism in some sense (as inAnti-Oedipus, where the family is a micro version of capitalist
social relations).
For Deleuze and Guattari, this manifests itself in the assertion that States in advanced
capitalism become are very different than they used to be before capital; they become conduits for
2
-
7/31/2019 deleuzeneoliberalism
3/10
the capitalist axiomatic: the States...are not canceled out but change form and take on a new
meaning: models of realization for a worldwide axiomatic that exceeds them (ATP454). A
strikingly accurate picture of the 21st century globalized capitalist economy emerges: Today we
can depict an enormous, so-called stateless, monetary mass that circulates through foreign
exchange and across borders, eluding control by the States, forming a multinational ecumenical
organization, constituting a de facto supernational power untouched by governmental decisions
(ATP453). This concept of the modified capitalist State is also interesting because it denies that
different governmental orientations could support a non-capitalist economy -- they can be
democratic, totalitarian, even socialist, and remain capitalist (ATP447). This is because capital has
flown so far and so deeply that nowhere is untouched by it. States in this view are capitalistically
similar by a kind ofisomorphy but not a homogeneity -- they contribute to the same global capital
but are not all identical, and therefore can have many formal variations (ATP456).
Another important divergence from Marxism in Deleuze and Guattari should be added: in
Deleuze and Guattari there is certainly a diminished sense of a purely exploiting class and a purely
exploited class. From a standpoint within the capitalist mode of production, it is very difficult to
say who is the thief and who the victim, or even where the violence resides. ...It is a violence that
posits itself as preaccomplished, even though it is reactivated every day (ATP447). This is not
only a preaccomplished violence, but also one with extremely diverse and diffuse forms of
operation. In a sense, we are no longer living in the world of naked, shameless, direct, brutal
exploitation described by Marx in theManifesto (Marx 475); there are much more complex forms
of class that exist and are engendered by complex divisions of labor. Deleuze and Guattari describe
two coexistent forms of exploitation of human labor: machinic enslavement and social subjection.
Nicholas Thoburn describes the two concepts as follows: the functioning of the axiomatic through
3
-
7/31/2019 deleuzeneoliberalism
4/10
abstract quanta (turning a force into a determined comparable conjunction) is the element of
machinic enslavement, and the production of the molar aggregate out of this (the personified
capitalist, the worker) is social subjection... (Thoburn, 95). In other words, machinic enslavement,
grossly simplified, is something like the physical, machinic relation of the person to the larger
operations of capital, while social subjection has to do with the persons sense of identity and
motivation with regard to the larger productive and consumptive roles s/he plays. So a picture
emerges that is more complex than popular depictions of programmed consumers -- media is not
only subjectivity-programming but also machinic enslavement; the subjective, affective dimensions
of socialization are coextensive with machinic enslavement, and they work together to uphold the
greater division of labor. Deleuze and Guattari describe machinic enslavement with regard to
television: one is enslaved by TV insofar as the television viewers are no longer consumers or
users, nor even subjects who supposedly make it, but intrinsic component pieces, input and
output, feedback or recurrences that are no longer connected to the machine in such a way as to
produce or use it (ATP458). Social subjection and machinic enslavement are more concretely
interesting in the analysis of the role of business in contemporary capitalism. Deleuze described
in his later theories of control societies a kind of business that permeated everyday life, with its
ludicrous challenges, competitions, and seminars (Negotiations, 179), creating a mode of
production that heavily relied on marketing-- what Thoburn calls a sign of the businesss free
floating ability to discern and require a wealth of activities through its permeation and intimate
control of social life, and its understanding of the variation and potential of activity that its data
banks provide (Thoburn, 99). This conception of business does many things: it reconfigures the
role of consumption and production; it problematizes the distinctions between exploiters and
4
-
7/31/2019 deleuzeneoliberalism
5/10
exploited and between work and life; and it destabilizes the clean dichotomy between agency and
structure.
An important question to ask of a Deleuzian theory of contemporary capitalism is: what is
politics, and how is it commensurable with capitalism? It is certain that, in Deleuzes view, politics
is not narrowly identifiable with government or public policy. Given the fact that governments are
nothing more than models of realization for a worldwide axiomatic that exceeds them, policy
deliberation could be said to have much less value under capitalism than it would in an ideal world
where states could actually fully control market impulses. Keynesian compromises and state
controls of the market were implemented in the 20th century, but it can be argued that their
implementation did nothing to actually slow down capitalism -- and regardless, the prospects of a
revival of Keynesian policies are extremely dim in the United States. Taking into account at the
very least the practical difficulty of undertaking policy reform under these conditions, one
imagines a different kind of politics, one more subterranean than policy reform, oriented toward a
kind of affective intervention. If one considers states as merely conduits for the flow of capital,
then the project of politics must become more molecular, something more akin to Lyotards
libidinal economy (founded on desire and affective investments in the social field). For Deleuze,
real politics is about a breakdown of molar aggregates, opening up of lines of flight for new types
of personal becomings. His defense of the minority proposes a kind of becoming everybody
against the stratified forms of identity that form the logic of the majority (ATP105); becoming
everybody would enable one to actdifferently and be differently, and this is why it is political -- it
would allow more possibilities for life. An ideal political project for Deleuze would involve the
ability to consistently experiment on oneself and understand the reality of continual difference.
5
-
7/31/2019 deleuzeneoliberalism
6/10
Thoburn says that actually existing politics has so often occurred through regimes of truth
and certainty that it has been characterized as much by dogma and ressentimentas by
experimentation and creation (139). In other words, the way people operate within the libidinal
economy is quite often marked by reductive, limiting, majoritarian tendencies -- exactly the things
that a Deleuzian politics would confront.
A case in point is the way right-wing ideology operates in the United States. As William
Connolly conceives it (his arguments here a bit simplified), many people in the contemporary
capitalist world want to uphold reactionary values as a response to the speeding-up of time, and
experience time teleologically rather than disjunctively; this leads them to majoritarian, dogmatic
thinking and a bigoted conception of the minor. In America, this manifests itself in xenophobia and
American exceptionalism -- in part because people consider America to be destined for greatness
(this is their teleology). Connolly argues that anxiety provoked by whatever time-speeding factor
contributes as well to an evangelical-capitalist assemblage, that manifests itself, among other
things, in support for preemptive wars; in tolerance or much worse of state practices of torture
that negate the Geneva Conventions, and in propagating a climate of fear and loathing against the
Islamic world (Connolly 2008: 40), not to mention extreme market apologism and market
manipulation.
Connolly believes that ressentimentis a big part of this assemblage; that the capitalist-
evangelical machine foments a cultural ethos of existential resentment. He thus argues that there
need be a deeper conception of politics in order to better treat this resentment: The rest of us too
often restrict ourselves to policy questions and rational persuasion, ignoring the need to engage the
spiritual dimension of life under altered conditions of being (Connolly 2008: 63). In other words,
a deeper, affective dimension of politics that encouraged people to come to terms with difference
6
-
7/31/2019 deleuzeneoliberalism
7/10
would open people up to different possibilities of life, and break down their stable conceptions of
time, identity and causality; he writes inNeuropolitics that unless essentially embodied human
beings cast off the weight of a teleological experience of time they are unlikely to come to terms
with the element of contingency and fluidity in cultural identity (Connolly 2002: 174).
These affect-related threads will be resumed below, but first it will be useful to look at
what is happening to the world economy today. Labor is becoming increasingly superfluous in the
United States, in part because jobs are being exported for extremely cheap labor abroad, and more
importantly because technology is increasing efficiency so much that human labor power is
becoming useless. Direct human labor power, especially in the United States, is almost
unnecessary. The United States is swaddled in debt, and the performance of the U.S. GDP has
weakened considerably in the last decade.
According to Grard Dumnil and Dominique Lvy, this situation of privation in the
United States (as well as Europe) was never supposed to arise. The first worlds trade with the so-
called Third World was meant to be productive for the first world, not destructive:
...each country was supposed to occupy its own specific place in the international
division of labor, within large zones of free trade or a world totally open to the
international flows of commodities and capitals. Countries of the periphery were
expected to specialize in activities in which they are more performing. Thus, the
periphery would be able to supply cheap commodities to the center and offer
profitable opportunities to investors -- in other words, the best of the neoliberal
imperial worlds (Dumnil and Lvy, 324)
But instead, there is a great deal of privation at home. Americans are being forced to
confront what Connolly calls a haunting discrepancy between the American dream of abundance
7
-
7/31/2019 deleuzeneoliberalism
8/10
expressed in films ... and the difficulty that many have in making ends meet as they participate in
the available infrastructure of consumption (Connolly 2008: 62). In a strikingly prescient passage
fromA Thousand Plateaus, Deleuze and Guattari describe this phenomenon encountered as a
result of trade between global capitalisms center and periphery:
It could even be said that the [worldwide] periphery and center exchange
terminations: deterriorialization of the center, a decoding of the center in relation to
national and territorial aggregates, cause the peripheral formations to become true
centers of investment, while the central formations peripheralize... The more the
worldwide axiomatic installs high industry and highly industrialized agriculture at
the periphery provisionally reserving for the center so-called postindustrial
activities (automation, electronics, information technologies...), the more it installs
peripheral zones of underdevelopment inside the center, internal Third Worlds,
internal Souths. Masses of the population are abandoned to erratic work
(subcontracting, temporary work, or work in the underground economy)... (ATP,
469)
According to Dumenil and Levy, taking into consideration the dwindling of United
States GDP performance among other factors, the current neoliberal U.S. hegemony will
fall in a matter of time. To distinct degrees, depending on the course of events during the
forthcoming decades, a multipolar pattern of international hierarchies will gradually replace
the contemporary unipolar configuration (Dumnil and Lvy, 309). In their view, this
presents the question of whether countries such as China, Russia, India and Brazil will
8
-
7/31/2019 deleuzeneoliberalism
9/10
operate with the same unsustainable neoliberal logic or move towards more innovative
paths (Dumnil and Lvy, 325).
The evangelical-capitalist resonance machine may have to confront head-on the
spectre of failure which Connolly says it senses anxiously (and which it tries to ward off
through countermeasures such as the war on terror, etc.). All signs point to Americas
downfall as the center of the world market. This raises questions for Connollys pluralism:
would a confrontation with the reality of American unexceptionalism reduce the fever pitch
of the resonance machine and its xenophobia, Christian fundamentalism and market
apologism? Would the downfall of America lead some cowboy capitalists to begin
considering that some of their own assumptions about the market (maybe even those of
economics in general) are unsustainable and unethical? It is certainly possible. It seems, as
Connolly would suggest, that a radical existential (affective) reorientation is the only thing
that could change certain peoples minds -- rather than beingconvinced by rational
argument.
As Dumnil and Lvy point out, it is unclear what the emergence of these new
international hierarchies would do with regard to the current situation of neoliberalism.
Though American exceptionalism did a lot to incite the neoliberal crisis, there is nothing to
suggest that the fall of America would curtail any of the same tendencies in the world
market. Still, though it is possible that neoliberalism would be reined in or destroyed
entirely, there is apparently nothing on the horizon to radically alter the fundamental
motions of capitalism itself -- it may only be regulated to a greater degree.
Works Cited
9
-
7/31/2019 deleuzeneoliberalism
10/10
-Deleuze, Gilles.Negotiations: 1972 - 1990. trans. Martin Joughin. New York: Columbia,
1995.
-Deleuze, Gilles and Flix Guattari.Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, trans
Robert Hurley, Mark Seem and Helen R. Lane. New York: The Viking Press, 1977.
-Deleuze, Gilles and Flix Guattari.A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia,
trans. Brian Massumi. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1987.
-Dumnil, Grard and Dominique Lvy. The Crisis of Neoliberalism. Cambridge: Harvard
University Press, 2011.
-Marx, Karl and Friedrich Engels. The Marx-Engels Reader. ed. Robert C. Tucker. New
York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1978.
-Thoburn, Nicholas.Deleuze, Marx and Politics. London: Routledge, 2003.
-Choat, Simon.Marx Through Post-Structuralism: Lyotard, Derrida, Foucault, Deleuze.
London: Continuum, 2010.
-Connolly, William.Neuropolitics: Thinking, Culture, Speed. Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota Press, 2002.
-Connolly, William. Capitalism and Christianity: American Style. Durham: Duke
University Press, 2008.
10