M-L-M Mayhem!

In my previous entries in this series I worried about Puar's eclecticism.  By this chapter, however, it seems as if she is beginning to centre her theoretical approach around Agamben, particularly his concept of the "state of exception."  While I don't think this enough to allow her to escape completely from the charge of eclecticism (because I think Agamben is also somewhat eclectic), or from the charge of a very narrow idealism (Agamben's focus and over-application of a Schmitt-inspired concept has always revealed an obsession of appearance over substance, an inability to cut down to the material foundation upon which both the state of exception and homo sacer  are dependent), it does permit a greater level of coherency. Earlier I worried that Puar's concept of homonationalism, though perhaps useful for most imperialist countries, was very US-centric.  Unfortunately this chapter confirms my fears about how the theory has been conceived as nationally spe

This is the third part in my series of reflections on Jasbir K. Puar's Terrorist Assemblages .  The first part can be found here and the second here . The first chapter of Terrorist Assemblages is entitled "the sexuality of terrorism" and this immediately fills me with slight misgiving.  While I agree that, especially in light of this book's subject matter, it makes sense to examine "discourses of sexuality (and their attendant anxieties)––heterosexuality, homosexuality, queerness, metrosexuality, alternative and insurgent sexuality," I am not at all convinced that without these discourses, as Puar claims, "the twin mechanisms of normalization and banishment that distinguish the terrorist from the patriot would cease to properly behave." (37) To my mind an imperialist project accumulates particular and secondary ideologies and discursive frameworks that are always contingent upon its social-historical context––that is, contingent upon the way im

The following is part of a "Let's Read" series where I plan to blog, slowly and probably interspersed with other posts, about my reflections of Jasbir K. Puar's Terrorist Assemblages . This first of these posts, concerning the Preface and an explanation as to what this series is, can be found here .  Today I'm reflecting on the Introduction. Yes, every post in this series will most likely contain a variant of the book's cover. The fact that the Introduction is titled "homonationalism and biopolitics", combined with what Puar has already claimed about "biopolitics" in the Preface, is somewhat worrisome for a historical materialist who finds the entire category of "biopolitics" suspect.  Let's be clear: there is indeed something about the Foucauldian concept of biopolitics that is politically useful––it's even useful in the way that Agamben mobilizes it––but at the end of the day this strikes me as an avoidance of a

I've held off writing about the recent Quebec Charter controversy for a variety of reasons.  First of all, the fact that the majority of my readership is outside of Canada means, on a really asinine blog logic level, that any post about this charter would begin with slight confusion as to what I was talking about.  Secondly, the fact that I tend to blog primarily about issues that are specific to communism would mean that any analysis of the Quebec's Charter might feel like a generally social democratic post, and social democrat bloggers would probably do a better job in this area.  Thirdly, the fact that most progressives who read this blog would understand the racist undercurrents of the charter means that I would be preaching to the converted (joke intended).  And finally, the fact that the PCR-RCP sponsored  Partisan  has already attacked the charter ( here and here ) from a communist perspective would render much of what I planned to say redundant. And yet, despite the

[I'm taking a brief break from the Combat Liberalism series to post this, but rest assured!  I shall return to the third and final part of that series in the next post.] In his essay Racism and Culture , Frantz Fanon remarked that, in societies where racism has become incorporated into the social relations of the mode of production, there is a tendency amongst the liberal members of these societies to regard racism "as a mental quirk, as a psychological flaw."  Rather than grasp the fact that unapologetic racists in a culture where racist relations have become institutionalized––implicit norms rather than explicit attributes that we would historically understand as virulently racist––are simply acting according to structural logic, we would rather dismiss them as aberrant.  "If in England, in Belgium, or in France, despite the democratic principles affirmed by these respective nations," Fanon wrote, "there are still racists, it is these racists who, in op

Actually, there is a lot I dislike about Slavoj Zizek.  I have never seen him as either a rigorous/useful marxist academic, let alone a principled and committed communist.  As much as I respect the fact that he is partially responsible for the repopularization of Lenin in academia, his "hipster marxism" (as one of my good comrades calls it) has generally offended my political sensibilities.  His lack of respect for actual historical materialism (such as his willingness to promote a rightist analysis of Mao in his introduction to the most recent Verso release of Mao's   writing) demonstrates a serious failing for a supposed marxist scholar––without investigation there should be no right to speak.  And his seeming disdain for political economy (as judged by a somewhat recent interaction he had with Samir Amin) demonstrates a strange refusal to engage in a concrete analysis of a concrete situation.  Generally I find, when it comes to any of Zizek's writing, that there i