一个完全不同的肯定

IF 2.1 3区 社会学 Q1 CULTURAL STUDIES
M. B. Rasmussen
{"title":"一个完全不同的肯定","authors":"M. B. Rasmussen","doi":"10.1215/00382876-10242616","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this article is to juxtapose the notion of refusal in Maurice Blanchot, Herbert Marcuse, and the Invisible Committee. The article opens by considering Blanchot's 1958 notion of a radical refusal and then turns to Marcuse's idea of a “great refusal” against one-dimensional society. It then concludes with a consideration of the Invisible Committee's theory of destitution, which aims to rethink revolution in light of an analysis of the contemporary cycle of insurrections. Although Blanchot's and Marcuse's notions of the refusal might appear dated, trapped within the agitated political climate of the 1950s and 1960s, in their time they each signaled a conscious rupture with a certain Marxist-Leninist theory of revolution that could not imagine the transformation of social relations except through the seizure of state power. For both thinkers, the proto-revolutionary gesture of refusal sought to respond to a historical conjuncture in which the integration of the working class into the circuitry of capital was a fait accompli. For Blanchot, refusal was a withdrawal from, and abandonment of, politics and representation, whereas for Marcuse it involved a transformation both of one's immediate social relations and of social relations more broadly. It is these aspects of refusal that anticipate and overlap with more recent theories of destituent power emerging from the new cycles of protests. Over the last decade, the notion of destitution has come to prominence as one of the most important reformulations of radical political action. In response to a new insurrectionary wave, characterized by new forms of action, destitution signals an attempt to reimagine the emergence of a new revolutionary force in the wake of the disappearance of Marxist dialectics and the established working-class movement.","PeriodicalId":21946,"journal":{"name":"South Atlantic Quarterly","volume":"90 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An Affirmation That Is Entirely Other\",\"authors\":\"M. B. Rasmussen\",\"doi\":\"10.1215/00382876-10242616\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The aim of this article is to juxtapose the notion of refusal in Maurice Blanchot, Herbert Marcuse, and the Invisible Committee. The article opens by considering Blanchot's 1958 notion of a radical refusal and then turns to Marcuse's idea of a “great refusal” against one-dimensional society. It then concludes with a consideration of the Invisible Committee's theory of destitution, which aims to rethink revolution in light of an analysis of the contemporary cycle of insurrections. Although Blanchot's and Marcuse's notions of the refusal might appear dated, trapped within the agitated political climate of the 1950s and 1960s, in their time they each signaled a conscious rupture with a certain Marxist-Leninist theory of revolution that could not imagine the transformation of social relations except through the seizure of state power. For both thinkers, the proto-revolutionary gesture of refusal sought to respond to a historical conjuncture in which the integration of the working class into the circuitry of capital was a fait accompli. For Blanchot, refusal was a withdrawal from, and abandonment of, politics and representation, whereas for Marcuse it involved a transformation both of one's immediate social relations and of social relations more broadly. It is these aspects of refusal that anticipate and overlap with more recent theories of destituent power emerging from the new cycles of protests. Over the last decade, the notion of destitution has come to prominence as one of the most important reformulations of radical political action. In response to a new insurrectionary wave, characterized by new forms of action, destitution signals an attempt to reimagine the emergence of a new revolutionary force in the wake of the disappearance of Marxist dialectics and the established working-class movement.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21946,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"South Atlantic Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"90 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"South Atlantic Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1215/00382876-10242616\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CULTURAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South Atlantic Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/00382876-10242616","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CULTURAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文的目的是将莫里斯·布朗肖、赫伯特·马尔库塞和“无形委员会”中的拒绝概念并列起来。文章首先考虑了布朗肖1958年提出的激进拒绝的概念,然后转向马尔库塞对单向度社会的“伟大拒绝”的观点。最后,它考虑了无形委员会的贫困理论,该理论旨在根据对当代起义周期的分析来重新思考革命。尽管布朗肖和马尔库塞关于拒绝的概念可能显得过时,受困于20世纪50年代和60年代动荡不安的政治气候,但在他们的时代,他们都标志着与某种马克思列宁主义的革命理论的有意识决裂,这种理论认为,除非通过夺取国家权力,否则无法想象社会关系的转变。对于这两位思想家来说,拒绝的原始革命姿态试图回应工人阶级融入资本回路是既成事实的历史关头。对布朗肖来说,拒绝是对政治和代表的退出和放弃,而对马尔库塞来说,它涉及到一个人的直接社会关系和更广泛的社会关系的转变。正是这些拒绝的方面,预示着新的抗议周期中出现的贫困权力理论,并与之重叠。在过去十年中,贫困的概念作为激进政治行动的最重要的重新表述之一而引人注目。作为对以新行动形式为特征的新起义浪潮的回应,贫困标志着在马克思主义辩证法和既定的工人阶级运动消失之后,一种新的革命力量的出现的尝试。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
An Affirmation That Is Entirely Other
The aim of this article is to juxtapose the notion of refusal in Maurice Blanchot, Herbert Marcuse, and the Invisible Committee. The article opens by considering Blanchot's 1958 notion of a radical refusal and then turns to Marcuse's idea of a “great refusal” against one-dimensional society. It then concludes with a consideration of the Invisible Committee's theory of destitution, which aims to rethink revolution in light of an analysis of the contemporary cycle of insurrections. Although Blanchot's and Marcuse's notions of the refusal might appear dated, trapped within the agitated political climate of the 1950s and 1960s, in their time they each signaled a conscious rupture with a certain Marxist-Leninist theory of revolution that could not imagine the transformation of social relations except through the seizure of state power. For both thinkers, the proto-revolutionary gesture of refusal sought to respond to a historical conjuncture in which the integration of the working class into the circuitry of capital was a fait accompli. For Blanchot, refusal was a withdrawal from, and abandonment of, politics and representation, whereas for Marcuse it involved a transformation both of one's immediate social relations and of social relations more broadly. It is these aspects of refusal that anticipate and overlap with more recent theories of destituent power emerging from the new cycles of protests. Over the last decade, the notion of destitution has come to prominence as one of the most important reformulations of radical political action. In response to a new insurrectionary wave, characterized by new forms of action, destitution signals an attempt to reimagine the emergence of a new revolutionary force in the wake of the disappearance of Marxist dialectics and the established working-class movement.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
62
期刊介绍: Individual subscribers and institutions with electronic access can view issues of the South Atlantic Quarterly online. If you have not signed up, review the first-time access instructions. Founded amid controversy in 1901, the South Atlantic Quarterly continues to cover the beat, center and fringe, with bold analyses of the current scene—national, cultural, intellectual—worldwide. Now published exclusively in special issues, this vanguard centenarian journal is tackling embattled states, evaluating postmodernity"s influential writers and intellectuals, and examining a wide range of cultural phenomena.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信