Thursday, 1 December 2016

Blackbird Braille: Winter (1)

Slogans to be painted upon your tanks and embroidered into your banners:

One constraint upon formulating a political position is that it must remain deluded about its true relation to power. ‬

‪The nonsense of every political tendency's general form is a necessary, if false, opening to the fragments of knowledge it is thereby allowed to collect.‬

‪Some useful discrete concepts and insights have been made available by NRx which are dependent upon the intrinsic absurdity of its general position.‬

‪It is tedious to forage through general principles for palatable scraps. ‬

‪The question of political involvement is entirely situated in the ratio between energies expended and energies acquired.‬

‪Every political tendency's set of general principles is a preliminary narrative that must be endured before the opening of the casket of holy relics. ‬

‪We must endure the setting of the scene before the protagonist's appearance. ‬

‪You must apply a tourniquet to raise the vein. ‬

‪In a circumstance where letting go of the contents of the discard pile is decisive, political consciousness still prefers the slag heap to the mine. ‬

‪It is possible that neo-reaction's main problem is that it is still not reactionary enough.‬

We already knew that a kicked dog behaves differently to a kicked stone. But we are only just learning that the more often a dog is kicked, the more it behaves like a stone. 

‪We already knew abo ut the recuperative coding buried within leftist ideology without resorting to unpleasantness.‬

‪We had arrived at critiques of categories of left-identitarianism decades before NRx, and by a less arduous path.‬

‪We already know about the light averse quality in left discourse, its ploys for controlling interlocutors from beneath Enlightenment principles. ‬

‪Even so, the therapeutic return of what is derided by marxists as the neo-kantian has been a blessed comfort to us. ‬

‪Left and right iterations of the state-form utilise crypto-manipulative plays hidden within issue-based discourse.‬

‪It is the modus operandi of repressive discourse to refuse to acknowledge the real content of its accusations.‬

Ressentiment is the general term for the mode of power emerging from the internalisation of defeat.‬

‪But ressentiment as a concept does not articulate the organisational process of buried force (e.g. as exercised in the system of 'down on you' in Billy Budd).‬

‪There are unnamed repressive forms of power which operate nowhere but in the discourses of liberation.‬

‪Politics is the art of not naming determining factors. Or rather, it is the art of not even wishing to name them.  ‬

‪Always back to Fortuna. ‬

‪The principle error in general principles (left or right), is belief in self-positioning. 

In practice we are thrown, we do not throw.‬ We are occupied, we do not occupy. We are positioned, we do not position.

‪Both the NRx and the ULx imagine their identification with decompositional tendencies grants them some sort of historical privilege.‬

‪In truth, no political tendency dictates terms to process. Nobody decides on the manner of their own recuperation. ‬

‪No lesser power may capture a greater power. ‬

‪The state always expropriates, it is never expropriated. ‬

Tuesday, 29 November 2016

Nor yet good red herring: Autumn (5.3)

Reservationism: An unintended consequence of the project of radical subjectivity where distinct fragments of soul, previously incorporated into the identitarian form of the committed self, break  free under the weight of accumulated contradiction. Like the Graffito of Esmet-Akhom, the reservationist fragment expresses the decomposition of its parent form at the point of dispersal. Reservation is the counting of costs incurred by the self's committing to inappropriate or premature projects. The object committed to, around which the unity of the radical subject coheres, is always in error - its only function, drawing the subject down into the labyrinth of false moves. The post-ultraleft version of communism is nothing but the accumulation of such labyrinthine diversions where the milieu is induced through its commitment to its object to insert its representations into that space vacated by the workers' movement. Commitment is itself the main proof for the object's polarisation of error. Nothing true requires subjective commitment or belief to survive. Occasionally, that which is committed to proves itself the good error, but more commonly the object is a travesty of its idealisation. The internal conflict around what cause is motivating what action is the determining factor of self-activity which always appears as an epiphenomenon of its moment just as its reservations appear as if at a further remove. Alternatively, the source of reservation may be discovered as being situated at a more fundamental level. The talking cricket eternally submits its minority report from a position seemingly separated from the decisive action which itself is only undertaken on the basis of internalised exigency and hasty rationalisation. Reservation is expressed privately by the self as knowledge that the practice it has involved itself in is either morally wrong or inoperable. And yet, it is the privacy of the expressed reservation, the admittance that there can be no involvement of reservation with political self-activity, which indicates the sense of incommensurability and inextricability - the fateful intuition that there is no politics but realpolitikIf the tension between what justifies the measures taken and what condemns them is the true extent of subjectivity, the subject's defining characteristic in revolt is its desire to sever all connections with its own reservations and thereby free itself to act, in truncated form, autonomously. The goal of revolutionary self-activity is the mobilisation of the individual's divergent cares within a unified form - all of the self is wholly committed or it is not committed at all. The radical subject recruits itself to the cause of generalising the conditions for its own reproduction. It takes its intuitive praxis as the model for the revolutionising of its conditions.  It finds its identity affirmed in its struggle with external conditions. As a seeming product of autonomous self-activity, the radical subject complies with its own directive to suppress its own incoherence. In a mobilised state, traitor fragments of the self (whatever is incompatible with the identity of self-activity) are projected as characteristics of enemies and competitors. The good revolutionary is merciless to his other self, to the Strelnikov-like overdetermination of his actions. The good revolutionary scorns whoever is not a member of the party - those who remain, despite a sufficiency of incitement, reserved. It is probable that the pocket of reservation, where resides the recognition of lies, losses and cosmic irrelevance of mobilisation, was never actually mobilised, no totalisation ever completes itself. It is probable that the unsubsumed reservation of character, the better part of human nature, is simply filtered out within imperative-saturated contexts, silenced, forgotten, misdirected, only to reemerge in a state of subtle contradiction when revolutionary events are absorbed into the apparatus of world production. The mobilised self exists in a state of immediate relation with its environmental triggers, whilst the mode of reservation draws in exterior and non-present materials from what has already passed. Even if it were to be achieved, the idealist category of praxis would still remain a momentary and passing state. It recedes only to be recalled later and invoked as a measure of that which may not appear again - the revolutionaries are not now what the revolutionaries were then. The production of ideal unities through efforts towards willed self-coherence also produces the conditions for its own fragmentation. The work of committed unity, itself a hollow and compensatory product of separation, disperses into the world yet further shell-like fragments - the brave faced defence of insupportable propositions. In spite of itself, commitment leaks - hypocrisy may only appear where morality has first set the scene. There is always a something else not articulated by the subject's discourse, something of itself which its work of externalisation is structured to deny. Labour camps, prisons, curfews, expulsions, executions - these are the subject's apparatuses of liberation. Where all is in the process of realisation, something has remained unrealisable. The identitarian subject suppresses its own incompatibilities with its project and internalises the ideal image of unity in its self as labour process. The product of the radical subject, of self-activity, cannot and will not belong to it - there is no subject but the representation of the subject and its revolt a mere unwitting caricature of non-compliance. The non-unity, the bad faith, the fragmentation of the identitarian product results precisely from the project of conceiving unity, authenticity, completion within the subject formation's works. Just as the committed self fragments into pathological traits each vying to identify itself with the totality, so the group form born out of common purpose creates unprecedented and unanticipated schisms, heresies, factions, vendettas. Just as the individual expresses reservation in private upon what is committed to public, so entire communities exist in a state of reservation to the political domain. The incompatible, if not opposed, political trajectories of the identitarian self and its consequent reservations are expressed through equally incompatible, if not opposed, forms of violence. The conventional and expansionist form of political violence is directed towards realising the identity of the universal with the particular, its objective is to mobilise the entire territory and thus produce a conformity of objects to the law.  The violence of reservation does not register as violence at all and is only identified negatively from the decomposing outline of once mobilised forces, now isolated and abandoned at the point of committed subject's furthest reach. Neither is the reservation an accusation, although it may be deployed as such by later subject forms, it is rather the overriding preference not to become involved in those actions undertaken 'against the better part of our natures.' .
 
Reservationism is a trivial neologism but difficulty with the 'we' form of political enthusiasm has its own history: 'But what does this ‘subjectivist approach’ refer to? In short, it seems to suppose an authentic involvement with the limits of the umwelt and a recognition of categorical hierarchies in relations of force. The subject formation may only gain knowledge of the world on terms set by the world and then  reflect upon these as the constraint of its appearance in the world. It may come to know on its own terms and to a greater extent what it is and what it can achieve but that is something very difficult. Its may also, but this too is a very great thing, come to recognise through its own activity, that the fundamental condition for the appearance of the subject in the world is that it may never function as the condition for the appearance of the world.'




Sunday, 20 November 2016

Nor yet good red herring: Autumn (5.2)

Eventism 1: The dissociative experience of conjuring up 'spectaculars' and then monitoring the TV for news of the extent of your disruption of 'business as usual.' Perceiving, 'through sabbath eyes', your magus-self as if from a distance, as you break upon the rippling depths of the external world. Eventism is your inundation of the inundation - news of you in the news. You are the wave that rushes against the tide. The eventist in you is consumed by the image of uncloaking yourself as the antagonist of the image of normalcy.You are willingly transformed into the instrument of deep forces that would otherwise remain latent beneath the weight of unemployed contradictions. You stand beside 'the fiery pool reflecting you in the asphalt'. You occupy the juncture where the advertising slick of revolutionary advertising converges with the imperative substance of its che-product. The eventist internalises as trigger and motivation the image of an avenging agency bent on fracturing images. It is a convention of radical analysis that the anti-globalisation events at the beginning of the millennium lost their impetuous as a result of the WTC massacre of 2001. The eventism of anti-capitalists was eclipsed by the eventism of religious terrorists. But the counterfactual trajectory and development of the anticapitalist milieu is of less interest than the wide dispersal of the eventist modus operandi. It is now decades since the PIRA's only noteworthy statement: 'Today we were unlucky, but remember, we only have to be lucky once; you will have to be lucky always.' From the position of the pathologised subject-formation, the image of asymmetricality is settled by an event-like blow. But the agency of any imagined strike-back must first sever itself from the relational environment of which it is both product and producer. The eventist strikes outwards but the impetuous and direction of the blow is always already inside. He contributes, unpaid, the terms of new contradictions to existing conditions and thereby expands the terrain of social reproduction. The breaking off, separating out, and autonomy of subject formations is the mechanism by which abstract relations are realised within communities that subsume themselves into markets for innovatory, compensatory, and affirmational products. Spectacularised negativity replicates the commodity version of festival economics which itself functioned as a regulatory mechanism within cyclical social systems by burning off the historical complexity of relations and returning them back to a point zero . Surplus social product in the form of private wealth as expropriated by 'overmighty subjects' is destined always to create instability within centralised state-form relations. The state must respond ideologically to the autonomy of its bastards wherever it does not have the military or legal capacity to expropriate them. It seeks to induce obligations within its oligarchs and lords into cultural mechanisms of expenditure. The lavish courts of kings are but a trumpian swamp into which the aristocracy are invited to dump their riches. The regulatory function of the neo-medieval court is replicated in state sanctioned popular festivals which absorb free time and loose energy into the production of a ritualised disorder that returns the world to its starting point. Commodity rituals are templated onto the psychological mechanism of individualised consumption and thereby enclose it: working; coveting; fantasising; saving; buying; delighting; using; cherishing; neglecting; abandoning. Festival economics follow a similar rise and fall trajectory by employing surplus labour time within a cyclical calendar: the long build up to the festival binds discontent, tensions, work, popular gatherings, common purpose, anticipation, excitement, skepticism and channels it to the petite mort of a singularised moment of expenditure; the event itself is short and rapidly passes through its stages, explosive, spectacular, transgressive, memorable, traumatising, exhausting; the event's medium length tail is characterised by melancholy, disenchantment, loss, withdrawal, hangover and the soon-to-be forgotten resolution not to get caught up in it all again. The wide tendency of social phenomena to reproduce themselves as 'festivals' and manufacture neo-seasonality by introjecting their own advertising campaigns has systemic significance. The function and purpose of festivalisation is the discharge of that energy which a commodity happens to have captured into mystifying the slow centralising grind of state monopoly capitalism. Football tournaments, pop music festivals, Christmas, democratic elections, telethons, protest movements, terrorist campaigns all utilise the same hoarding/voiding process of the enthusiasm life-cycle.


Eventism 2: The subject's increased metabolic output triggered in response to the violent intimacy of remote events. The work of the real is taken up by individuals, as in trophallaxis, as they absorb into, and dissipate through, their networks, the impacts and shocks of external events. The work of ideological metabolisation involves the channelling of exceptional impacts, directing flows of energy, from the ramparts of the security state towards the self-mobilisation of individuals. Every individual becomes his own crumple zone. Public opinion chews on prefabricated slabs of ideology, not to simply adhere or sign up or conform to the state's official line, but to autonomously finish the manufacture of all possible responses, adding value to what may be said, and thus facilitating the complex containment of every possible idea within the processive environment. Thus, the variants of 'Je Suis Charlie', 'Not in my name' and similar parcels of signification are circulated and worked upon at a vast scale (at its height, the Charlie hashtag was circulating at 6,000 tweets a minute) only to become the finished work of de-fanged ideology. The hooked up democratic masses are the state's lymphatic system of affect and are qualitatively distinct from totalitarian displays of emotional transportation before the Great Leader. Their homeostatic digestion of events, as they are autonomously processed through social media, whilst adding facets of response and reaction, is employed systemically as a means of lessening the blow of traumas and maintaining the upper and lower viability thresholds for the host environment. The masses of social media users function for the state as a Greek chorus, accumulating the necessary quantity of that very chattering, digesting, and regulating of tragedy and crisis (so many checks, tweets, updates, likes), that processing of shock's absorption, which in each of its instances otherwise seems so futile and meaningless. At the individual level, 'who cares what your opinion is on the new president?' becomes at the totalising level the decompositional process integral to sustaining the environment in steady state. Eventism is the work, the metabolisation, the autopoiesis, the thought, of the outline.

Note: the concept of eventism has a wider currency but for us it has been formational rather than inhibitive. One example of its use: 'Like the knapper, they strike flint from flint; they derive affirmations, and not genuine inferences, from social events. It is their assertion that a particular set of struggles, a set of perhaps related, perhaps unrelated events, or both related and unrelated, which Endnotes themselves have collected together (erasing the marks of the process of skewed selection), are indicative of a particular alteration in a general set of social relations. This is a fundamentally false method, as the named events are not set against a background, or control group, of all that did not occur, that is against all that has not fallen into line with Endnotes initial hypothesis.' http://thetheologicalturn.blogspot.co.uk/2011/12/in-violent-hour-on-thirst-for.html

Wednesday, 16 November 2016

Nor yet good red herring: Autumn (5.1)

Solutionism: The fly-maddened urge to express as expostulation the self-evident and once-and-for all settling of an otherwise intractable 'issue of the day'. Solutionism expresses conditions where affliction and cure, appearing in dyadic form, function simultaneously as each other's competitor and co-dependent. The solution's struggle with its designated problem is structured ambivalently upon the persistence of the antagonist as sole income source. In the perfected form of the quagmire, solutionist remedies must appear within the register of kneejerk responses, cutting to the heart of the matter, wherein naturalised state-form capacity for executive action is set gladiatorially against representations of lesser but noisy environmental irritants (banished Erinyes-like products flitting about the abandoned junk left by previous state-form interventions). The solution proceeds from its assumption of an identity between symptom and cause, wherein crime is demonstratively caused by criminals, and then advances rapidly towards abrupt interventions: proscribing, denying, blocking, disrupting, severing, bombing, banning, demolishing, expelling, suppressing, preventing, unpicking, draining, clearing, sterilising, cleansing, separating, concentrating, enclosing, imprisoning. The origin of the solutionist compulsion is state-specific and authentically ideological but is sufficiently homologous to the calling down of divine retribution for its magical dimension to be considered as something of a recapitulation. Solutionist gambits are framed punitively, every solution non-identical to itself but mapping exactly onto the outline of its problem - the solution within solutionism is not identical with itself as a solution but uncloaks itself as a punishment, a smiting, of difficulty. As Horace might have observed, under conditions where the deus ex machina is never not invoked, the proliferation of miraculous exits only serves to develop a final, and strictly comic, stage of containment. Solutionism in practice deploys pre-strategic interventions, formally driven declarations of unconditioned principle bellowed into the void for want of anything else to announce, and seeming, all too implausibly, to 'meet the issue head-on' - a president of the USA is elected wholly on the basis of promising to build an impossible wall. Orchestrated to appear as the only option on the table, the solutionist solution is less a response to an identified difficulty than to the appearance of the difficulty within the public domain. Where facts tell and stories sell, every political intervention is designed as a mic drop, the means for making a quick exit at the moment of creating a stir. The pornographic desire for politics to function as the domain of  implausible lies renders every official and manager as inadequate to the role of mountebank. Discourse fails if it is attributable to those already employed as 'insiders'. Only mavericks of the para-establishment, as if coming in from the cold, may now get away with the outrageous bluffs that the spectacle requires for the task of papering across the abyss. Only the untrustworthy shall be judged trustworthy, only the incompetent are judged competent. We are now thoroughly instructed in how the terms of reversal shall be disclosed through the reversal of terms. Even if it is presented as a revolutionary cure-all, no solution is intended to survive to the stage of implementation.  The solutionist strategy is a demonstration of the ironic representation of competence, the mouthpiece represents the will to be 'all over this' in a 'competitive environment' comprised of nothing but those conventionally labelled difficulties that are all exclusively the 'very' highest priority. When policy announcements do survive into policy implementation, the solution is situated as a pole of orientation around which newly delineated and unintended tensions  crystallise only to almost immediately deliquesce back into inextricability - the true purpose of generating controversy through 'strong' narratives is the misdirection, and ultimately the exhaustion, of rivals. Curiously, solutionism, the mobilisation of populations around a pseudo-utopian content, mimics extremist tropes where 'radicalisation' is also hypostasised as a bad exit.  Down the line, some time after its triumphant policy roll out, any solutionist policy still attached to its financialisation abandons its utopian dimension and develops autonomously as a second order, target driven, institution for maintenance and management of the new iterations, new territories, new convolutions in otherwise eternalised relations of force: wars on drugs, wars on people-trafficking, wars on terror, wars of zero tolerance. Solutionism is cut-the-crap radicalism in a context of terminal moderatisation and failing economic negentropy. Even 'no magic bullet' and 'no easy answer' becomes a magic bullet and easy answer for defending the reified path along which 'problems' must be approached publicly. Solutionism, as with every fundamentalist resurgence, is a last flaring of the idea of agency before systemic relinquishment at the runaway of the community of capital. The measure to which subject formations have bound themselves into solutionist approaches, immediately answering symptoms with seeming elixirs (anti-fascism; anti-racism; anti-war; anti-capitalism) is the measure to which they have also internalised the managerialist logics, if not also the capacity, of state power.
The designation 'solutionism' is attributed to Evgeny Morozov in 2013 but the text here generalises the concept from the cut and paste piece 'Councilism, communism and communist critique' written as forum posts either on the anti-politics or glow worm discussion boards around 2008 and made into a pamphlet at about the same time. A re-written version of the text was posted here in 2012. The concept is weak but of mild interest in circumstances of political topsy-turvy.

Friday, 21 October 2016

Nor yet good red herring: Autumn (4)

You are here: subjective awareness is a lightening rod for attracting the violence discharged by abstracting process.

Where you should be: abstract forms become the lightening rod for the violence that must be shed from subject relations. 

Sunday, 9 October 2016

Nor yet good red herring: Autumn (3)

Where automated algorithms have supplanted 'fat finger' as the key component in subject formation, the subject cedes its god given pole. 

The sole purpose of the automatic subject is to induce within its human rival a permanent state of deferral of its judgment upon the life-world. 

Wednesday, 28 September 2016

Nor yet good red herring: Autumn (2)

Navigator. Historical materialism refers to the process by which the progressive accumulation of productive forces transforms the content of world social relations. But accepting this is not to also allow that even the general characteristics of what follows a transformative event are predictable. Given sufficient information, we are able to broadly anticipate potential occurrences within closed systems as they metabolise perturbations (a hunter will know that a particular manoeuvre will separate weaker members from the main body of a herd) but no quantity of information is sufficient to predict the impact on a life-world following the extinction of one of its component species. Similarly, Marx's work on political economy may accurately describe certain processes within capitalism and how it will metabolise its internal crises but it has nothing, literally nothing to say on communism as a potential outcome of the transformation in human social relations post-capitalism. Whilst the reproduction of commodity society is dependent on its perpetual expansion, and its trajectory is both predictable and comprehensible from within the system as being always 'more of the same', the qualitative transformation of social relations between different social orders (say between feudalism and capitalism, or even within sequences after ruptures such as 'The Arab Spring') cannot be predicted by those living through it. For this reason, the passage of social relations to what is broadly understood as communism is not an object available to be anticipated either in terms of a quantitative to qualitative shift, or even as an intentional (prefigurative) self-adaptation to 'material conditions'. The ideological basis of historical materialism, its positivist stageism, by which an identity between social relations and history is first asserted and where the tumult of its forms is then retroactively represented as a sequence of closed systems, is both facile and inaccurate. Historical materialism becomes an ideology the moment it departs from the descriptive model of unintended consequences, wherein material transformations are observed to impact on social activity. By substituting for the flux of world forces a narrative of objective directionality and 'development' HM retroactively creates a positivist paradigm for its own predictions. The theory of historical materialism remains plausible where a system (say, Feudalism) is observed to apply 'learnt' responses in order to conserve a number of its internal instituted components and thus improve their operational efficiency. But its narrative exceeds the description of intra-systemic development wherever it goes on to explain inter-systemic, or super-systemic, continuity. The ideology of historical materialism is itself under-historicised, constructed as a distant reflection of the positive sciences. Its basic error is located in the misapplication of the description of intra-system 'learning' (the autopoeitic self-reproduction of institutionalised relations) to the totality of all human systems. At this point, HM not only asserts that systems become more internally complex as they seek to govern themselves but that across history a system of systems is operating through the selection and development of the species' conserved historical organs (primitives fall by the wayside as they are superseded by moderns). The Victorian prejudices active within these assumptions have been exposed by, for example, the ethnographies of those following Clastres where it has been discovered that the relative complexities of technological and social relations operate inversely upon each other. And the overarching narrative of material determination is itself also simplifying and selective, Gould writes of this mindset, 'Thus if you wish to understand patterns of long historical sequences, pray for randomness [...] nothing works so powerfully against resolution as conventional forms of determinism.'  Gould discovered that 'maximal long term order' is a product of randomness, of flux, and not of developing forces. Historical materialism instrumentalises the ideal of a world historical spirit guiding objective developments from simple forms to complexity, where 'complexity' functions as the higher value, as its means of verification of itself as paradigmatic theory and by implication of the political positions that are sustained by the theory. Then, the historicist ideology is pathologically dependent upon its demonstrating the external necessity of a sequence of developmental stages which function successively as the 'conditions' for what follows. The argument for complexity as the higher value form is familiar enough to Marxists and is a feature common to both its accelerationist and communising iterations. There is an active and explicit assumption within historical materialism that communism (the 'highest' form of social relations) must be situated at the end of the historical sequence which Debord describes as 'unified irreversible time' and Nick Land terms the degenerative ratchet effect. The material conditions for communism, as Marxists understand them, is the progressive defeat of 'necessity' (by which they mean systemic vulnerability) which is understood as a complex of: the reduction of work activity; the defeat of pathology; the commensurability of globalised planning with surplus product; the socialisation of productive relations. But the accumulated securities and assurances are neither securities nor assurances, they are not the conditions for communism but the conserved organs of historical reproduction. The conservation of existing structures is bound to reproduce the same conditions and the same social relations - stability and not change is the most likely outcome of historical materialist forces. But even so, there are no guarantees of invulnerability, and no true overcoming of the realm of necessity. Threats to the species, and the privations of existence, will continue to beset society (apparent improvements in the situation of oppressed populations indicate only what Foucault observed of power, that its relations are 'productive' more than they are prohibitive). The specific character of threats to the species change depending on historical conditions, but the potential annihilation of the species remains a constant, if also random, outcome which cannot be designed out. The underlying logical premises of 'material conditions' theory is reliant on the easily contested assumption of objective sequentiality - not only has the human species reached the present moment, thus proving the greater success of past societal forms at a species level and thus contradicting the developmentalist narrative, but because the extinction event is not situated in the past it must therefore be located in the future, indicating an increased potential sub-optimal resilience both at the particular historical level of over-adaptation to a unitary form of technological determinism and as phylogenetic inevitability (for this reason, the concepts of survival and necessity as these appear within the productivist discourse are always specious). Nevertheless, both communisers and accelerationists extrapolate from their adherence to the degenerative ratchet model of change and imagine communism as belonging within the historical continuum. As a consequence, they are obliged to make arguments for capitalism as a progressive force which simultaneously impedes their capacity for critique of existing relations. For historicists, communism's appearance at the end of the historical sequence is nothing but the integration of potentials developed within the capitalist environment but hitherto constrained from realisation by the value form. It is a theory which coheres only within its self-presentation - from the outside it is revealed as a self-confirming ideology. The launch pad for communism does not, and cannot appear within other relations because, as with all social systems, the relations are the conditioning constraints of the relations. There must be communism, not capitalism, prior to communism - communism is communism's subject, just as capitalism is capitalism's subject. The conditions for emancipation are emancipation not domination. An identified set of relations must first be in place before the same set of relations may appear. That is to say, conditions is the name of relations and relations is the name of conditions. In other words, it is axiomatic that communism, as it is with all systems, is self-conditioning. There are no 'material conditions' and no 'historical conditions', there are only relational conditions and the relational conditions are the conditions of reproduction not those of origin. Communism is neither a material community nor a historical community, it is a relational community, a community community.  By implication, communism not only does not appear within the bourgeois continuum of history, it is structurally incompatible with that continuum. This is not to say that what are called 'material conditions', that set of external contextual or environmental factors in which the relations appear, do not also contextually and environmentally impact upon their internal functioning - there is always this form of air, water, fire and earth. However, the qualitative/transformative metabolisation of these impacts cannot be predicted within the ideological heuristic of 'suppression and realisation'. In the end, nothing will be expropriated, there is only adaptation and survival - nature, that is the universe, will neither be subdued nor incorporated - the majority of what is, escapes. Communism, like all other human structures, appears as a very limited magisterium within the totality of cosmic forces, a situation which renders all talk of materialism as anthropocentric petty idealism. It is reasonable to conclude that if communism does not belong within the continuum, then it will be situated in a different order of temporality - probably some form of for-itself seasonality, a veritable neo-cyclical time. We learn from studying how systems maintain their outlines that cohesion is not the product of positive feedback, or the mutual congratulations of the internal organs, but of the tension between the incompatible constituent parts. For communism, the human community, to sustain itself as a 'final' form it must first isolate its processes from history and eternalise them within itself. It must establish and maintain its processes beyond historical sequentiality (otherwise it merely formulates the conditions of what follows it, where communism becomes the exit to some still later form). Post-sequentiality is only realisable where an internalised 'war' of its buttons is also the mechanism of its stabilisation (the order that is found in evolutionary randomness) - where communism's fundamental incompatibility with itself, the host's rejection of its transplanted organs, where its contradictions, are ritualised, seasonised, internalised. In pain, and in hunger, the injured beast feeds upon its own flesh that is exposed as its wound even as it also shrinks from its own fangs . Every successful system includes external functions within its own operations, this is the definition of subjectivity - therefore as a system of relations, and as the condition for communism's successful realisation of its relations, it must convert inter-system processes into intra-system operations. For this reason, there shall be no 'full communism', no point where the process is actualised as a finally achieved state. Completion only invites the exterior, and the end.  Instead, the flux of human community will loop itself into some other and external flux - it will not de-mystify but knowingly, willingly re-mystify itself. Inhabiting a plateau of its non-development it will oscillate, fluctuate, tramping between its seasons, its humours, its elements. From the genius Chtcheglov we are already familiar with 'the quarters' of the human community but now we must begin to explore, contra marxism, 'new urbanism's' temporal equivalent, which becomes comprehensible as a 'return', or rather as a mechanism of return. In this context, 'return' indicates the closure of the system, its outline and its reproduction. Thus, communism becomes not the antagonist of capitalism but of itself. Just as all opposition to capitalism is produced and constrained by capitalist relations, reproducing the same but also perfecting its form, so communism must utilise its contradictions as the motor of its self-reproduction. Spatially, the multiplication of thresholds where borders are abolished, formalises the passage of individuals across different territories as a mechanism of communism's war against itself. And in this 'balkanisation' of thresholds lies Chtcheglov's ethnographic genius. All other theorists of the post-state form, with the exception perhaps of Benjamin, imagined international communism as an unimpeded horizon, and of universalised integration of the totalised whole, but Chtcheglov re-introduced the alleyway, the hidden courtyard, and the interior space as the locus for thresholds between different and forever fragmenting territories of subjectivity. Temporally, the seasons and the moments of the seasons shall also be set against each other, striking different orders and registers of incompatibility by which the human community achieves its various relational states. After Chtcheglov, we may now imagine a Winter communism, perhaps along the lines described by Caillois, austere and self-depleting; then the cycle, anticipated by Shelley and Turgenev, commences in the Spring agonies of reawakening, the perpetual revisiting of early and fragile forms (thaw floods, convergences, confluence, the well-met) are later succeeded by the high and fragile Summer events of what the community takes to be its perfected form, but which it is aware must also decline, passing from a ripened stage to decadence and the Autumnal exit, a punctured edifice spouting energy and corruption, like Jupiter's Io, into the cosmos.Throughout my life I have had just one plan: first to create monstrous aberrations and then, by rushing to their side the tubes and trolleys of emergency life support, to secure for them, if only momentarily, a few sweet breaths of tender existence. Carving out footholds for the absurd and unprecedented encapsulates the entirety of what I have always understood as, and what I have always meant by, that elusive, and ever undetermined, 'communism'.