Following the 2001 explosion of Tiqqun,* a debate raged. How could Tiqqun be explored by other means? The entanglement of ideas found in previous iterations of the journal describing Tiqqun were dense, almost impenetrable at times. As far as an experiment or an investigation, ‘writing the tiqqun’ made serious interventions – incompleting a whole series of academic relays, causing many machines to splutter, break down, or gain new life in different contexts. But despite its wide intervention, the audience produced by the text could only speak the high language of the academy, a contaminated discourse tinged with ivory. Comrades and allies are still separated by the deep chasm of training received to speak with a tone of (author)ity still present in the author-less text.
“Tiqqun 3 should be a film!” But if the committee that had been writing about the Tiqqun was no longer in (commun)ication – what would follow?
Bernadette Corporation hits the scenes with a narrative about the cannibalism of the summit protests. It speaks volumes when contrasted with American Anarchist naval-gazing like “Breaking the Spell”. What was the showdown in Seattle about anyway? Is it about expressing moral outrage, radicalizing the Marxist notion of ‘accelerating the contradictions’ or smashing capitalist ideology — or is it something deeper, less containable, an unleashing of collective desire? And how quickly, and in what ways does that collective desire just fold back into the capitalist axiomatic or the state-form? To be facetious, why will we win, by doing ‘security’ better than the state, by being more destructive than capital, by being more willing to give up moralism? And most frightening, could we simply be rehearsing lines given to us by the subjectivizing processes that put us in this place to begin with (hint: Chloe’s got an answer for you).
http://www.archive.org/details/get_rid_of_yourself (sorry, i couldn’t figure out how to embed it)
Compare to this to dreadful ideology critique “breaking the spell”