New Anonymous (thescuspeaks) wrote in control_society,
New Anonymous

Love: A politics of joy

this is x-posted in my personal journal, sorry for anyone reading both.

Jacques Ranciere wrote that, “Politics is not made up of power relationships, it is made up of relationships between worlds.”

To begin to speak of lived possibilities rather than power is to speak of connecting worlds that are incommensurable. The connection of such worlds is for me a chiliastic experience. Chiliasm does not wait for a better world to come, is rather an embodiment of profound presentness. Not present in that we all have a here and now, spatially and temporally, but rather the realization that within the present lies the possibility that which is inward can burst out and transform the world.
This connecting of worlds is always the work of philosophers, artists, shamans, tricksters, all creatures of sensual religions. When one world enters another we have what Felix Guattari calls “affective contamination.” And this is what Power is afraid of. As Foucault showed us with his triad of Power (sovereign, disciplinary, and bio) that the models of Power are made from fear of contamination; be it leprosy with sovereign, plague with disciplinary, or “racial impurity” with biopower. This is why talk of a social Love and revolutionary erotics is so important, for what is at stake with Love and eroticism is contamination and world-connections. When Love is combined with chiliastic energy we have a joy that gives the strength and courage to realize the impossible. What we have is a Love which is a politics of joy.
  • Post a new comment


    default userpic
wow, thats a really great post. "To begin to speak of lived possibilities"... YES! Maybe i'm just hopelessly out of the loop/ignorant, but i never hear this sort of terminology ("lived worlds", etc) outside of psychology journal articles. I have found it to be very helpful, i had totally been trying to formulate something with such a thing-- the meeting of my (anti)politics and this vocabulary with its strengths (for attempting to describe the undescribable in pointed, perspicuous language). I knew i needed to re-attempt D&G's Anti-O, I have a feeling they might use such language... hm.
Im not sure about the chiliasm thing.. first off cause i dont know what it is! haha. but my question would be "if chliasm is really possible in the present, as things are, then why are we fighting or what are we fighting for?" isnt the mistake always to think that health is possible in a subculture or lifestyle? isnt recuperation (or the similar concept for the psychological, i forget the term) always the directing of our attention to spiritual battles so that we cant fight the others? Im not sure about all the talk of "Love"-- too loaded a word, and something that may not exist in any way comparable to that word, "love" if we want to share in something good anyway.
[sorry if my writing is unclear.. its early!]


May 24 2006, 21:29:57 UTC 10 years ago

excellent post Sku. There really has been a push to understand power relations since Foucault. You presented the facts in such a way that shows the universal aspects of power relations while not falling prey to reductionist arguments. Looks like your work with the debate team has been paying off.
Thank you very much. You might want to check out the longer version on my lj.

Btw, who are you? (How do I know you?)