Tuesday, July 31, 2007

Anger is an Energy



Resentment is a worthwhile point of entry...but what then? asks one of K-Punk's interlocutors. See also Dominic's brilliant post on Politics of Envy, Politics of Truth. In my original post on Resentment, which was frankly rather tossed off - if I'd known it was going to help cause this particular chain reaction I would have made it a damn sight sharper - what I was trying to get at was a certain usefulness in resentment, and more generally in anger or bitterness. My problem with the 'leftist critique' of resentment that Dominic delineates is that it assumes that we should want a politics without affect: that instead, one accumulates a quantity of knowledge about capitalism's contradictions and calmly realises the necessity of its destruction. The peculiar idea that the class struggle should somehow exclude class anger, class hatred even.



For one thing, this is a misunderstanding of how revolutions actually work: usually couched in terms of avenging the last revolution, of taking some sort of final vengeance for the long history of defeats and brutalities, driven by raw wounds and by concrete grievance. There's an anecdote in Victor Serge's Conquered City, a semi-autobiographical novel of the Russian Civil War (which Vaneigem cites as well) in which a working class Red Army man is driven by a sense of personal and historical grievance, specifically avenging a Paris Communard he'd read about in a history class. Particular affects of rage or resentment at the 'scandalous' can, of course, be reassimilated and presented as merely exceptional. Yet that sort of shock, the visceral reaction, is surely what makes people revolt in the first place: not just through a reading of political economy, but from particular affective charges, from the concrete example of the intolerable - and this is why resentment seemed to me to be worth reclaiming in the first place, for its power.

5 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

hmmm...is it a stretch to make the connection that societies with deeply ingrained notions of reciprocity and honour are also places where places where class conflict is most naked and open?

4:11 pm  
Blogger owen hatherley said...

I don't know. Can you elaborate on that, it sounds interesting...

6:48 pm  
Blogger Charles Edward Frith said...

I know just the man to send this post too.

7:26 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

in places were honour codes heavily inform behaviour and social relations, people may consider the indignities and injuries of class as affronts to be redressed greater than people in societies where people exorcise their humiliation and class oppression by indulging in the world of the commodity/spectacle or enertain hope that sacrifice and discipline preached in class society will lead to upward mobility and to the end of class reality for them.

11:25 am  
Blogger David McDougall said...

I like the idea that people see "class" as a construct of lack, where upward mobility leads to the end of class reality for them. This vision of the nature of "class" - where class is an escapable reality on a personal level rather than an essential structural component of capitalism - is, I think, the dominant conception of class in the world's freer economies. This upward mobility makes class-based analysis impossible beyond the intellectual sphere; structural-theoretical analysis plays a secondary role to personal striving. It's why as capitalism unfetters itself from class boundaries of the traditional type, the new economic confines of class solidify rather than question the structural precepts of capitalism. Neoliberalism neuters resentment - which is the only real locus of revolutionary power.

10:37 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home