Abstract
In a historical situation characterised by crisis, wars and widespread protests the question of the relationship between past Left-revolutionary endeavours and present political challenges is of utmost importance for the possibility of mounting an anti-systemic challenge to capitalism. T. J. Clark’s essay ‘For a Left with No Future’ argues that the future-oriented stance of the 19th and 20th Century Left turned the Left into a disastrous dobbel- gänger of capitalist modernity causing havoc and death instead of being a genuine opposition to capitalism. The great refusals have to be replaced with a ‘modest’ and more ‘realistic’ approach, Clark argues, enabling the Left to understand the human propensity to violence and therefore engaging in a kind of anti-war activism. This article rejects Clark’s analysis and tries to save the revolutionary perspective Clark is trying to get rid of arguing that it is indeed the Left that we have to bury. Juxtaposing Clark’s argument with a reading of Michèle Bernstein’s ‘Victories of the Proletariat’ made as part of the 1963 Situationist exhibition ‘Destruction of RSG-6’ the article attempts to contribute to the re-formulation of a contemporary revolutionary position on the basis of the breakdown of the programmatic Left.
Highlights
Mikkel Bolt Rasmussen abstract In a historical situation characterised by crisis, wars and widespread protests the question of the relationship between past Left-revolutionary endeavours and present political challenges is of utmost importance for the possibility of mounting an anti-systemic challenge to capitalism
Juxtaposing Clark’s argument with a reading of Michèle Bernstein’s ‘Victories of the Proletariat’ made as part of the 1963 Situationist exhibition ‘Destruction of RSG-6’ the article attempts to contribute to the re-formulation of a contemporary revolutionary position on the basis of the breakdown of the programmatic Left. keywords Defeat, The Left, Revolution, Avant-garde, T
‘Leaving behind, that is, in the whole grain and frame of its self-conception, the last afterthoughts and images of the avantgarde.’[5]. This is because these visions turned out to be prone to extremely violent political practices in the period from 1917 to 1989 and never mounted a real challenge to capitalism anyway and because they prevent the Left from coming to terms with the present situation of defeat
Summary
Mikkel Bolt Rasmussen abstract In a historical situation characterised by crisis, wars and widespread protests the question of the relationship between past Left-revolutionary endeavours and present political challenges is of utmost importance for the possibility of mounting an anti-systemic challenge to capitalism.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: 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.
