<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<br>
<div class="moz-forward-container"><br>
-------- Original Message --------
<table class="moz-email-headers-table" cellpadding="0"
cellspacing="0" border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE" align="RIGHT">Subject:
</th>
<td># SPINOZA /// Episode 1: The Marxian Reading of
Capitalism through a Spinozist Conceptology</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE" align="RIGHT">Date: </th>
<td>Mon, 25 Mar 2013 07:58:58 +0100</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE" align="RIGHT">From: </th>
<td>Nord <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:protocosmos@home.nl"><protocosmos@home.nl></a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<br>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://thefunambulist.net/2013/03/24/spinoza-episode-1-the-marxian-reading-of-capitalism-through-a-spinozist-conceptology/">http://thefunambulist.net/2013/03/24/spinoza-episode-1-the-marxian-reading-of-capitalism-through-a-spinozist-conceptology/</a><br>
<br>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<h1 class="entry-title" style="border: 0px; font-family:
'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, 'Nimbus Sans L', sans-serif;
font-style: normal; font-weight: bold; margin: 0px; outline:
0px; padding: 0px 0px 8px; vertical-align: baseline; color:
rgb(0, 0, 0); text-rendering: optimizelegibility;
letter-spacing: normal; font-size: 20px; line-height: 24px;
font-variant: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start;
text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal;
widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;
-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255,
255);"># SPINOZA /// Episode 1: The Marxian Reading of
Capitalism through a Spinozist Conceptology</h1>
<div class="entry-meta" style="border: 0px; font-family:
'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, 'Nimbus Sans L', sans-serif;
font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin: 0px; outline:
0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(136,
136, 136); font-variant: normal; font-size: 12px; line-height:
normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align:
start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space:
normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;
-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;
background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span class="meta-prep
meta-prep-author" style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit;
font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px;
outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Posted
on</span><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://thefunambulist.net/2013/03/24/spinoza-episode-1-the-marxian-reading-of-capitalism-through-a-spinozist-conceptology/"
title="2:44 am" rel="bookmark" style="border: 0px;
font-family: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-weight:
inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px;
vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(136, 136, 136);"><span
class="entry-date" style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit;
font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px;
outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">March
24, 2013</span></a><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><span
class="comments-link" style="border: 0px; font-family:
inherit; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin:
0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span
class="meta-sep" style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit;
font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px;
outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">|</span><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://thefunambulist.net/2013/03/24/spinoza-episode-1-the-marxian-reading-of-capitalism-through-a-spinozist-conceptology/#comments"
title="Comment on # SPINOZA /// Episode 1: The Marxian
Reading of Capitalism through a Spinozist Conceptology"
style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style:
inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px;
padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(136, 136,
136);">1 Comment</a></span></div>
<div class="entry-content" style="border: 0px; font-family:
Georgia, 'Bitstream Charter', serif; font-style: normal;
font-weight: normal; margin: 0.85em 0px 0px; outline: 0px;
padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(51, 51, 51);
font-size: 14px; font-variant: normal; letter-spacing: normal;
line-height: 23px; orphans: auto; text-align: start;
text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal;
widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;
-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255,
255);">
<p style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style:
inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 1.7em; outline:
0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://thefunambulistdotnet.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/spinoza-bill.jpeg"
style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style:
inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px;
padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(51, 51,
51);"><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-12229"
alt="spinoza bill"
src="cid:part4.07030402.02090008@gmail.com" style="border:
0px; max-width: 100%; width: auto; height: auto;"
width="500" height="341"></a></p>
<p style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style:
inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 1.7em; outline:
0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-align:
justify;">Today, I am starting a series of articles about 17th
century Portuguese-Dutch philosopher<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><strong style="border:
0px; font-family: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-weight:
bold; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px;
vertical-align: baseline;">Baruch Spinoza</strong><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>and thus dedicates to
his work a ‘week’ like I did<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://thefunambulist.net/2011/06/20/deleuze-constitution-of-an-archive/"
target="_blank" style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit;
font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px;
outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; color:
rgb(51, 51, 51);">two years ago for Gilles Deleuze</a><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>and<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://thefunambulist.net/2012/06/20/foucault-episode-1-michel-foucaults-architectural-underestimation/"
target="_blank" style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit;
font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px;
outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; color:
rgb(51, 51, 51);">last year for Michel Foucault</a>.</p>
<p style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style:
inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 1.7em; outline:
0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-align:
justify;">The first article of this week will attempt to
examine how Spinoza can supply a terminology, or rather, a<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><em style="border:
0px; font-family: inherit; font-style: italic; font-weight:
inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px;
vertical-align: baseline;">conceptology</em><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>to extend the sharp
analysis of capitalism made by Karl Marx in the 19th century
to a its neo-liberal version we have been experiencing for the
last thirty years. In order to do so, I would use a particular
chapter from the book<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.lafabrique.fr/catalogue.php?idArt=530"
target="_blank" style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit;
font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px;
outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; color:
rgb(51, 51, 51);"><strong style="border: 0px; font-family:
inherit; font-style: inherit; font-weight: bold; margin:
0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align:
baseline;"><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit;
font-style: italic; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px;
outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Capitalisme,
désir et servitude: Marx et Spinoza</em></strong></a>(Capitalism,
desire and servitude, Marx and Spinoza) written by<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.fredericlordon.fr/"
target="_blank" style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit;
font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px;
outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; color:
rgb(51, 51, 51);"><strong style="border: 0px; font-family:
inherit; font-style: inherit; font-weight: bold; margin:
0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align:
baseline;">Frédéric Lordon</strong></a><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>and published by the
always excellent publisher<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.lafabrique.fr/"
target="_blank" style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit;
font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px;
outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; color:
rgb(51, 51, 51);">La Fabrique</a><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>in 2010.</p>
<p style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style:
inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 1.7em; outline:
0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-align:
justify;">Through this book, F. Lordon depicts, among other
things, the two important shifts of paradigms in capitalism
that occurred since the publication of<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><strong style="border:
0px; font-family: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-weight:
bold; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px;
vertical-align: baseline;">Das Kapital</strong>, in order
for it to survive against the potentiality of a revolution
prophetized by Marx when he was observing the continuous
production of a discontented working class. The first shift of
paradigm, often known as Fordism, occurred in the first part
of the 20th century and consisted in a neat amplification of
the production rhythm associated with the integration of the
working class itself in the mass consumption of their own
product. The second shift of paradigm, closer to us, examined
how the working class (which also shifted for a big part of
it, from the industry to the realms of services) could gain in
productivity by integrating it to an ideology of
“self-accomplishment” that could apparently relate to the
Spinozist idea of<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><em
style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style:
italic; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px;
padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">joyful affect</em><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>(for a very basic
introduction to his concepts, you can read my text<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://thefunambulist.net/2010/12/18/philosophy-architectures-of-joy-a-spinozist-reading-of-parentvirilio-and-arakawagins%E2%80%99-architecture/"
target="_blank" style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit;
font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px;
outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; color:
rgb(51, 51, 51);">Architectures of Joy</a><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>from 2010). For
Spinoza, the servitude is anyway universal as all our acts are
determined by the sum of circumstances that caused it (much
more about that in a upcoming article), but we can
nevertheless increase our power (<em style="border: 0px;
font-family: inherit; font-style: italic; font-weight:
inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px;
vertical-align: baseline;">potentia</em><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>in latin, more on that
soon too) by acquiring the knowledge of the causes of our
behavior. As we know too well, strategies of<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><em style="border:
0px; font-family: inherit; font-style: italic; font-weight:
inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px;
vertical-align: baseline;">inducing</em><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>do not allow the
subject to understand the context of his decisions better than
an assembly line worker in the beginning of the 20th century
and therefore force it to remain within the<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><em style="border:
0px; font-family: inherit; font-style: italic; font-weight:
inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px;
vertical-align: baseline;">sad affects.</em></p>
<p style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style:
inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 1.7em; outline:
0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-align:
justify;"><span id="more-12228" style="border: 0px;
font-family: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-weight:
inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px;
vertical-align: baseline;"></span></p>
<p style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style:
inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 1.7em; outline:
0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-align:
justify;">So far, I was evoking the book in its entirety but
in order to be precise, I would like to examine more
particularly a specific chapter entitled<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><strong style="border:
0px; font-family: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-weight:
bold; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px;
vertical-align: baseline;"><em style="border: 0px;
font-family: inherit; font-style: italic; font-weight:
inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px;
vertical-align: baseline;">Alors le (ré)communisme!</em></strong><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>The neologism of<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><em style="border:
0px; font-family: inherit; font-style: italic; font-weight:
inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px;
vertical-align: baseline;">(ré)communisme</em><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>is a French play on
word insisting on the idea of revisiting communism, but more
importantly to oppose to the<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><em style="border:
0px; font-family: inherit; font-style: italic; font-weight:
inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px;
vertical-align: baseline;">respublica<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></em>(the public
thing) the <em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit;
font-style: italic; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px;
outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">rescommuna</em><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>(the common thing) as
two different models of society. It is interesting to observe
how F. Lordon is slowly introducing this new model: (the
original French version is at the end of the article, the
translation is mine but since the text is difficult to
translate for the multiple meanings each important word
carries, I left the word used by him in parenthesis)</p>
<blockquote style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit;
font-style: italic; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px 30px
1.7em; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;
quotes: '', '';">
<p style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style:
inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 1.7em;
outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;
text-align: justify;">The starting point was the following:
someone wants to do something that needs several people to
achieve. This community of action is in its very essence a
political community if we attribute the political status to
any situation that composes powers (<i style="font-style:
italic;">puissance</i>) of action […]. The question is
then about the constitution of this entrepreneurial
political community. This implies the genetic dimension of
the mechanisms for which the community emerges, as well as
the constitutionality of the formal as the formal layouts (<i
style="font-style: italic;">agencements</i>) that rule its
function once it is assembled. What are the desirable
relationships for which a company (<i style="font-style:
italic;">entreprise</i>) can be constituted when it is
conceived as an association of powers (<i style="font-style:
italic;">puissance)</i><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>of
action?</p>
</blockquote>
<p style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style:
inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 1.7em; outline:
0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-align:
justify;">While condemning the relationships of servitude
created by capitalism, F. Lordon also introduces a form of
doubt in the sacred equality enforced by communism in its
orthodox version (presented as the only alternative to
capitalism for many years). His discourse is, of course,
mostly focused on the realms of companies; however, in order
to make his point clearer, he uses the example of the creative
process of a theater play (from here, I translated the
ambivalent term of<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><em
style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style:
italic; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px;
padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">entreprise</em><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>(both company and
project as the same time) with the English word of<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><em style="border:
0px; font-family: inherit; font-style: italic; font-weight:
inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px;
vertical-align: baseline;">enterprise<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></em>that needs to
be understood with those two simultaneous meanings as well):</p>
<blockquote style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit;
font-style: italic; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px 30px
1.7em; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;
quotes: '', '';">
<p style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style:
inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 1.7em;
outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;
text-align: justify;">A playwright comes with an amazing
text: who would deny that his contribution is not of the
same nature than the one of the electricians and the costume
designers? who would contest his status of power (<i
style="font-style: italic;">puissance</i>) authentically
creative? Yet, he needs electricians and costume designers
so that the show could occur and that his genius text could
be transmitted to the public. The problem is never tackled
this way as the immediate solution brought by the wage
relationship (<i style="font-style: italic;">rapport</i>) in
the form of a supplied hired manpower made it forgotten as a
problem. To find back its meaning, we need to achieve the
thought experiment that consists in imagining which kind of
political arrangements would emerge so that the collective
enterprise would be withdrawn from the structure of wage
relationship (<i style="font-style: italic;">rapport</i>).<br>
<em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style:
italic; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px;
padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">[...]</em><br>
If the communist idea is essentially related to the notion
of equality, the question is then to wonder what can be the
nature of equality in the context of a substantial,
recognized inequality of contributions, and how not to deny
the asymmetry of these situations in which the strength of
an initial proposition makes the other contributions appear
as auxiliary. Here is the communist equation: which form of
equality can we realize in the context of the division of
work and its heaviest inheritance, the fundamental
separation between ‘conception’ and ‘execution’?</p>
</blockquote>
<p style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style:
inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 1.7em; outline:
0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-align:
justify;">This latter point is important as it bring back
Marx’s contempt for the strict division of work as it was
invented by the mass production of goods. F. Lordon later
insists that, even in relatively ‘democratic’ working
environments, it is rare to see a person sometimes in charge
of the lights and some other times in charge of the
play-writing. There is no real redistribution of the roles
depending on the desire and inspiration of each person
involved in the enterprise.</p>
<blockquote style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit;
font-style: italic; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px 30px
1.7em; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;
quotes: '', '';">
<p style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style:
inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 1.7em;
outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;
text-align: justify;">If the complete solution of the
communist equation consists in a restructuration of the
division of desire that shares the chances of conception –
and symmetrically the execution tasks too – nobody indicated
better than Etienne Balibar its horizon (Spinozist as well
as Marxian) : “ To be as many as possible to think the most
as possible.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style:
inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 1.7em; outline:
0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-align:
justify;">Finally, F. Lordon introduces his model of<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><em style="border:
0px; font-family: inherit; font-style: italic; font-weight:
inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px;
vertical-align: baseline;">(ré)communisme</em><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>as an alternative
based on the principle above. He then describes an enterprise
that would adopt this model as a working paradigm. Such a
description can make us recall the Argentinean <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.fabricasrecuperadas.org.ar/"
target="_blank" style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit;
font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px;
outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; color:
rgb(51, 51, 51);"><em style="border: 0px; font-family:
inherit; font-style: italic; font-weight: inherit; margin:
0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align:
baseline;">fábricas recuperadas</em></a>, factories took
over by their workers when their owner wanted to liquidate
them after the 2001 economical crisis. The new system set-up
by the workers involves (in addition of a unique salary) a
democratic process of decision making.</p>
<blockquote style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit;
font-style: italic; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px 30px
1.7em; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;
quotes: '', '';">
<p style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style:
inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 1.7em;
outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;
text-align: justify;">Since they put a part of their life in
an enterprise, its members can only exit the enrolment
relationship (<i style="font-style: italic;">rapport</i>),
born from a monarchical constitution (the<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><i
style="font-style: italic;">imperium</i><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>of the
master-desire), by sharing, beyond the object itself, the
entire control of the conditions of the collective pursuit
of the object, and finally by affirming the indisputable
right to be fully associated to what they are affected by.
What the productive enterprise has to fabricate, in which
quantity, with which rhythm, which volume, which wage
structure, which reattribution for the surplus, how it will
accommodate variations to its environment: none of these
things can escape to the common deliberation since they all
have common consequences. The very simple recommunist (<i
style="font-style: italic;">récommuniste</i>) principle is
thus that what affects everyone should be the object of
everyone, i.e. constitutionally and equally debated by
everyone.</p>
</blockquote>
<p style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style:
inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 1.7em; outline:
0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-align:
justify;">As a conclusion, we might want to go back from where
we left, the philosophy of Spinoza, by using its Deleuzian
interpretation to explain the notion of freedom:<em
style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style:
italic; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px;
padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">There is no
freedom, only forms of liberation</em>. In other words, if
we follow the writings of Spinoza absolutely (i.e. as diagrams
we might say), one is never free as (s)he is subjected to a
form of determinism, however (and maybe in a less orthodoxic
reading) one can get involved in processes of liberation by
participating to a power (<em style="border: 0px; font-family:
inherit; font-style: italic; font-weight: inherit; margin:
0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">potentia</em><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>again) that is
‘bigger’ than him or her. This power is called God (i.e.
nature or the world to put it maybe too simply) in Spinoza’s
philosophy. However, in his political project, which is in
complete agreement with his philosophy but founds itself on
more pragmatic bases, this ‘bigger’ power can be more simply
the harmonious composition of a collective enterprise. In F.
Lordon’s interpretation of the latter, it might not be
functioning in a strict equality, but rather in the shared
association of skills and desires, the regular shift of roles,
and the systematic access to the decision process that makes
this enterprise exist and operate.</p>
<p style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style:
inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 1.7em; outline:
0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-align:
justify;">Original French version of the excerpts:</p>
<p style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style:
inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 1.7em; outline:
0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-align:
justify;">Frédéric Lordon, Capitalisme, désir et servitude:
Marx et Spinoza, Paris: La Fabrique, 2010.</p>
<p style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style:
inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 1.7em; outline:
0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-align:
justify;">[…] le point de départ était ceci : quelqu’un a
envie de faire quelque chose qui nécessite d’être plusieurs.
Cette communauté d’action est<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><i style="font-style:
italic;">ipso facto</i><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>une
communauté politique si on donne le nom de politique à toute
situation de composition de puissance d’agir […]. La question
est alors celle de la constitution de cette communauté
politique d’entreprise, aussi bien au sens génétique des
mécanismes par lesquels la communauté vient à se former qu’au
sens « constitutionnel » des agencements formels qui en
régissent les fonctionnements une fois assemblée. Quels sont
les rapports désirables sous lesquels peut se constituer une
entreprise conçue très généralement comme un concours de
puissances d’agir ? P164</p>
<p style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style:
inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 1.7em; outline:
0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-align:
justify;">Un dramaturge survient porteur d’un texte inouï: qui
niera que cette contribution-là n’est pas de même nature que
celle des éclairagistes et des costumiers? qui lui contestera
son caractère de puissance authentiquement créatrice ? Et
pourtant il faut des éclairagistes et des costumiers pour que
le spectacle ait lieu et que le texte génial soit porte à la
connaissance du public. Le problème n’est jamais posé en ces
termes car la solution « immédiate » que lui apporte le
rapport salarial sous la forme d’une fourniture de
main-d’œuvre employée a fini par le faire oublier comme
problème. En retrouver le sens suppose l’expérience de pensée
consistant à imaginer quels arrangements politiques devraient
se former pour que l’entreprise collective voie le jour<i
style="font-style: italic;">retirées des structures du
rapport salarial</i>. P166</p>
<p style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style:
inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 1.7em; outline:
0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-align:
justify;">Si l’idée communiste a essentiellement à voir avec
l’égalité, la question se pose alors de savoir quelle peut
être la nature de l’égalité accompagnant une inégalité
substantielle, reconnue, des contributions, et qui ne nie pas
l’asymétrie de ces situations où la force d’une proposition
initiale donne objectivement aux autres contributions un
caractère auxiliaire. Voilà donc l’équation communiste :
quelle forme d’égalité réaliser sous le legs de la division du
travail ? – et notamment du plus pesant de ses héritages, à
savoir la séparation princeps de la « conception » et de
l’ « exécution ». P167</p>
<p style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style:
inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 1.7em; outline:
0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-align:
justify;">Si la solution complète de l’équation communiste
consiste en une restructuration de la division du désir qui
repartage les chances de conception – et symétriquement
redistribue les taches d’exécution […] – nul n’en a indiqué
comme Etienne Balibar l’horizon (spinoziste autant que
marxien) : « Etre le plus nombreux à penser le plus
possible. » P168</p>
<p style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-style:
inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 1.7em; outline:
0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-align:
justify;">Puisque c’est une part de leur vie qu’ils mettent en
commun dans une entreprise, ses membres ne sortent du rapport
d’enrôlement, dual par construction d’une constitution de type
monarchique (l’<i style="font-style: italic;">imperium</i><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>du désir-maitre),
qu’en partageant au-delà de l’objet, l’entière maitrise des
conditions de la poursuite collective de l’objet, et
finalement en affirmant le droit irréfragable d’être
pleinement associés à ce qui<i style="font-style: italic;"><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>les concerne</i>. Ce
que l’entreprise (productive) doit fabriquer, en quelle
quantité, à quelle cadence, avec quel volume d’emploi et
quelle structure de rémunérations, sous quelle clé de
réaffectation des surplus, comment elle accommodera les
variations de son environnement : aucune de ces choses ne peut
par principe échapper a la délibération commune puisqu’elles
ont toutes des conséquences communes. Le simplissime principe
récommuniste est donc que ce qui affecte tous doit être
l’objet de tous – c’est le mot même de récommune qui le dit !
-, c’est-à-dire constitutionnellement et égalitairement
débattu par tous. P170</p>
</div>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<br>
</body>
</html>