|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gramsci is Dead
This tearing apart of legitimate dissent by the repressive state apparatus under the control of the G8 is a "death blow to the most visible expression of resistance to neoliberalism in the global north." Systems of domination and exploitation have always tried to kill any radical activism which always "attempts to alter, impede, destroy or construct alternatives to dominant structures, processes, practices and identities." Very consciously, these alternative movements tend to aim towards the total eradication of the root cause of various social and economic problems. Hierarchies, therefore, are central to neoliberal societies of control and oppression where domination cannot be evaluated outside capitalist exploitation. As Day puts it: "Neo-liberal societies are divided according to multiple lies of inequality based on race, gender, sexuality ability, age, and region and the domination of nature." Populations including the working class are tactfully divided and controlled by inherently hegemonic neoliberal projects. The over-arching desire of neo-liberalism is nothing but increased profits which is maneuvered through the removal of state interference or working-class resistance: "privatisation, deregulation, right to work, legislation (union-busting) and fanatical worship of the free market become de rigueur." The corollary to this is that the "oppressed deserve their oppression, everyone (except the rich) must work more or less; the bigger the corporation the better; the less the state intervenes in the economy (except to bail out failed corporations and provide them with a free infrastructure and the right to pollute at will) the better." The strategy behind such policies is to win the minds and hearts of the middle class of the North and the elites of the South. Thus, neoliberalism succeeds by seeking hegemony which is apparent in the periodic meetings of the G8 which consciously plans to retain its control on world affairs. Day is of the opinion that all counter-hegemonic battles have to ensure that a global economy works from below. The aim is to establish a welfare state where contemporary radical politics would work non-hegemonically and not counter-hegemonically. This goes against the conventional views on hegemony. Unlike the Marxist view, there is no desire to take over the state power or reverse relations between the dominated and the dominators. The aspiration is towards having non-hegemonic independent media centres, affinity groups, social centres and Zapatistas, Aboriginal Provisional Government as in Australia, transnational feminism and queer theory. For instance, a thorough analysis of education systems or woman’s movement, will give rise to new formulations within a post-structuralist mode, a drive to create alternatives to the state and the corporate world. At least that should be the goal of all postcolonial critics. Theory is really not about vague notions, but a struggle against power. For Day, the practice of "relay" is vital, and it stands for the urgent and necessary practice of being able to move from one theoretical point to another. Related to this standpoint is Day’s excellent perspective on the role of the academic and the activist, where he defends the university as a public space for critical thought. To rid ourselves of old prejudices and received ideas, we need to engage in the critical practice of moving across disciplines. Territorialism has to be curbed and trespassers from other areas allowed free interventions. For Day, it is not important to quote only an academic; activists are as much an authority on a subject. Marx was never at a university; Gloria Azaldua and Chomsky work at a university but have a more meaningful connection with various communities and international politics. Seeking mileage out of one’s professional discipline and having just a theoretical desire to participate in the real world is highly suspect and intrinsically authoritarian. They need to learn lessons from academic debates as well as involve themselves in "broader movements of resistance and construction of alternatives." Thus, the hard realities confronting globalisation today demand hard questions and equally hard answers. Day’s book achieves this successfully, useful as it is for students of political theory who intend to see contemporary social movements from the Marxist as well as the Anarchist point of view.
|
Deep
structures in the fabric of the exploited world are responsible for the
anarchist currents against globalised capital. Though anti-globalisation
movements which initially began in Seattle in the late 1999 with mammoth
demonstrations spreading to the rest of the world registered a deep
resentment against the G8, the media significantly fell back on
essentialisms and prejudices to paint the "anarchists as a
sprawling welter of thousands of mostly young activists populating
hundreds of mostly tiny splinter groups espousing dozens of mostly
socialist critiques of the capitalist machine." Richard Day, in his
brilliant book, Gramsci is Dead, draws attention to such
"ill-informed caricature of anarchist activism" that labels
such demonstrations as "threats," "mayhem,"
"rampage," or "disruptive power."