The Lived Revolution: Solidarity With The Body In Pain As The New Political Universal

by Katerina Kolozova

The book explores the themes of a) "radical concepts" in politics (inspired by François Laruelle's "non-Marxism" and "non-philosophy," developed in accordance with Badiouan and Zizekian "realism"); b) politically relevant and applicable epistemologies of "Thought's Correlating with the Real" (Laruelle), inspired by Laruelle, Badiou and Zizek and c) the possibility of hybridization of the epistemic stance of "radical concept" with the politics of grief and "identification with the suffering itself" proposed by Judith Butler. Radical concepts, the political vision and the theory based on them, are always already succumbing to the "Lived" (Laruelle), to the singularity of the Event (Badiou), to the encounter with the "kernel of the Real" (Zizek) conditioning a political horizon and the grand and small political narratives taking place within it. The thesis of the book is that the instances of the "lived," the "event" or the "Real" can be inherently inter-connected by virtue of the category of the "experience" which is an instance of the sheer lived, the bare being subjected to an occurrence which is always already an instance of trauma. The mere subjection to certain" taking place," the passion (in the etymological sense derived from the Latin verb pati or in the Spinozian sense) which is category beyond the psychological notions of feeling, rational (or irrational) thought, i.e., an ontological category referring to our relation with the "Out-There" which always already happens to us, is that to which the radical (political) concept succumbs to as the ultimate authority rather than to a doctrine, a system of thought, to the "philosophy's auto-mirroring" (Laruelle). Political revolt or the revolutionary stance stems from precisely this bare experiential, the sheer lived and thus, from the Real of the conatus of staying-in-life.

Genres: Academic

234 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2010

Reviews

[Violet Aisling · Rating 3 out of 5]

ultimately i’m still unconvinced by laruelle (and here, by extension, kolozova). non-philosphy (or non-standard thought, as he seems to call it now) still seems ultimately recursive & self-defeating in a way that i'm unconvinced is particularly useful as an overall framework. however, this text did illustrate how the method is definitely a highly productive mode for reconsidering the presuppositions baked into the human sciences. if our project ought to be one rooted in the rigorous critique of all that exists, laruelle definitely provides a useful jumping-off point. i'm just still not entirely sure he's a particularly useful place for you analysis to conclude.