Monasticism and neoliberalism: On Agambens The Highest Poverty | A...

http://itself.wordpress.com/2012/07/12/monasticism-and-neoliberalism-o...

Thursday,July12,2012AdamKotsko IvebeenslowlyworkingmywaythroughFoucaultsBirthofBiopoliticsthissummer,withakindof dawninghorroratthesheernihilismofneoliberalism.Theendresultofthisrulingideologyisthatwe shouldallbeourownindividualenterprises,inconstantcompetitionwithothers,makingcontinual economicchoicesandwithnogoaloutsidethecompetitionitself.Evenwhenweretire,wearenot atrest,becausethenaboveallweneedtobesavvymanagersofourvariousinvestments. Allthisinthenameoffreedom!Ithinkweneedtobecarefulherenottojumptooquicklytotheidea thatfreedomisjustacoverforamoresinisteragendaasfarasIcantell,theneoliberaltheorists sincerelybelievethatthemarketistheplacewherethemostauthenticformoffreedomisinstantiated, wherepeoplecometogethertoformfreelychosenarrangements(appealingtoliberals)andshowtheir trueaptitudeandworth(appealingtoconservatives),all(atleastideally)withoutthemediationofthe coerciveforceofthestateoranyinheritedtradition.Ifthemarketiswherefreedomhappens,thenwhat elsecanyoudobutmakealloflifeamarket?Yettheresult,ofcourse,isntreallyfreedom,buttheworst totalitarianismofallanonstop,exhaustingagonwithnogoalandnoprospectofrest(insofarasrest isalwaysonlygearedtowardmoreeectivestruggle). IhadasimilarsensationofexhaustiononreadingthersthalfofAgambensTheHighestPoverty,where hefocusesonthedevelopmentofmonasticsrulesandtheirambitiontoturnalloflifeintoanonstop liturgy.Forexample,manyrulesandmonasticcommentatorstakeveryliterallytheApostlesinjunction topraycontinuallyasidefromtheLiturgyofHours,themonkistobecontinuallymeditatingon memorizedpassagesfromscripture,evenwhenengagedinpurelyutilitarianwork.Everyaspectofthe monkscomportmentandclothing(i.e.,hishabitineverysense)issaturatedwithmeaning.Especially whentranslatingthesepassages,whichrequiredmetothinkabouteveryaspectofthisregimeinvivid detail,Ithoughtitsoundedhorribleandexhausting. Thistotalitarianregime,asAgambencallsitmorethanonce,wasironicallyenoughtheendresultofan attempttoeefromthepolisandgiventhatthisisChristianityweretalkingaboutfromitslaw. Thisisironic,sincethemonasticruleseemstobeanevenmoreoppressivelawthanthelawitself:where normallawspeciestheboundariesofacceptedbehaviorandleaveseverythingelseindierent,the monasticruleisanattempttopositivelydetermineoneseveryaction. Yettherewasalwaysaneorttodistancetherulefromthelaw.Forinstance,themonasticvowcannot beconstruedasalegallybindingvowrequiringthemonktofolloweverysinglepointintheruleas thetheorydevelops,itisgraduallydeterminedthatwhatisatstakeisnotsomuchtheruleasthelifethat itregulates.Thereissomethingaboutvowingtoliveaccordingtotherulethatisdierentfromvowingthe rule.

Whatisatstakehere,forAgamben,ismorethanapracticalcompromiseinlightofthefactthatfullling therulestotalitariandemandsisbasicallyimpossibleonthepracticallevel.Itisawayofrearmingthe factthattheruleisreadoofthemonasticliferatherthandeterminingthatlife.Wherethiscomesout mostclearlyisintheformofmonasticismthatAgambenviewsasmostradicalandpromising: Franciscanism.(Indeed,itwouldprobablynotbesayingtoomuchtoclaimthatFrancisisamessianic 1 of 3 gureforAgamben.) 12/16/2013 10:34 PM

Monasticism and neoliberalism: On Agambens The Highest Poverty | A...

http://itself.wordpress.com/2012/07/12/monasticism-and-neoliberalism-o...

y g p g Franciscanism.(Indeed,itwouldprobablynotbesayingtoomuchtoclaimthatFrancisisamessianic gureforAgamben.) Francisintroducesaradicalsimplicityintotheconceptualizationofmonasticism.Whatthemonkvows istoliveaccordingtotheGospel,andtheruleitselfismerelysupplemental(indeed,somepopes wouldntrecognizeitasaruleproperlysocalled).Moreimportantly,theemphasisonpovertyis conceivedexplicitlyasarenunciationofoneofthemostimportantpointsofthelaw,therightof ownership.Franciscanpovertydoesnotmeanthatthemonkmustmakeeveryeorttoavoidowning anyparticularthing,butratherthatthemonkcompletelyabdicatesanyrighttoclaimownership.They dontjustlackallpossessions,theylacktheveryabilitytopossess. Iamstillthinkingthisthrough,butthecontrastbetweennormalmonasticismandFranciscanism seemstobeimplicitlycastintermsofthestructuresetoutinTheKingdomandtheGlory:normalmonks attempttoescapefromtheworldseconomybymeansofglory(i.e.,thecontinualworship representedbyturningoneswholelifeintoaliturgy),whereasFranciscansrefusetheeconomy altogether.Inasense,then,Franciscansrepresentareallifeinstantiationofcommunism(evenmore thanmonksingeneral,whomightbeviewedasanalogoustostatesocialism). Thebookendsonanegativenote,though,asAgambentracesthewaysinwhichFranciscanpovertywas ultimatelydomesticatedbythepapacy.ForAgamben,thisresults,inthelastanalysis,froman inadequateconceptoflaw.TheFranciscantheoristsadvancedtheideathattheBrotherswereableto usethingsinapurelydefactoway,muchasanimalsdo,withoutclaiminganyexplicitlegalrightto usethem.(IfoundthisargumentexcitinginlightofmyreadingofAugustinesDeTrinitateintermsof use.)Yetthisattempttondaspacethatisoutsidethelawprovedtobetotallyunstableas Agambenpointsout,itisintheverystructureoflawtoclaimwhatisoutsideitself.(Indeed,Iwouldargue thatforAgamben,thatisintheverynatureofWesterncultureasawhole;seemyessayinAnthonys editedvolume.)Byputtingtheirpracticeforwardasakindofprelegalzone,theFranciscansopened themselvesupasnewterritoryforprimitiveaccumulation. NowIdoubtthatanyonewasexpectingthatAgambensfourthvolumeintheHomoSacerseries wouldbeginwithadetailedanalysisanditisincrediblydetailed,probablythemosteruditething AgambenhasyetputoutofhowFranciscanismwentwrong.ButIthinkhisdiagnosishaspositive implications,becausethegeneralsenseofAgambensargumentisthattheFranciscanswentwrongby tryingtowalloazoneinwhichtheycouldrenouncepropertywhileleavingtherestoftheworldasit is.Thelawisperfectlycapableofappropriatinganydeterminatelocalterritory,justastheChurch provedmorethancapableofappropriatingthedesertintowhichthemonksed.Whattheyneededto dowastogoontheoensiveagainstpropertyassuch,toattacktheverylegitimacyoflegitimacyitself. Thatis,theycouldonlyeectivelyghtagainstthetotalitarianpoweroflawiftheywerewillingtoght onthesamelevelofuniversality. Whatdoesthismeanforthestruggleagainstthetotalitarianismofthemarketrepresentedby neoliberalism?Onepotentialtakeawayisthatthewelfarestatelooksmuchmorequestionableasa strategy(asintheworkofHardtandNegri).Insofarasthewelfarestatetriedtosetupcertainzones outsidethedemandsofmarketcompetition,itultimatelypresenteditselfasaneweldforprimitive accumulation,justliketheFranciscanszoneofdefactouse. Intheownershipsociety,nothingcantrulyescapethelawofpropertyitisalwaysonly preowned.Privatizationcanbestavedo,perhapsevenindenitelythequestioniswhatitwould lookliketodenythatanythingcouldeveractuallybeprivate.Perhapsnecessarily,Agambenleavesthat questionopenattheendofTheHighestPoverty.
2 of 3

12/16/2013 10:34 PM