INTERSTITIAL JOURNAL

ROBERTSON UNCONTROLLABLE SOCIETIES (REVIEW)

Belief and its Discontents Uncontrollable Societies of Diaffected Individuals

Bernard Stiegler (translated by Daniel Ross) Cambridge: Polity, 2013, ! 200, "2#!$% a erbac& 'SB(: $)*+0)#%,#*12%
Re-ie.ed by Ben/amin 0! Robertson, 1ni-ersity of Colorado

In Taking Care of Youth and the Generations , Bernard Stiegler describes what he clearly considers the dark side to the rise of what English Departments in the United States call 'literary theory': It was in fact standard proced re, in the co rse of the dark !"#$s, to disappoint, and to claim a disappointing heuristic in the name of the str ggle against %recei&ed ideas' and %ideologies(') *fter ideology lost its power as a positi&e philosophical concept, in the wake of +re d and ,iet-sche, and against *lth sser and certain aspects of +o ca lt, Stiegler contin es: It became simply fashionable to re&eal to the na.&e world that all these bea tif l disco rses /on teaching methods, for e0ample1 are in fact doing ser&ice to a disciplinary State apparat s, and that the teacher who belie&es she is a teacher is act ally a prison g ard() ! 2hat he addresses in Taking Care as a matter of fostering inter3generational relations /which is to say, ed cation1, Stiegler pre&io sly addressed in the second &ol me of Disbelief and Discredit, Uncontrollable Societies of Disaffected Individuals , as a 4 estion of belief( S ch is the challenge Bernard Stiegler presents to s in Uncontrollable Societies, his most recently translated &ol me: he believes( *nd he challenges s to belie&e with him5in ed cation, in h manity, in society, in symbols, in spirit, in the f t re( In the following passage, Stiegler responds to ,icholas Sarko-y's claim regarding people's diffic lty in finding meaning in their e0istences:
2e know the meaning of this e0istence is life after death: spirit( B t does the 4 estion of spirit and religion, and what links spirit to religion, in fact amo nt to the 4 estion of what exceeds death as a life beyond6 7r is it not a completely different 4 estion, a more interesting and complex 4 estion5the 4 estion, precisely, of psychic indi&id ation insofar as it is always already collecti&e, that is: insofar as is what will contin e beyond my death, from the instant of my death, and as the f t re of my children, or the children of my family and my friends, of the e that h manity constit tes, as the we that is essentially the unity of care for our dependents or or the descendants of those close to us! and! step by step! for all our fello human beings, so that we do not hold that attit de e0pressed collo4 ially as after me! the deluge)68
1 ) Bernard Stiegler, Taking Care of Youth and the Generations (trans. Ste !en Bar"er), Stan#$rd% Stan#$rd Uni&ersit' (ress ()*1*), 11+ ($riginal e, !asis). Bernard Stiegler, Uncontrollable Societies of Disaffected Individuals (trans. -aniel R$ss), Ca,.ridge and /alden%

000.interstitial1$2rnal.3$, /a'% )*14 1

INTERSTITIAL JOURNAL

ROBERTSON UNCONTROLLABLE SOCIETIES (REVIEW)

Sarko-y disting ishes5in a manner reminiscent of the sec lar h manism of the Enlightenment deplored by the religio s right in the United States, of which Sarko-y is a sort of E ropean co nterpart5between the role of religion /care of eternal life1 and that of go&ernment /care of temporal life1(9 :he problem, as Stiegler's two 4 estions imply, deri&es from Sarko-y's nderstanding, in the manner of cynical politicians in whom we cannot belie&e, b t only 'tr st' /which in&ol&es concerns that are short3term and merely indi&id al, rather than ones that are longterm and collecti&e1, of the absol te distinction between religion and go&ernment, between the eternal and the temporal( In this distinction, Sarko-y posits an afterlife for the 'I' who contin es her life in the beyond witho t regard for the 'we' she lea&es behind( Elsewhere, Stiegler refers to this lack of care as 'I3don't3gi&e3a3f ckism' /"e#m$en#foutisme1( ;ontra this attit de, Stiegler asserts the necessity of thinking the 'I' as always part of a 'we', of thinking the relation between the 7ne and the <any, the first and perhaps the only 4 estion of philosophy()= Beyond the death of any indi&id al, in a f t re of which the indi&id al will not and cannot be a part, will e0ist a society, e&en if this society is by definition /insofar as it is a f t re society1 nknowable( :o accept this society of the f t re is to belie&e in it, to nderstand its consistence as a symbol( +or Stiegler, there are three forms or conditions of 'being': s bsistence, e0istence, and consistence( :hat which s bsists /and therefore does not e0ist1, s ch as animal life, merely is and leads a life witho t reason( :hat which consists /and therefore does not e0ist1, leads a 'life' in which being and reason are one, e&en if the relation between the two remains incalc lable /and therefore beyond the scope of political economy1( :hat which e0ists seeks to a&oid mere being by p rs ing the incalc lable consistency of its being and its reason, at which it will ne&er arri&e( S ch h man being becomes, or indi&id ates in a term Stiegler borrows from >ilbert Simondon, toward a consistence that only manifests on another plane /and Stiegler here draws from Dele -e and > attari, who write of planes of consistency on which assemblages manifest by finding a proper le&el of abstraction1( In order for the e0istent to p rs e its consistence5and a&oid the disindi&id ation, des blimation, and?or disaffection that lead to s bsistence5it m st ha&e a reason, something in which to belie&e: a symbol, something that possesses consistence, something whose meaning is at one with its being( In this manner, as well as in a more con&entional sense, Stiegler claims that s ch symbols do not e0ist( S ch symbols take many forms: the f t re, >od, the nation( @owe&er, when
4 ($lit' ()*14), 1*+ ($riginal e, !asis). In t!e #irst &$l2,e $# Disbelief and Discredit, The Decadence of Industrial Democracies (trans. -aniel R$ss, Stan#$rd% ($lit', )*11), Stiegler identi#ies a 3$nte, $rar' E2r$ ean 3risis t!at !as res2lted #r$, t!e E2r$ ean ad$ ti$n $# n2,er$2s as e3ts $# A,eri3an ind2strial 3a italis,. W!ile Sar"$5'60!$ at t!e ti,e Stiegler 0r$te Uncontrollable Societies !ad n$t 'et .een ele3ted t$ t!e residen3', .2t instead 0as ser&ing as /inster $# t!e Interi$r, a $st t!at in3l2des /inister $# Religi$n (see translat$r7s n$te t$ age 1*8)63ann$t .e red23ed t$ a N$rt! A,eri3an 3a2se, !e is n$net!eless in&$l&ed in t!is ad$ ti$n. Stiegler, Uncontrollable Societies, 1)).

000.interstitial1$2rnal.3$, /a'% )*14 )

INTERSTITIAL JOURNAL

ROBERTSON UNCONTROLLABLE SOCIETIES (REVIEW)

Stiegler notes that AoBbCects of belief do not e0ist and this is why they are not calc lable,) we begin to see the problem(D Eoliticians s ch as Sarko-y, again cynical by definition, separate the 4 estion of belief from that of politics5separate the eternal from the temporal as that which does not concern itself with earthly life5and thereby destroy consistence( In so doing, politicians destroy the tr st they demand /insofar as they ha&e pre&io sly red ced belief to tr st, the longterm to the short3term1( :hey seek to calc late, to gi&e an absol te &al e to, the relationship between the eternal and the temporal as a transaction between the indi&id al and her god( :hey t rn symbols into 'diaboles', male&olent constr ctions of opposing tendencies robbed of their intimate in&ol&ement with one another, and engender therefore 'symbolic misery' /an immiseration, a po&erty1( 2ith nothing left to belie&e in, with nothing toward which to progress or indi&id ate, the I no longer finds home within a we: ,o society is possible witho t belief, that is, witho t moti&ation, or in other words witho t reason() F In an o&ert rning of the Enlightenment tho ght that nderpins criti4 es of modernity by *dorno and *gamben, Stiegler arg es that s ch a society, bereft of belief, becomes irrationalG belief, which can ne&er be red ced to the calc lation of a professional politician, is part and parcel of rationality, a form of rationality which e0tends beyond mere ratio( @ere we see the potential power of Stiegler's tho ght, namely that it demands we reCect cynicism, incl ding that cynicism many academics learned at the feet of those from whom Stiegler himself descends, the cynicism that says school is only a prison, that eternity is only that which robs the temporal of its meaning( ;ontra ;am s' <ersea lt, who reCects the priest's offer of sal&ation and a meaningf l life granted by that which is beyond life, Stiegler insists on the necessity of belief for earthly society and its politics( 2hile this re&iew cannot do C stice to the comple0ities of Stiegler's tho ght in Uncontrollable Societies and the many te0ts with which it engages /Stiegler's own as well as those of +re d, ,iet-sche, <arc se, Dele -e, and others1, let me be clear this tho ght does not in&oke belief innocently or na.&ely( :hat which consists will ne&er e0ist, and society m st ne&er finally settle in its belief on a final, imm table symbol( Society m st e&er criti4 e itself, in what Stiegler calls the Hantian sense: the criti4 e of that which is necessary( @ere, howe&er, those of s trained to disappoint /in the do ble sense of demonstrating fail re and remo&ing something from its position1 find something distastef l in Stiegler's approach /and I se the term 'distastef l' knowingly, in relation to Stiegler's claim abo t the 'fashionableness' of s ch disappointment5perhaps all of these concerns are a matter of taste, which is to say an ncritical belief1( 2e might ask, for e0ample, 2hose criti4 e6) 2hen Stiegler writes, * thority is the condition of all consistence: it designates consistence in generalG it is the general str ct re thro gh which consistences are possible,) we might ask, 2hose a thority6) # 2hen Stiegler states
: ; 8 I.id., ;;. I.id., ;8. I.id., 9:.

000.interstitial1$2rnal.3$, /a'% )*14 4

INTERSTITIAL JOURNAL

ROBERTSON UNCONTROLLABLE SOCIETIES (REVIEW)

his idealism, e&en with n anced conceptions of ideali-ation) and ideality,) we might wonder if he considers himself a philosopher king( @e has promised a fo rth &ol me of Disbelief and Discredit: The %ristocracy to Come /the third, The &ost Spirit of Capitalism appeared with Uncontrollable Societies and is forthcoming in translation from Eolity1, in which he plans to rehabilitate the concept of 'aristocracy', or go&ernment by the best( 2e might ask, 2ho or what is the best6 2ho gets to decide6) :o be clear, Stiegler answers all of these 4 estions( @e insists on the capacity of the indi&id al to C dge, to interpret, to criti4 e, and on the necessity of ni&ersal ed cation /which is not merely prison1 to foster s ch abilities( 2ith *ntigone /a maCor fig re in Uncontrollable Societies1, he reCects 'a thority witho t credit', or that a thority which does not allow for consistences( @e likewise reCects the p rported stability of the Idea in fa&or of a metastability, a temporary consistence that m st always be s bCect to criti4 e( ,o do bt his nderstanding of 'aristocracy' in&ol&es his concept ali-ation of the in&ol&ement of the best with the worst, a recognition of the pharmacological nat re of s ch a go&ernment( :he 4 estion, therefore is not whether Stiegler can answer these 4 estions( *gain, he has( :he 4 estion is whether we can belie&e his answers, whether we ha&e become so disaffected as to be incapable of s bCecting o r own tho ght to a criti4 e that might e0pose o r cynicism as s ch( Ben/amin 0! Robertson teaches classes on *merican literat re, media st dies, baseball, and el&es in the English Department at the Uni&ersity of ;olorado, Bo lder( @is writing has appeared in Configurations, Science 'iction Studies, and %modern, among other places( @e is working on two proCects: (ere at the )nd of %ll Things , on media, genre, and posthistoryG and The %ge of the *orld +laylist, on c lt ral prod ction and cons mption in the conte0t of new media( @e blogs at e&eningredness(net and tweets from IBenJobertson(

000.interstitial1$2rnal.3$, /a'% )*14 9