Communising the mode of ruling concept from ruling

Communising & the mode of ruling concept: from ruling through anti-ruling to integral living Jara Handala Marx 2016, Stockholm 15 October 2016

overview • what's the problem? • the clues • the 'argument' • the utility of the Mo. R approach

epistemic context there's little new under the sun; moreover. . . Much of what I shall have to say will thus be a restatement of things well known. Yet I felt that they need restatement […] Scientific progress rests in large measure on such a reordering of 'things known', which is my justification. S F Nadel 1951

what's the problem?

what Lucio Colletti said in 1974 remains largely the case – and we continue to suffer the consequences: […] the weakness and sparse development of political theory in Marxism. In other words, you can also read it as a way of saying that Marxism lacks a true political theory. […] The development of political theory has been extraordinarily weak in Marxism. […] The result was that the sphere of political structures remained little examined or explored. One could formulate this paradoxically by saying that the political movement inspired by Marxism has been virtually innocent of political theory. The absurdity and danger of this situation are manifest (my emphases in red)

not 'theory', but ideas, conceptions & accounts of varying degrees of abstraction-concretion • so what is the most abstract specification of the political dimension of human living? • can politics end (does it have its time)? • if systematic oppressions & exploitation end, what remains of politics? • abstractly, how can we best conceptualise the communising of the political dimension?

example: Marx's Gotha critique schema transitional period communist society the lower phase economic dimension ? political dimension political rule of wc a higher phase associated producers ? ?

the clues

• Religion, the family, the state, law, morality, science, art, etc. , are only particular modes of production and therefore come under its general law ["the movement […] of the economy"] K Marx, 3 rd Paris MS 1844

• the notion of a mode of domination, consisting of an articulation of specific political technologies (forces of domination) and specific ways of appropriating such technologies (relations of domination) Nicos Mouzelis 1990

• ideological effects that cause subjugation: accommodation sense of representation fear deference sense of inevitability resignation Göran Therborn 1980

the 'argument'

the mode of ruling concept if there is a mode of production, why not a mode of ruling?

In Marxism, ruling class is a 'hanging' concept – perhaps supported by ruled class(es) • they're products – the generated dimension of human reality • so how are they generated? if a scientific understanding of economic life needs the Mo. P concept, that of political life needs the Mo. R concept Mo. R = the organising of ruling forces by people involved in human relations (5 kinds – not just the social)

the 'competition' I argue against reliance on these conceptual frameworks: • consent/force • consensus/legitimacy/force • hegemony/domination • true/false consciousness (science/ideology) • & a preoccupation with power

ideas spawned by there being Mo. R • the framework • key propositions • [the elementary contents of the political] • how ruling is achieved: the sub-modes

the framework • ruling/anti-ruling opposition to the current way of ruling; opposition to all ruling (communist & anarchist idea) re-ruling (governing-over) • anti-ruling de-ruling (trying to make ruling wither) co-governing (associating with others) • de-ruling self-governing (self-discipline)

key propositions • the effect of successful ruling = control: of access to valued entities, & over the quality of relations • politics = the decisive activity promoting/meliorating/opposing ruling each the necessary condition of the other (internal relation) • the effect of the victorious exercise of political power = domination (one way to rule) = oppressions & exploitation

so how is ruling achieved? • the sub-modes of ruling used to generate ways (i. e. forms) of ruling: powers • forces susceptibilities (liabilities, affordances) powers active positive susceptibilities passive negative

forces ruling de-ruling powers ✓ ✓ affordances ✓ ✓

• ruling forces: ruling powers: exercise of political power (oppressive/exploitative) results in domination (oppressive/exploitative) (non-violent) coercive power coercive domination violent power (force) violent domination this typology contrasts with using Mouzelis' more abstract conception, political technologies, i. e. figurations of (ruling) forces

• ruling forces: ruling affordances: exercise of political susceptibility results in being ruled sense of inevitability trained deference spontaneous meekness merging self with the ruler or with the fetish habits realised as routines political indifference political resignation accommodation sense of representation frightened, fearful, feeling terrorised

• de-ruling forces: their exercise result in co-governing, even in self-governing de-ruling powers: exercise of results in emancipatory power emancipation liberatory power liberation liberatory administrative power liberatory administration

• de-ruling forces: de-ruling affordances: anti-authoritarian disposition egalitarian sensibility empathy, regard for others, comradeship, altruism confidence to act belief in success – 'the future is ours'

the communising epochs 'primitive communism' CE 1 ? ruling: ? political: ? integral: class society transitional society CE 2 pre-capitalist CE 3 communist society 1 st phase 2 nd phase later ones CE 4 CE 5 co-governing & self-governing-over | CE 6+ > > 2 nd-order forces 1 st & 2 nd 1 st <, & 2 nd | political dimension of human living | | integral living >

the utility of the Mo. R approach

• a scientific concept it offers heuristic opportunities to be explored in perhaps unexpected ways • the Mo. R approach identifies the limits of possibility of generic human practice, reason, & knowledge: the political is a practical & epistemic narrow conception of the governing likewise, the governing is only an aspect of the integral

• allows recognition of the wider scope of the political: not just powers but susceptibilities ruling forces, & anti-ruling forces, include affordances widens the scope of the possible content of political strategy & policy – why have Marxists (& anarchists) consistently ignored half of politics, the other side, people as patients, not agents?

• as a meta-strategic conception, it helps us orientate when asking political questions (i. t. o. ruling v. anti-ruling, re-ruling v. de-ruling, co-governing v. /& self-governing) examples: USSR & nationalised property: the key Q is de-ruling: how is co- & self-governing being encouraged, which institutions facilitate this? demands upon 'reformist' parties: do policies facilitate co- & self-governing or governing-over? extending democracy to work (Rick Wolff, E O Wright et al. ) • the civilisational import of participation

• within our organisations, developing anti-ruling capacity (& its facilitating means) at the expense of the org'n's Mo. R: participation, accountability (re-call), mandating representatives, etc. examples: SYRIZA, 2014 -15 Momentum (British Labour Party), 2015 -16

• provides a political elaboration of Marx's Gothakritik transitional period CE 3 economic dimension ? political dimension political rule of wc communist society the lower phase CE 4 a higher phase associated producers ? ? CE 3, clarion call is 'extend de-ruling at the expense of re-ruling!' CE 4, 'extend self-governing at the expense of co-governing!'

Thanks for your attention. I hope you found the ideas & assertions of interest; & I look forward to hearing your questions & comments - & not just on this presentation. The full set of slides & the argument are at a Wordpress blog, Thru the Eyes of Corpses https: //thrutheeyesofcorpses. wordpress. com (in four parts, starting with 'Preamble: what's the nature of politics? ' – link also in Marx 2016's abstracts, http: //marx 2016. org/abstracts/UC 4. pdf)

example 1: aftermath of UK referendum Marxist capitalist state theory: • state as instrument of the ruling class, in the grip of big capital, even fused with it • state as committee managing rc's common affairs • state as relatively autonomous of/relatively dependent on the rc

back on Planet Earth … • big capital, almost without exception, was for Remain & yet … & yet: • Tory government, from day one, said "Brexit means Brexit" - & acted upon it. Why? • since the vote, big capital has been almost wholly silent, not even insisting on EEA access. Why? • worryingly, Marxists have not acknowledged their inability to explain these two facts is politics in command, is the primacy of politics?

the elementary (the simplest necessary, the most abstract) contents of politics: feature political relation political dynamic political generative means political conditions political contradiction content between rulers & ruled btwn. ruling & anti-ruling Mo. R & mode of anti-ruling dynamic btwn. superordination/ subordination & freedom-as-therecognition-of-necessity btwn. contesting groups as they undermine one another in trying to control ruling forces

feature content political behavioural dynamic order or rebellion purpose of political behaviour (politics as such) attempt to satisfy political practical imperatives political practical imperative control: of access to valued entities, & over the quality of relations political outcomes ranging from order, through resistance & rebellion, to mayhem

… all this means … feature political dimension of human living content configuring & re-configuring of ruling forces & their exercise … which brings us back to … political dynamic btwn. the exercise of ruling forces & anti-ruling forces