Appendix I - Political Post-Anthropology 1. The topic of this seminar is political post-anthropology. Each type of political system/stage of political history operates with the normative political type of the political human. We say “a man of the Middle Ages”, “a man of Modernity”, etc., describing the specific historical and political constructs. These constructs are directly dependent on the organization and formalization of power relations in a society and relate to the axis of power, which is the essence of the Political, and with collective friend/foe identification (C. Schmitt), which is also the essence of the Political. The Political is power and political identification (ours/not ours). Each political form provides a different model of power and such identification. However many political systems, there are that many political anthropologies. Political theology (C. Schmitt) suggests that the policy reflects, and in certain cases constitutes, a standard of Political Anthropology. 2. The political human is transformed from one form of Political to another. This is sufficiently traced in the “Philosophy of politics” and “Post-philosophy”. Now we focus on which form of Political Anthropology meets Post-modernity. 3. Post-modernity is something that sets in, steps on. Steps on us. But it has not stepped yet. Therefore, the study of Postmodernity has a hilarious creative gap. Although it steps on, it may also not step on, we can (or cannot, it is not clear) wriggle out of it. So, talking about Post-modernity is interesting, exciting and at the same time risky. It is a process with an unknown end and uncertain meaning. It is still possible to affect this end and this meaning. The history (apparently) has ended, and the post-history is only “beginning” and one have to search in it for a space of struggle, to win back this space and expand it. 4. Political post-anthropology is forecasting/constructing the political human in Postmodernity. We do not just study what exists; we follow the process and try to affect it. Wishful thinking and self-fulfilled prophecy is quite legitimate and welcome here. Exploring the political postanthropology, we call it back to life. Part 2. Political post-human and Post-State 1. Absolute features of the (post-) human of Postmodernity are: - Depoliticization; - Autonomization; - Microscopization; - Sub- and transhumanization (as a special form of dehumanization); - Dividualization (fragmentation). That is, the rejection and denial of something that was Political on the previous phases becomes politics as the dominant form. The politicization meets with the depoliticization, politics of the human of Postmodernity is in the escape from the element and structure of the
Fashion and technology are changing rapidly. 3. glamour and show business exhibits that for material prosperity one does not need to earn money. i. a victim and an offender (leniency towards criminals is increasing. acts as a basic personality (A. and then the individual. It has neither vertical. and “connected” (branche) is the one who is changing along with it. This is fashion and interactive information technologies (Twitter. public and private (in the center of attention. 2. the serious and frivolous swap. He does not recognize the power relations not over or under him. in this case. social networks. 4. are the tiniest details of personal life). senators (elders) are assigned out of schools (if. post-human constitutes this Post-State being amused by its deadly hallucinatory game. in this case. including political debate. But. And for such an attack and such an advance. Why are we talking about politics when it is obviously about something directly opposite to the Political? Because such an anthropological type of Postmodernity in theory and social practice steps on. and does not accept any long narratives that go beyond his microcosm. rapidly and dynamically. There is no yesterday and tomorrow. but it is no one's and nowhere specifically addressed. identity. it is optional). is a synonym to eidos or universal).e. Gloss pages. does not know ours or not ours. blogs). introduces itself and is gradually becomes normative. The human of Postmodernity declares war on the Political: first. working is not necessary. i. Hardt). Maybe it is “desire”. It is from a random game of subindividuality and transindividuality post-human creates a model of Post-State.
. literally.e. male and female (the rapid growth of women and homosexuals in politics).Political into the new area. This “party” has a stylistic and strategic arsenal. 6. In the Post-State. Statephantom. actual work. is required. on which a body without organs is sliding right and left. institutions are mobile and ephemeral. State-mockery. which replaced the routine. “fashionable” is transferred by a slang word “branche”. Post-state is an ironic parody of State. and the victim is assigned all the blame). Apolitical singulars and divids compose a sort of a ruling party of Postmodernity. 5. become a member of the sliding glamorous network. etc. Kardiner). then against the classical subject-object economy in the name of the network dynamics of the free (creative) game of disengaged “sets” (Negri. dispositif of power and collective identification. The postpolitical human overthrows the power and the collective. For example. policies and legal principles are continuously rapidly changing. In French. based on the economy (homo economicus against homo politicus). In politics. here and now. they are the relatives of influential figures). it is State vice-versa. he must enter the relevant social set. models of counter-power tend to affirm their power and those models that deny all forms of a type as such insist on universalization of their type (type. persistently imposes itself. Or a Brazilian carnival. and it is a kind of permanentized Saturnalia. for example. nor horizontal symmetry. is like a concrete embodiment of Deleuze’s “l'espace lisse” – an image of post-economics. It is sort of a pirate republic placed in cyberspace. aiming to merge with the network. to get money one enough to be a gay (in this case. i. knowledge and ignorance (complete idiots are assigned as academics and correspondent members). not even today. is watching comic and entertainment shows). attacks. “connected”. mobile phones. Industry of fashion. His policy is expressed in the form of desires and vegetative impulses of unknown ownership and aims. In the Post-State. the Political again.e. In political postanthropology all is reversed: leisure and work (the most serious occupation. Influential one and close to seizure of power or already in power.
The political soldier is a mediastinum of the political anthropology of Modernity. it can be generalized by the figure of a “political soldier”. All the threads that connect the political arena of Postmodernity with Modernity and deeper into political history are broken at the moment of Postmodernity and have a knot. but not unique. And fundamental distinction of the political soldier is that he is ready and able to die for his political idea. Very heroically. Like any political model. 4. This is the main delicacy of Postmodernity: it carries an ironic mutation in regard to all aspects of Modernity. the political postanthropology can be accepted and may be rejected – doesn’t matter how much it would insist on its “naturalness”. Today there is no political soldiers. But in any case. The revolt of the elites and the oscillation of the intensity level of consciousness of the ruling groups are “near-zero”. but in a moment they will be pre-historic events. The political soldier in the unique conditions of corrosive waters of Postmodernity is immediately converted into a simulacrum. tragically. The first alternative is the political anthropology of previous forms.There is only now. A politician fights for an idea. Now it is Google and Twitter. An individual fights a dividual. Twitter-revolution in the Arab world or iPad presidents are clear signs of political postanthropology and phenomena of Post-State. There is only its shell. a nationalist. It tells him from an ordinary soldier and an ordinary politician. may it be mainstream. It doesn’t give any idea of what political ideology the “political soldier” follows. Post-State and Twitter-presidents – just a single trend. but to die for it he is not ready. 6. he personalizes Modernity. There may be alternatives. 2. And as such (in theory). But (!): the political postanthropology makes such a position almost impossible. This is an anthropological concept. The drama of last Humans clashing with Post-Humans in a political opposition. The political soldier may be a communist. Part 3. A soldier dies but not for the idea. 5. Political soldier and his simulacrum 1. Ending present rejects the atemporal post-historical “future”. we can only meet with his double. Part 4. Herein is a dromocratic aspect (Virilio – what was discussed at the seminars). 7. A person can choose both the structure of power and his identity. Today we don’t have a chance to meet with the political soldier. with his fake. such as word processor Lexicon or PC 286. After that knot (with all the visible continuity). and directly and openly identifies himself with a particular group (“ours”). This will be a conservative answer. In the face of the political postanthropology. stepping on and intruding. A classic example is a drug addict – political strategist. in regard to anthropology – in the first place. a fake segment is situated. Modernity in its specific political form. Alternative in political postanthropology: Pre-Human and PC
. In anthropological series of political and anthropological forms. But this concept implicitly contains a belief in the existence of political ontology: the political soldier fights for a model of power relationships. Postmodernity installs a vicious link. his simulacrum. and even a liberal. poetically and hopelessly. 3. it can fight the political postanthropology.
3. pseudo-individual and post-human vs. That is. indeed. Schmitt). Here we concern subjects of the previous seminar and the delicate theme of angelomorphosis. There is no accident that in the eschatology of most religions and traditions we are dealing with the Endkampf panoramic view. which necessarily involves angels’ participation. But it is inevitable.
. There is the anthropological fold (Deleuze) of the postmodern anthropology in this: a simulacrum meets with a simulacrum. It is not a previous anthropological link that is designed to collide with a postanthropological segment of anthropological series. This topic requires further development. but Pre-Human. 5. Postmodernity and Post-Human (Dividual) cannot be opposed to Modernity and Human (Individual). but different. Consequently. pseudo-human. which is located after the substituted element (knot). one should speak of political expression of the Radical Subject. It is not the human really meets with the post-human in the political postanthropology. Pre-Concept of the human. 2.1. There is no space and time here to develop it. it is also suffer from simulation. human. the routes of transgression may not be such as in the case of the dividual. 6. A political soldier in Postmodernity is impossible. A couple will not be like dividual vs. but like dividual vs. individual and posthuman vs. That origin that was before the human is parallel to him and will be after him. But generally we can say: an alternative to the political postanthropology is also postanthropology. but as the area of the political angelology. the opposition must be different. Human’s bounds violation. The political expression of the Radical Subject can be defined not as the area of the political theology (C. The edge of my thesis is reduced to the following affirmation: in the context of the political postanthropology. In blockbusters. This topic should be somehow integrated with the 4PT. but an entirely different figure. 4. It can only be a simulacrum.