2:00pm - 2:30pm
“The Need for a People” – From the Unmaking of the Demographic Question to the Making of the People in Contemporary Central-Eastern Europe
University of Warwick, United Kingdom
Under various forms – of which migration, ageing populations, social cohesion are some of the most vividly discussed – the problem of “demography” is at the heart of contemporary political debates across Europe.
In this paper, I shall explore Central-Eastern European instantiations of the link between the “demographic issue” and politics by deploying the Deleuzian concept of “people”. An agent of “collective utterances” that can nurture resistance against the “intolerable”, the Deleuzian “people” – always an “infinity of peoples” – is what is needed, be it through coming together or by eschewing artificial unification, in order to harness creative thought processes and bring about socio-political change.
By reconceptualising the politics of the “demographic problem” as practices of “people-making”, I shall develop a Deleuze-inspired three-fold interrogation. First, I will consider how, through a dynamic of “deterritorialization – reterritorialization” fostered by processes of European migration (or the “double becoming” of the indigene and the immigrant), people-making in Central-Eastern Europe is part of a changing Europe-wide “geopolitics” of people-formation. Second, I will deploy Deleuze’s positing of the “missing” people in small nations’ cultural traditions, to discern how people-making has historically been another name for state-making in Central-Eastern Europe, at the perpetual exclusion of the Deleuzian “people”. Last, Deleuze’s affirmation of the need to “invent a people” will guide a probing into how contemporary political events such as youth protests in Central-Eastern Europe and the political mobilisation of the region’s growing West-based diaspora are critical of state-making practices and express the need to stand in for the “missing” people.
2:30pm - 3:00pm
Who is Dark Deleuze?
University of Ioannina, Greece
In this paper I question Andrew Culp’s book, Dark Deleuze, about the validity of its claims and, also, the possible application of this new interpretation of Deleuzian philosophy to the creation of new liberating social imaginaries. Andrew Culp claims that the majority of interpretations of Deleuze’s work continues to rely on the affirmationist, connectionist and joyous concepts of rhizomes, assemblages and networks.‘Dark Deleuze’ is his working hypothesis and designates an alternative view on Deleuze’s philosophy that is based on the opposite affects, like this of sadness and etc., which may lead to the destruction of current lines of flight of this world and the searching of a new political/practical strategy.The death of world is a project of un-becoming of the capitalistic assemblages that oppresses individualistic libidinal forces by its institutional practices and discourses.
The aim of this paper is to provide a critical examination of ‘Dark Deleuze’ project through revisiting this project, the Deleuzian work and scholarship in order to find new aspects of this and probable ways of application, because in our times that tacit neoliberalistic oppression of libidinal networks creates a concrete regime of sense and truth, which limits, restricts and declines any ontological and political articulation of our unconscious imagination. Reading closely Culp’s, we can find new ways of understanding Deleuzian philosophy, but most importantly ways of resisting against the forces that seek to repress and exploit our lifes.
3:00pm - 3:30pm
Alternative Right, Identitarianism and Deleuzoguattarian Approach Towards Fascism
Faculty of Social Sciences, Ljubljana, Slovenia
In the last few years, a qualitative change, best signified by the emergence of the so-called alternative right (alt-right), occurred in a discursive field traditionally dominated by the conservative right. The ideology of right-wing identitarianism and populism is, on the one hand, characterized by a negative attitude towards migration, other races, and cultures, and, on the other hand, by the rejection of the so-called domestic "liberal elites." Alternative right could also be characterized by an attempt of appropriation of the minoritarian, transgressive and rebellious political affections, which were in the second half of the 20th century usually connected with the new-left political movements. Therefore, the main question of the proposed paper, that was already raised in different variations by many scholars, who studied alt-right and similar contemporary movements (such as Angela Nagle, David Neiwert, George Hawley, Mike Wendling, etc.), is: how is it possible that the alternative right undertook the position of rebellion, transgression and minority? What is the alternative if the alternative is becoming right?
In the proposed paper, I will try to address those questions through the lenses of Deleuze and Guattarian philosophy, which could be, as Foucault argues in his Foreword to Anti-Oedipus, perceived as a specific form of anti-fascism. Special emphasis would be given on Deleuze’s concept of difference, which opposes identitarianism on the ontological level. Another important concept of the paper is the concept of "minoritarian becoming," which opposes the idea of majority, embodied in the profile of “the average adult-white-heterosexual-European-male-speaking a standard language /…/”. That is exactly the profile, in the name of which alternative right developed its (supposedly minoritarian) identity politics.