âFrom Standing Rock to LĂźtzerath, the struggle to defend the Earth continuously crosses over into the construction of the communeâ
âSituating the battle to defend Atlantaâs forests within the collapse of the historical left and the rise of place-based or âterritorialâ forms of struggle, Hugh Farrell surveys the possibility of revolutionary organization in profoundly disordered timesâ
âAmid this period of fear and reflux, the movement to defend the Atlanta forest â alongside recent efforts to defend the village of LĂźtzerath against its destruction by mining giant RWE (from which the accompanying images here are taken) â stand out as bright exceptionsâ
âWhile my focus here will be on the struggle in Atlanta, the logic of composition outlined below may also help to illuminate other ecologically-minded insurgencies across the globeâ
âvarious camps allow for a range of people to engage in differentiated ways, while making the movement harder to map and evict for the authoritiesâ
âpeople from across Atlanta and the country circulate through the forest, some staying for a few nights while others have lived there for more than a yearâ
"âIt seems simple. Work is hell. The forest is beautiful. The goal of protecting what sustains us and destroying what destroys us is the most important thing.ââ
âinability to fall back on the mediation of institutions has forced participants to develop customs and practices of compromise and conflict resolutionâ
âWhile remaining riven by contradictions and difficulties, the Atlanta forest has become an inverse image of the national political situation, an exception in this period of refluxâ
âDecentralization and autonomy are not sufficient principles in themselves to account for the movementâs simultaneous resilience, creativity, and chaotic, collective intelligenceâ
âin an already anarchic epoch, decentralization and autonomy are hallmarks of most political forces, and hardly sufficient as a liberatory horizonâ
âBeneath the movementâs commitment to remaining âdecentralized and autonomousâ lies another active principle, which has emerged in territorial struggles and situated conflicts around the world: compositionâ
âIn what follows, I will draw on Endnotes and their interlocutors to define the broader coordinates of our current, precarious moment and why it poses the âcomposition problemâ on an epochal scaleâ
âIn âOnward, Barbarians,â their magisterial balance sheet of the era of COVID and anti-police rebellion, Endnotes offers a framework for understanding the vast fluxes of popular insurgency and anxious, bloody reaction within our anarchic present.â
âEndnotes argues that this confusion, and this orphanhood more broadly, are also productive, creating a field of experimentation which, for these precise reasons, is difficult to represent and govern.â
âWithout an extant tradition or leadership to draw on, movements exist in a permanently improvisational mode â creative, ungovernable, and yet internally unstableâ
âThis poses what Endnotes calls the âcomposition problem,â in which contemporary movements can assume no automatic, shared basis, and thus face new challengesâ
âMovements must produce their own basis for organization and new tools for welding together the increasingly heterogeneous sectors produced by the precarious present â as this process becomes self-conscious, it becomes composition as a strategyâ
âIn Hinterland, his survey of the contemporary âterrain of class and conflict,â Phil Neel proposes a peculiar solution to the composition problem, one especially suited to the massive fluxes of movement now regularly produced by the destabilizing global orderâ
âHe argues that reactionary forces are propelled by âoaths of blood,â in which racial and traditionalist myths nourish new communities of exclusion intended to offer security amid generalizing stagnation and destabilizationâ
âOpposed to this, participants in insurgent movements make no exclusive claim, and instead make an inclusive pledge to insurgency itself, an âoath of waterâ to Marxâs ââParty of Anarchyâ that seems to seek nothing but further erosion, the growth of the flood.ââ
âNeel understandably emphasizes a âfidelity to the unrest itself,â in a way which ethically orients us towards inclusive communities and a negative project based on the destruction of the already-failing capitalist worldâ
âHowever, oaths of water tell us very little about how to organize, and they represent only the ethical distillation of those sequences of rapid erosion which occur during vast movements and uprisingsâ
âNeel disparages efforts to sustain long-term anti-capitalist spaces: âthere is no true âautonomyâ from the world of capital, only fidelity to its destruction.ââ
âNeel is taking aim at an anarchist attachment to âsmall-scale moments of self-reproduction in squats and occupations.ââ
âThese are often conservatively-minded efforts to hold onto a limited area of freedom on the part of groups that have already been constituted, whether by shared subculture, ideology, or an experience of movement participationâ
âThe goal in these cases is to hold on, to survive in a localist or ideological modeâ
âUnfortunately, Neel conflates these limited, small-group experiments with a form of struggle â territorial defense â that grows out of the contemporary epoch just as surely as the rapid, erosive insurrections with which he is primarily concernedâ
âKristin Ross has declared, âdefending the conditions for life on the planet has become the new and incontrovertible horizon of meaning of all political struggle.ââ
âThe autonomy built at Standing Rock, however, bore no resemblance to the static, closed refuges criticized by Neelâ
âThere was a vast and constant flow of bodies, goods, ideas and strategies through the camps, fed by multiple social strata each of which arrived with their own distinct experiences of being rendered surplus to the economyâ
âThe demographic parallels â the encounter of the racially excluded and the newly precarious â between riots and blockade camps led Joshua Clover to assimilate the two in his Riot, Strike, Riot.12 For Clover, both belong to that category of antagonism he terms âcirculation struggles,â which are born out of capitalist stagnation, slack labor markets and the growing importance of circulation vis-a-vis productionâ
âThe defense of a territory is a constructive process that necessarily includes more people as it unfolds, yet which proceeds through a completely different temporality than that of riots or mass uprisingsâ
âAlongside Standing Rock, a paradigmatic example is the Zone Ă Defendre (ZAD) at Notre-Dame-des-Landesâ
âThe participant research collective Mauvaise Troupe, which has written extensively about territorial struggles across Europe, emphasizes their sequential logic:
It quickly became apparent that defending these wetlands was inseparable from inhabiting, nourishing, and building forms of resistant infrastructure within and upon them, and that all of these efforts were at odds with the existing economic and governmental structuresâ
âThe conditions under which we now organize are those of what Andy Merrifeld has called the âwild city,â the âderegulated city, the downsized city.ââ
âThis is a capitalist reproductive circuit which has shed the stable character required for stable subjects to advocate in ordered ways for a given portion of social goodsâ
âUnder such conditions, the role of the left can no longer be to teach people fixed truths and bring them into a stable coalition based on a pre-existing program. Political formulations based on a mass identity are no longer possibleâ
âAny possible program or strategic platform can no longer be unidirectional, but must instead be permeable, i.e., constitutively open to their outside, and perhaps even defined by itâ
âIn practical terms, this means that whatever our stakes in the fight are, we must be interested in other peopleâs experiences too, as well as their own reasons for being thereâ
âIf there is a truth on which our politics depends, it cannot be the âscientificâ truth of the old orthodoxies, but must be situated in an irreducibly intersubjective spaceâ
âFrom here on out, all truths are situationalâ
âactivists in the anti-globalization movement proposed that summit protests be organized in accordance with a principle they called the âdiversity of tacticsâ: all the sections of the movement can act as they see fit, separatelyâ
âThe problem with this approach is that it effectively abandoned the possibility of a collective strategy or mode of organization. In order for each section of the movement to enact its tactical program during a mobilization, it must enjoy (according to the canonical âSt. Paul Principlesâ) a âseparation of time and space.ââ
âwhenever any movement-wide discussion would occur, the focus would be on allowing each tactical program to be enacted without getting in each otherâs way, rather than on winning in a broader senseâ
âToday, the legacy of the 20th century left bequeaths to us a sad binary: on one side, there is the classical labor movementâs singular program, with its dialectical resolution of difference, and its dependence on the leadership of a now-extinct mass subject; on the other, the contemporary activist approach, itself based on the prioritization of tactics, the non-resolution of difference, and the abandonment of any strategic horizon of victoryâ
âComposition as a strategy positions itself between these two extremesâ
âThe negative rationale for its development resides in the disappearance of any leading identityâ
âit also has a positive rationale. Whereas the programmatic approach to struggle relied upon dialectical resolution of conflicts â i.e., the assumption that, through the course of the struggle, a synthesis would emerge that would produce a new sort of unity â the method of composition proposes that the multiple segments of a movement remain multiple, while simultaneously weaving the necessary practical alliances between themâ
ââComposingâ as a practice means holding together and expanding the relations between social sectors of a struggle, and âcompositionâ as a strategy refers to the assumption that a collective victory under current conditions is only possible provided our movements find ways to tease out such collaborative meshworks across and between various social identitiesâ
âthis is not merely a coalition of different subjects, each of whom remains the same throughout. In order for this strategy to function in practice, in order to maintain the composition of a movement, each of its component parts must be willing to step away from their identities to some degreeâ
âThe aim here is not to enter into some kind of new synthesis, erasing particularity; rather, the assumption is that, in order to win, each segment must commit to a contextual form that invites all the other pieces of the movement to destabilize the identity and commitments that they may otherwise have held in normal capitalist politics.â
âIn this way, composition produces not âsocial unityâ but a practical machine fueled by the partial desubjectification of its constituent partsâ
âAs Kristin Ross observes, composition struggles tend to produce a distinctive social base: âessentially a working alliance, involving mutual displacements and disidentifications, that is also the sharing of a physical territory, a living space.ââ
âTo experience the movement is not merely to experience oneâs own distinct view upon it, or oneâs own menu of practices within it, but also to feel claimed by the wagers, risks, and contributions of all the other component pieces as well, with whom one shares a common fateâ
âTo put in terms borrowed from the Spanish radical collective Precarias a la Deriva, maintaining the transversal linkages that bind these components and methods requires an âaffective virtuosityâ characteristic of contemporary work and politicsâ
âComposition is the mode of organization in profoundly disordered timesâ
âAs a poetic and compositional account from Minneapolis during the first days of the George Floyd Uprising put it: âWe combine without becoming the same, we move together without understanding one another; and yet it works.ââ
âUnder these hazy conditions, it might be helpful to articulate a partial list of compositional methods at play in the Atlanta forest:â
âMultiple camps have proliferated, which, although marked by starkly divergent cultures and populations, have not opted to remain tolerantly separated, but instead have continuously sought to remain connectedâ
âThe movementâs open approach to political methods stresses not just a diversity of tactics, but their potential interlinkingâ
âBy maintaining an open approach to the construction of the camps, the movement prioritizes pragmatic and hands-on activities. In this way, it deactivates ideological questions and dividesâ
âAn emphasis on land restoration and building places of life contributes to a broad transvaluation of values, articulating a new basis for organizing and coordinating in defense of this particular place, in its singularityâ
âMultiple components display a compositional intelligence, investing serious political effort and affective virtuosity to resolve conflicts and draw in new componentsâ
âComposition necessarily functions less through internal correction within a coalition, than through the positive process of linking together new elements â it is a âyes, andâŚââ
âA sense of patience and taking the movementâs own time has meant not only that each attempted eviction has been met with calm and resolve, but that the political winds buffeting the rest of the country are experienced at greater remove in the forestâ
âthe Atlanta forest has become not just a refuge from a reactionary moment but a testing ground for bottom-up ecological resilience and abolitionist politicsâ
Navigation
Backlinks
There are no backlinks to this post.