Conference: Encountering Althusser

Jan van Eyck Academy, Maastricht, 9-11 October 2009

International Conference organised by Katja Diefenbach, Sara Farris, Gal Kirn and Peter Thomas

www.after1968.org/encounteringalthusser

The work of Louis Althusser and his associates constituted an important attempt to rethink the political and philosophical potential of Marx’s thought, in tension with its ‘orthodox’ reading in Stalinism. In his work in the 1960s and 1970s, Althusser proposed to negate the metaphysical categories of subject, substance, telos, and end. He further explored these themes in the late 1970s and 1980s in terms of the event, the encounter and contingency. The late Althusser’s “materialism of the encounter” both provides many points of contact for a productive dialogue with thinkers associated with post-structuralism, while at the same time seeming to maintain a stronger connection to the Marxist tradition, particularly in terms of his continuing affirmation of the dictatorship of the proletariat. One of the purposes of this conference will be to attempt to gain an overview of the development of Althusser’s thought and to pose the question of its legacy for contemporary debates in radical political thought.

It is not only the legacy of Louis Althusser that will be of our interest here, however, but rather how to encounter and deal with the more unrecognised or suppressed points in his thought that remain enigmatic, and at the same time productive for further research in politics, economy, philosophy (and ideology). Many contemporary discussions ranging from Badiou and Zizek to Balibar, Laclau and Butler revolve around some topics that were traced or started by Louis Althusser, mainly on ideology, linking Althusser to Lacan or politics. In this conference, we would like to focus on some points that have not yet been discussed or have not yet been given the attention they deserve.

In the Althusserian spirit of philosophy working by attacking established positions on an occupied Kampfplatz, we outline four different fields of investigation to which panels will be dedicated: ruptures in philosophy, politics, political economy and politics and philosophy in the late Althusser. In each field, we intend to subject established interpretations of Althusser’s thought to critique and to attempt to determine productive areas for future research. Beyond such scholarly and philological debates, however, our guiding concern will be to pose the question of the extent to which an encounter with Althusser today has the potential to promote critical energies and perspectives that are capable of intervening effectively in the contemporary conjuncture.

Friday 9|10 Ruptures in philosophy: dis/continuities in Althusser's thought – Chair: Peter Thomas

16:00 – 16:15 Introduction

16:15 – 17:15 G. Michael Goshgarian | The early "late Althusser"

Break

17:30 – 18:30 Caroline Williams | Althusser and Spinoza

18:30 – 19.30 Giorgos Fourtounis | The "absolute beginning" and its duration: the continuity of rupture in Althusser

19:30 Discussion

Saturday 10|10 The primacy of politics: singularity, dictatorship of proletariat, class struggle – Chair: Gal Kirn

10:00 – 10:15 Introduction

10:15 – 11:15 Rastko Močnik

Break

11:30 – 12:30 Ozren Pupovac | At this side of interpellation: Althusser’s critique of the subject

12:30 – 13:30 Slobodan Karamanić | Three uses of topography: theory, politics, state

Lunch

14:30 – 15:30 Mikko Lahtinen | Althusser, Machiavelli and us: from Marxist philosophy to materialist politics

15:30 – 16:00 Discussion

Break

The critique of political economy and the legacy of Louis Althusser – Chair: Sara Farris

16:30 - 16:45 Introduction

16:45 – 17:45 Maria Turchetto

17:45 – 18:45 Marko Kržan | Should there be a Marxian perspective on contemporary capitalism

Break

19:00 – 20:00 Frieder Otto Wolf | Dialectic and contingency in thinking reproduction: looking back at a line of Althusser’s theoretical initiatives

20:00 Discussion

Sunday 11|10 Politics and philosophy in the late Althusser: the philosophy of the encounter and aleatory materialism – Chair: Katja Diefenbach

10:00 – 10:15 Introduction

10:15 – 11.15 Vittorio Morfino | History as the "permanent revocation of the accomplished fact": on Machiavelli in the late Althusser.

11:15 – 12.15 Katja Kolšek | Some reflections on the conception of reading of Althusser's aleatory materialism

Break

12:45 – 13:45 Panagiotis Sotiris | Rethinking aleatory materialism

13:45 - 14:45 Jason Read | Primitive accumulation: between contingency and constitution

14.45 - 15:15 Discussion

I VERI COLPEVOLI

di Annamaria Rivera

Abbiamo provato a gridarlo in ogni modo che il mostruoso reato d'immigrazione clandestina avrebbe generato crimini «umanitari». Così è stato, purtroppo. L'abbandono e poi la morte dei settantatre profughi eritrei è la prima strage prodotta dal «pacchetto-sicurezza». È, certo, il frutto maturo del trattato con la Libia, siglato dal ministro Amato, rafforzato e reso operativo, cioè criminale, dall'attuale governo. È il frutto, più largamente, dell'Europa-fortezza e dell'adeguamento alla sua politica anche da parte del governo maltese.

Ma inedito è il cinismo di Stato per cui una tale strage non trovi come risposta né l'indignazione corale, né l'incriminazione per strage, appunto, bensì per favoreggiamento dell'immigrazione clandestina. «Senza escludere un'eventuale ipotesi di omissione di soccorso», dicono gli inquirenti. Immigrazione clandestina di cui potrebbero essere imputati i cinque poveri spettri che il fato - lui solo compassionevole - ha voluto sottrarre alla morte. Questo «dettaglio», con l'annuncio della parata che Berlusconi sta per fare il 30 agosto con Gheddafi per festeggiare a Tripoli l'anniversario del trattato, restituisce in modo perfetto il senso del crollo dell'elementarmente umano consumato con le politiche di questo governo.

Politiche disumane generano comportamenti disumani: se nessuno ha sentito il dovere morale di soccorrerli è anche perché leggi criminali producono condotte sociali criminali. Ma non tutto è inedito in questo dramma. Non è vero che con esso «abbiamo toccato il fondo», come si è scritto. Se così fosse, si potrebbe coltivare la fragile speranza che un futuro governo non reazionario e non razzista potrebbe ripristinare forme di rispetto per l'elementarmente umano. Purtroppo non è così. Ce lo dice la strage di 108 profughi albanesi della Kater I Rades, provocata nel 1997 dalla pretesa di un governo di centrosinistra di bloccare manu militari l'esodo albanese. Ce lo ricorda un'altra strage del proibizionismo, quella del 25 dicembre 1996, in cui annegarono 233 migranti: a lungo ignorata dai media - il manifesto fu l'unico giornale ad aprire subito con la tragedia -, sempre negata dal governo di centrosinistra e occultata da una parte dei pescatori di Portopalo. Alla fine fu grazie all'ostinazione di qualche giornalista e di antirazzisti come Dino Frisullo, che il silenzio fu spezzato. Non vogliamo sostenere che il trattamento crudele riservato ai de-umanizzati - coloro che anche da cadaveri sono detti clandestini - sia una lunga notte oscura in cui tutte le vacche sono nere. Ma che per produrre i frutti marci che coltiva il governo in carica, di fatto guidato dall'ideologia post-nazionalsocialista della Lega nord, altri hanno provveduto a spargere i semi avvelenati: quelli del proibizionismo crudele e ad ogni costo. La condizione per tornare a coltivare la speranza sta nella costruzione di una volontà collettiva di superamento del paradigma proibizionista.

da Il Manifesto, 23 Agosto 2009

On Italian Marxisms by Peter Thomas in the last number of 'New Left Review'

As this blog happens to be particularly sensitive to the Anglo-Italian dialogue and to Marxist and leftist issues more in general, I recommend the reading of the first review essay on Italian Marxisms in the last number of New Left Review. The entire number is worth reading by the way!

New Left Review 58, July-August 2009

Kenneth Pomeranz: The Great Himalayan Watershed

From Asia’s mountainous heart flow rivers on which half the world’s population depends. Pomeranz examines the complex interaction between human water needs, fragile ecology and vast infrastructural projects—and the far-reaching consequences of their conjugation.

Miroslav Hroch: Learning from Small Nations

Leading scholar of national questions discusses his personal trajectory and theoretical development, against the backdrop of the Czech experience. Sociological and historical roots of national feeling, and comparative perspectives on their European destinies.

R. W. Johnson: False Start in South Africa

Disappointments of post-apartheid rule, marred by mass unemployment and corruption, amid the enrichment of a new black elite. Does the arrival of Zuma, and new salience of the SACP within the ruling alliance, portend a lurch to ethnic conflict and capital flight?

Patrick Bond: In Power in Pretoria?

Responding to Johnson, Patrick Bond locates the origins of the ANC’s neoliberal record since 1994 in the compromises of the transition era. Rhetoric versus reality, and the subordination of trade unions and SACP alike to capital’s prerogatives.

Etienne Balibar: Althusser and the Rue d'Ulm

Retrospective look at the life and work of Althusser, seen within the structures—personal, political, institutional—of the École Normale Supérieure. Teaching, thinking and writing at the intersection of private and public realms.

Fredric Jameson: Marx and Montage

The author of Archaeologies of the Future unearths fragments from ‘ideological antiquity’ in Alexander Kluge’s recent film on Capital. Encounters with Eisenstein’s unrealized equivalent, seeking a cinematic transposition of the commodity fetish.

BOOK REVIEWS

Peter Thomas on Cristina Corradi, Storia dei marxismi in Italia. Multiple inheritances of Labriola, Gramsci, operaismo and other currents. Can a pluralized theoretical tradition aspire to outrun reverses in praxis?.

Tony Wood on Michael Reid, Forgotten Continent: The Battle for Latin America’s Soul. A revised neoliberal gospel for the region, courtesy of the Economist.

Max Gasner on Robert Kagan, The Return of History and the End of Dreams. The 21st century as re-run of the 19th, shaped by the ambitions of ascendant autocratic powers.

For f...'s sake. Leave us alone! Part II

This is one example of the new marketing strategy that the University Alma Mater of Bologna (Italy) has chosen in order to attract more students. I am still collecting some materials. More soon!

Rethinking Marxism Conference

University of Massachusetts Amherst

Call for Papers

New Marxian Times will be held over four days, beginning on Thursday evening, 5 November 2009 and ending on Sunday afternoon, 8 November 2009. In addition to two plenary sessions and an art exhibition, there will be concurrent panels, workshops, and art/cultural events. We invite the submission of organized sessions that follow traditional or non-traditional formats (such as workshops, roundtables, and dialogue among and between presenters and audience) as well as individual presentations. Since Marxism covers a wide variety of fields, from literature to public health and forms of political practice, from environmental organizing to opposing global inequality and envisioning new economic and social practice, anyone engaging with Marxism in any discipline or form of activism is encouraged to submit paper and panel proposals. We encourage those working in areas that intersect with Marxism, such as critical race theory, feminism, political economy, anarchist studies, cultural and literary studies, queer theory, working-class and labor studies, postcolonial studies, geography and urban studies, psychoanalysis, social and natural sciences, philosophy, and around issues of class, race, ethnicity, nationality, gender, sexuality, and disability, to submit proposals. We also welcome video, poetry, performance, and all other modes of presentation and cultural expression.

SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS

Proposals for papers, films, or other formats should include:

• Paper title
• Presenter's name and contact information (mail, email, phone, affiliations)
• Brief abstract (no more than 200 words)
• Technology needs for presentation

Proposals for panels should include:

• Panel title
• Name, contact information, and paper title for each presenter
• Brief abstract (no more than 200 words) explaining the panel's focus
• Brief abstract for each paper (no more than 200 words)
• Names and contact information for any discussant(s) or respondent(s)
• Technology needs of presenters
• Title, contact, and address for any sponsoring organization or journal

The appropriate preregistration fee must accompany all proposal submissions. Unfortunately, any proposal not accompanied by the appropriate preregistration fee cannot be considered. Proposals that are not accepted will have their preregistration fees returned in full. If you are submitting a proposal for an entire panel, please make sure you include the preregistration fee for all members of the panel.

The deadline for proposal submission is 1 August 2009.

The deadline for proposal submission is 1 August 2009.

Subversive sideburns!

We know how Italians are concerned with appearance, to the extent that 'fare una bella figura' marks the sharpest distinction between a gentleman and a lout, a refined and an uncouth lady. On the occasion of the G8 in Abruzzo, therefore, the authorities of L'Aquila encouraged the earth-quacked population of the region - still living in tents and caravans - to show the Vips of the world that a 'bella figura' is a precious concern for the descendants of Dante and the countrymates of Dolce&Gabbana.

Thus they enacted a special ordinance for which "the population (...) must respect precise behavioral and hygienic norms" (see the image above - unfortunately it is not a joke...).

The third 'article' states: "Female citizens must avoid wearing mini-skirts, flip-flops and scanty clothes". Now, the prohibition of flip-flops might appear bizarre. In reality, upon careful consideration, it is perfectly consistent with the ban of mini-skirts and scanty clothes as flip-flops expose the feet to unnecessary male sight and might inelegantly recall a G-string, a thong, and the like. But now I am just wondering why they are not banning dental floss...

The second 'article' urges men "to avoid wearing undershirts, short pants and overalls". Well, at first sight it is not clear why wearing overalls is not decorous. But again, with a surplus of reflection and without losing faith in the rationale governing the intentions of the authors of the ordinance it is possible to find the answer. I think that the ban of overalls in front of Obama, Sarkozy and so on had been dictated by the fear that showing Italian men in working clothes in a country with 30% rate of unemployment and one of the highest rates of workplace deaths would have looked a bit ironical; and the authorities (who happen to have a clown as a commander in chief) want to avoid irony above all things. Well done then! Stop overalls!

However, the third article (listed as first in the ordinance in the picture) is particularly amusing. Here "male citizens" are required "to shave the beard with accuracy on the days of the 8th, 9th and 10th July, as well as sideburns and other decorations".

In front of this, I must admit I am speachless. Are sideburns forbidden because hair is regarded as anti-hygienic? So why did Berlusconi want a hair transplant? Or perhaps they are forbidden because body hair is not sexy? And ok, the malevolent gnome - as my friend Savonarola suggests calling him - prefers women who have not yet developed too much body hair...So, I can get it again. Nonetheless, the matter needs more investigation (try here).

In the meantime, I like thinking of 'subversive sideburns' as a new fashion to be promoted again. Here are some examples:

The example above is very minimalist but immediately usable by the anti-G8 movement on the leaf-lets.

This is also very nice. Perhaps more appropriate for a pluralist movement where each current would like to express its own position on the best way to grow subversive sideburns.

But this is my favourite one. Not only does it give more room for expression of political differences, but it also combines a subversive project with a scientific presentation of the different options available. Terrific!

The essence of Caesarism!

Really worth watching from the beginning to the end. Hysterically funny!