the aff brands themselves as zaps, and that branding makes zaps intelligible to power

revs aren't inevitable if the rev was inevitable you wouldn't need the aff either proves they're non-inherent or they don't need you to do your ballot shit only a risk that first world solidarity is shitty because of the el kilombo galactico evidence also, even if rev is inevitable, it's invisible and anonymous they render it visible which makes rev failure inevitable

Jean Baudrillard 1976 (Symbolic Exchange and Death pg. 36) We will not destroy the system by a direct, dialectical revolution of the economic or political infrastructure. Everything produced by contradiction, by the relation of forces, or by energy in general, will only feed back into the mechanism and give it impetus, following a circular distortion similar to a Moebius strip. the only solution is to turn the principle of its power back against the system itself: the impossibility of responding or retorting. To defy the system with a gift to which it cannot respond save by its own collapse and death. Nothing, not even the system, can avoid the symbolic obligation, and it is in this trap that the only chance of a catastrophe for capital remains. The system turns on itself, as a scorpion does when encircled by the challenge of death. For it is summoned to answer, if it is not to lose face, to what can only be death. The system must itself commit suicide in response to the multiplied challenge of death and suicide. So hostages are taken. On the symbolic or sacrificial plane, from which every moral consideration of the innocence of the victims is ruled out, the hostage is the substitute, the alter-ego of the 'terrorist' - the hostage's death for the terrorist's. Hostage and terrorist may thereafter become confused in the same sacrificial act. The stakes are death without any possibility of negotiation, and therefore return to an inevitable overbidding. Of course, they attempt to deploy the whole system of negotiation, and the terrorists themselves often enter into this exchange scenario in terms of this calculated equivalence (the hostages' lives against some ransom or liberation, or indeed for the prestige of the operation alone). From this perspective, taking hostages is not original at all, it simply creates an unforeseen and selective relation of forces which can be resolved either by traditional violence or by negotiation. It is a tactical action. There is something else at stake, however, as we clearly saw at The Hague over the course of ten days of incredible negotiations: no-one knew what could be negotiated, nor could they agree on terms, nor on the possible equivalences of the exchange. Or again, even if they were formulated, the 'terrorists' demands' amounted to a radical denial of negotiation. It is precisely here that everything is played out, for with the impossibility of all negotiation we pass into the symbolic order, which is ignorant of this type of calculation and exchange (the system itself lives solely by negotiation, even if this takes place in the equilibrium of violence). The system can only respond to this irruption of the symbolic (the most serious thing to befall it, basically the only 'revolution') by the real, physical death of the terrorists. This, however, is its defea.t, since their death was their stake, so that by bringing about their deaths the system has merely impaled itself on its own violence without really responding to the challenge that was thrown to it. Because the system can easily compute every death, even war atrocities, but cannot

For this death draws it onto a plane where there is no longer any response possible for it (hence the sudden structural liquefaction of power in '68. Actually. of spiritual power. or used to know it. can do nothing against this lowly but symbolic death. like the absolute mortification of the ascetic. The current depression could be the beginning of a massive abandonment of competition. if we think of the geopolitical struggle of the first decade – the struggle between Western domination and jihadist Islam – we recognize that the most powerful weapon has been suicide. to what can only be death . the impressario of a system of equivalences between God and men. the irreversible gift which. and outrageously too much during the last thirty years. And this is the source of our profound boredom. Nothing corresponds to death except death. That is why the ascetic is always close to heresy and sacrilege. defeat itself to lift the challenge. We have been working too much during the last three or four centuries. not even the system. all the institutions and mobilised violence of power whether individually or massed together. The routes of symbolic effectiveness are those of an alternative politics. since this death has no calculable equivalent. if it is not to lose face. The Church will have had this role for all time. are there so that no-one ever has the opportunity to issue this symbolic challenge. Thus the dying ascetic challenges God ever to give him the equivalent of this death. The same situation exists in our relation to the system of power All these institutions. The system must itself commit suicide t exhaustion could also become the beginning of a slow “wu wei” civilization. and adopt the mode of passivity . but a death which wears it out. and it is in this trap that the only chance of a catastrophe for capital remains. The challenge has the efficiency of a murderer Every society apart from ours knows that. avoiding this type of catastrophic confrontation (catastrophic primarily for the Church) and substituting a rule-bound exchange of penitences and gratifications. The police and the army. The mother of all the bubbles. and of dependence on work. Ours is in the process of rediscovering it. not because it was less strong. whose function it is merely to preserve God from this symbolic face-to-face. brings about a victory over all power. can avoid the symbolic obligation. Which is precisely what happens in this case: the system itself is driven to suicide in return. however powerful its authority may be. He will then have triumphed over God. in the form of prestige. consumerist drive.compute the death-challenge or symbolic death. all these social. indeed of global hegemony But the ascetic's secret dream is to attain such an extent of mortification that even God would be unable either to take up the challenge. A movement towards a definitely threaten the ethos of relentless productivity that neoliberal politics has imposed. However infinitesimal in terms of relations of forces it might be. this challenge to the death. to protect Him from this mortal challenge where He is summoned to die. the only violence it cannot exert: its own death. political and psychological mediations. and frugal expectations of life and consumption. or to absorb the debt. and as such condemned by the Church. but because of the simple symbolic displacement operated by the students' practices). And they won. God does all he can to give him this equivalent 'a hundred times over'. based on the withdrawal. which suicide is manife-st in its disarray and defeat. to sacrifice Himself in order to take up the challenge of the mortified ascetic. This is why taking hostages and other similar acts rekindle some fascination: they are at once an exorbitant mirror for the system of its own repressive violence. and defeating the hyper-technological . and the model of a symbolic violence which is always forbidden it. but radical passivity would thousands of people have killed themselves in order to destroy American military hegemony. After the Future pg 106-108 [NN]) Nothing. the colossal apparatus of power is eliminated in this situation where (the very excess of its) derision is turned back against itself. Bifo 11 (Franco “Bifo” Berardi. For it is summoned to answer. and become God himself. Its death at this instant is a symbolic response. Radicalism could abandon the mode of activism. forcing the western world into the bunker of paranoid security . would finally deflate . as a scorpion does when encircled by the challenge of death. it opens up an inexpiable overbidding by other means than a death in exchange. The system can only die in exchange. the work bubble. 9/11 is the most impressive act of this suicidal war. The system turns on itself. economic. It is no longer necessary that the possibility of this direct symbolic confrontation ever takes place.

and in the offices of France Telecom. and suicide. we found that an old friend—the Ejército Zapatista de Liberación Nacional (Zapatista Arm of National Liberation. The exchange between life and money could be deserted. and that it was thus necessary to attempt an evaluation of Zapatismo that would in turn be adequate to the real ‘event’ of their appearance. Is it possible to divert this implosive trend from the direction of death .” From our position as an organization composed in large part by people of color in the United States. Beyond Resistance: Everything p. and in Afghanistan. where collective intelligence is only subjected to the common good. The self-organization of the general intellect could abandon the law of accumulation and growth. we viewed this focus on “solidarity” as the foreign policy equivalent of “white guilt. EZLN)—was already taking enormous strides to move toward a politics adequate to our time. when the 2009 recession destroyed one million jobs. The notion of “solidarity” that still pervades much of the Left in the U. In Italy.armies of the West both in Iraq. 1-2//shree] In our efforts to forge a new path. threatening to kill themselves. Indian farmers have killed themselves. the necessity for radical social change. A new refrain could emerge in that moment. this practice of solidarity urges us to participate in its perverse logic by accepting the narrative that power tells us about itself: that those who could make change don’t need it and that those who need change can’t make it. climbed on the roofs of the factories. In other words. while simultaneously working to reduce the solidarity recipient to a mere object (of our pity and mismatched socks). if we emphasize the creative side of withdrawal. social creativity and of life? I think that it is possible only if we start from exhaustion . and exhaustion could give way to a huge wave of withdrawal from the sphere of economic exchange. To the extent that human solidarity has a future. Against neoliberal politics. thus producing a political subject (the solidarity provider) that more closely resembles a spectator or voyeur (to the suffering others) than a participant or active agent. towards a new kind of autonomy. and start a new concatenation. Against exploitation hundreds of workers and employees have killed themselves in the French factories of Peugeot. haunted by the fear of unemployment.” quite distinct from any authentic impulse toward. Suicide has became a form of political action everywhere. has continually served an intensely conservative political agenda that dresses itself in the radical rhetoric of the latest rebellion in the “darker nations” while carefully maintaining political action at a distance from our own daily lives. despite the fresh air that the Zapatista uprising had blown into the US political scene since 1994. or recognition of. That is. Solidarity DA: Identifying with Zapatismo inspiration in the US is white guilt par excellance—it produces us as voyuers to suffering others and breeds interpassivity— we can prance around in the rhetoric of “subcomandantes” while maintaining political action at a distance from our daily lives—turns case El Kilombo Intergalactico 7 [Collective in Durham NC that interviewed Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos. the process of solidarity ensures that subjects and political action never meet. this logic and practice do not! .S. murder. and wipe out the law of economic growth. we began to feel that even the inspiration of Zapatismo had been quickly contained through its insertion into a well-worn and untenable narrative: Zapatismo was another of many faceless and indifferent “third world” movements that demanded and deserved solidarity from leftists in the “global north. many workers. The suicidal implosion has not been confined to the Islamists. in this way it serves to make change an a priori impossibility. At both ends of this relationship.

University of Victoria. The modern view of death is constructed on the model of the machine and the function. confining particular groups – the ―mad‖. For Baudrillard. Baudrillard suggests that death as we know it does not exist outside of this separation between living and dead.The masks of the Zapatistas prevent the development of a cult of personality around any particular leader in their movement and preserve their cause from marginalization and commodification by the system against which they fight— presencing of zaps is comparatively worse Pitawanakwat 2k (Brock. The definition of the „normal human‟ has been narrowed over time. Marcos explained to reporters that the rebels were masked in order to prevent any particular commandante from becoming a figurehead and therefore a target for government cooptation or corruption. protect against the cold weather. the one it uses to cover up the real Mexico. they: 1) maintain equality amongst the leadership and dispute the idea that it was led by any single rebel 2) show solidarity between the indigenous and the mestizo within the EZLN 3) constitute a unifying form of self-identification analogous to the beards of the Cuban rebels during that country‟s 1959 revolution 4) function as a symbol of Mexico‟s refusal to recognize its indigenous peoples 5) shield the identities of the r ebels in order to prevent reprisals against their communities and families. prisoners. women and so on – to particular segregated situations. but not with the „properly symbolic rhythm‟ of the west‘s idea of a biological. During the first day of the uprising. The mask has been symbolically tied to Mexico‟s attempt to hide the third world conditions in which its indigenous peoples live while its government attempts to secure first world status with trade deals such as NAFTA.¶ Gift-exchange is radically subversive of the system. no one saw them. Poststructuralists generally maintain that the problems of the present are rooted in the splitting of life into binary oppositions. either functions or does not. the old. “Jean Baudrillard: The Rise of Capitalism & the Exclusion of Death”. balaclava. Subcommandante Marcos explained to surprised witnesses of the rebellion in San Cristóbal that until indigenous peoples put on their masks. The human body is treated as a machine which similarly. for all the other splits and exclusions – along lines of gender. or pasamontañas in Spanish. The modern view . Political Theorist. But in preventing the figurehead syndrome. According to Baudrillard. and 6) perhaps more practically. children. 10-11) Perhaps the most visible and well-known Zapatista symbol is the ski mask. Marcos has stated that he will remove his own mask only when “Mexican society takes off its own mask. and so on. The affective charge of death remains present among the oppressed. Baudrillard thinks the system can survive defections or exodus. a whole series of others have been created. University of Nottingham. the mediations of capitalism exist so that nobody has the opportunity to offer a symbolic challenge or an irreversible gift. sexual minorities. class. "The Mirror of Dignity: Zapatista Communications and Indigenous Resistance" pp. Various interpretations exist for their use by the rebels. the mask also helps to maintain a collective and diffused leadership that prevents ―protagonism‖ and supports the movement‘s ―leading by obeying‖ principle. This discrimination against the another marked or deviant category. this misunderstands the nature of life and death. A machine either functions or it does not. After this first split. Today. species. This is not because it is rebellious. The “You livies hate us deadies”. For Baudrillard.uk/in-theory-baudrillard-2/ . ignoring the sociality of death. or archetype. nearly everyone belongs to one or original exclusion was of the dead – it is defined as abnormal to be dead.co. It is because it counterposes a different „principle of sociality‟ to that of the dominant system. Power operates through the imposition of life Robinson 2012 /Andrew. the division between life and death is the original. first split and exclusion forms the basis. They exist to keep the symbolic at bay. For example. founding opposition on which the others are founded. http://ceasefiremagazine. March 30. disability. material death is actually an idealist illusion.” In his first appearance in the media spotlight. Activist Based in the UK and research fellow affiliated to the Centre for the Study of Social and Global Justice (CSSGJ). This dead brings into being the modern experience of death.

The mortal body is actually an effect of the split introduced by the foreclosure of death. any such marking or barring of the other brings the other to the core of society. The split never actually stops exchanges across the categories. or barring which allows concentrated or transcendental power to come into existence. westerners invest the ―Third World‖ with racist fantasies and revolutionary aspirations. we still ‗exchange‘ with the dead through our own deaths and our anxiety about death. resultant purity is illusory. The internalisation of the idea of the subject or the soul alienates us from our bodies. Yet the . For Baudrillard. no longer know how to die – or how to do anything but keep reproducing themselves. the other exists only as an imaginary object. For instance. ideas of religious immortality is simply an ideological cover for the real exclusion of the dead. It creates a split. or prisoners. They are reduced to the instrumental. In separation. Through splits. the ―Third World‖ invests the west with aspirational fantasies of development. When this disappears. This requires an idea of death as an end. marking. with game-like rules. laws and the state are invented to take their place. Symbolic exchange is based on a game. The subject needs a beginning and an end. mortal relationships with objects either. We no longer have living. or mad. It is the process of excluding. But institutions try to remain truly immortal. voices and so on. the real self irreducible to such categories. through their exclusion. In the case of death. by destroying their actual connections to others. It also individualises people.of death is also necessitated by the rise of subjectivity. ―We all‖ become dead. In relation to individuals. as Stirner would say. so as to be reducible to the story it tells. Modern systems. people turn the other into their ‗imaginary‘. It is as if we have a transparent veil between us. especially bureaucracies. It is counterposed to the immortality of social institutions. The society of the code works constantly to ward off the danger of irruptions of the symbolic. between the category of ‗man‘ and the ‗un-man‘. The symbolic haunts the code as the threat of its own death. and so on.