textfiles/politics/SPUNK/sp001188.txt

66 lines
3.6 KiB
Plaintext
Raw Permalink Normal View History

2021-04-15 11:31:59 -07:00
COMMUNITY
Com-mu-ni-ty n. 1. a body of people having the same interests. 2.
IEcol.] an aggregate of organisms with mutual relations. 3. a concept
invoked to establish solidarity, often when the basis for such
affiliation is absent or when the actual content of that affiliation
contradicts the stated political goal of solidarity.
Community, by which one obviously means more than, say, neighborhood, is
a very elusive term but a continuing touchstone of radical value. In
fact, all manner of folks resort to it, from the pacifist encampments
near nuclear test sites to "serve the people" leftists with their
sacrifice-plus-manipulation approach to the proto-fascist Afrikaaner
settlers. It is invoked for a variety of purposes or goals, but as a
liberatory notion is a fiction. Everyone feels the absence of community,
because human fellowship must struggle, to even remotely exist, against
what "community" is in reality. The nuclear family, religion,
nationality, work, school, property, the specialism of roles-some
combination of these seems to comprise every surviving community since
the imposition of civilization. So we are dealing with an illusion, and
to argue that some qualitatively higher form of community is allowed to
exist within civilization is to affirm civilization. Positivity furthers
the lie that the authentically social can co-exist with domestication.
In this regard, what really accompanies domination, as community, is at
best middle-class, respect-the-system protest.
Fifth Estate, for example, undercuts its (partial) critique of
civilization by upholding community and ties to it in its every other
sentence. At times it seems that the occasional Hollywood film (e.g.
Emerald Forest, Dances With Wolves) outdoes our anti-authoritarian
journals in showing that a liberatory solidarity springs from
non-civilization and its combat with the "community" of industrial
modernity.
Jacques Camatte discussed capital's movement from the stage of formal
domination to that of real domination. But there appear to be
significant grounds from which to project the continuing erosion of
support for existing community and a desire for genuine solidarity and
freedom. As Fredy Perlman put it, near the end of his exceptional
Against His-Story, Against Leviathan!: "What is known is that Leviathan,
the great artifice, single and world-embracing for the first time, in
His-story, is decomposing...lt is a good time for people to let go of
its sanity, its masks and armors, and go mad, for they are already being
ejected from its pretty polis."
The refusal of community might be termed a self defeating isolation but
it appears preferable, healthier, than declaring our allegiance to the
daily fabric of an increasingly self-destructive world. Magnified
alienation is not a condition chosen by those who insist on the truly
social over the falsely communal. It is present in any case, due to the
content of community. Opposition to the estrangement of civilized,
pacified existence should at least amount to naming that estrangement
instead of celebrating it by calling it community.
The defense of community is a conservative gesture that faces away from
the radical break required. Why defend that to which we are held
hostage?
In truth, there is no community. And only by abandoning what is passed
off in its name can we move on to redeem a vision of communion and
vibrant connectedness in a world that bears no resemblance to this one.
Only a negative "community," based explicitly on contempt for the
categories of existent community, is legitimate and appropriate to our
aims.