Abstract

[only abstract in English; full article and abstract in Lithuanian] In the article, while differentiating between the resistance theories of Badiou, Deleuze, and Guattari, the attempt is made to emphasize Badiou’s critique of the theory of asubjective becoming and desire as well as his attempt to develop it into the dialectics between the insurgent students and what Deleuze and Guattari call the “missing people”. Badiou’s theory of the subject, based on the works of Hegel, Lenin and Mao, is regarded as a counterpoint to the theories of revolutionary desire. The revolutionary strategies of Lenin and Mao, based on Hegel’s philosophy, allow them to create the concepts of totality as the unity of the opposites, as the split One, as well as to determine the conflictual dialectical process that conditions the rise and existence of a revolutionary subject – party. While relating the dialectical concepts of the above mentioned authors with Badiou’s concepts of scission, torsion and periodization, Badiou’s logic of the subject is explained. It allows revolutionary forces to constantly resist the institutional practices of placement, destroy stability and immerse into the new cycles of struggle instead of undergoing the process of recuperation and return to the system. The above mentioned concepts meaningfully supplement the vocabulary of social movements and minor politics. Allowing them to spread beyond their comfort zones and to aim at what for them is still a “noumenon”: the sphere of everyday strugglesfor dignity and survival. We, not the “missing people”, have to be the protagonists of such struggles.

Highlights

  • well as his attempt to develop it into the dialectics between the insurgent students

  • them to create the concepts of totality as the unity

  • It allows revolutionary forces to constantly resist the institutional practices of placement

Read more

Summary

Kasparas Pocius

Šiuos skirtumus ir priešpriešas tarsi vainikuoja Badiou prisipažinimas anksčiau minėtoje knygoje apie Deleuze’ą, kad tuo metu Deleuze’o prijautimą spontaniškiems politiniams judėjimams, jo „laisvų erdvių“ teoriją ir neapykantą dialektikai – visa tai, ką buvo galima vadinti gyvenimo filosofija, jis laikė „fašizmu“ (Badiou 2000: 2). Dėl kurių Badiou kritikuoja Deleuze’o ir Guattari politinę teoriją, yra jų bandymas revoliucinį įvykį (kalbama apie 1968-ųjų gegužę) vertinti kaip tai, ko neįmanoma iš anksto numatyti. Kad šios praktikos teorijos atžvilgiu tampa pertekliumi, Badiou paneigia ne tik Deleuze’o ir Guattari revoliucijos kaip „neracionalaus proveržio“ sampratą, bet ir ortodoksinę marksistinę istorinio materializmo versiją, pagal kurią priežastis (pakankamas darbo jėgos ir jos potencialo išsiplėtojimas, kai jos nebetenkina esamos sąlygos) būtinai turi turėti pasekmę (vesti į revoliuciją). Skirtingai nei Deleuze’as, sekdamas Lenino ir Mao principais, siūlo remtis masėmis ir kurti jų strategijas atspindintį politinį subjektą – partiją

Hegelis ir nedogmatinė Lenino revoliucijos paradigma
Badiou subjekto teorija
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.