GUY DEBORD

THE SOCIETY
OF THE SPECTACLE
(1967)
AND
THE COMMENTS
ON THE SOCIETY
OF THE SPECTACLE
(1988)
1

THE SOCIETY
OF THE SPECTACLE
(1967)
Chapter 1 Separation Perfected
But certainly for the present age, which prefers the sign to the thing signified, the
copy to the original, representation to reality, the appearance to the essence...
illusion only is sacred, truth profane. ay, sacredness is held to !e enhanced in
proportion as truth decreases and illusion increases, so that the highest degree of
illusion co"es to !e the highest degree of sacredness.
#euer!ach, Preface to the second edition of $he %ssence of Christianity
1.
2
&n societies where "odern conditions of production pre'ail, all of life presents itself
as an i""ense accu"ulation of spectacles. %'erything that was directly li'ed has
"o'ed away into a representation.
(.
$he i"ages detached fro" e'ery aspect of life fuse in a co""on strea" in which the
unity of this life can no longer !e reesta!lished. )eality considered partially unfolds,
in its own general unity, as a pseudo*world apart, an o!+ect of "ere conte"plation.
$he speciali,ation of i"ages of the world is co"pleted in the world of the autono"ous
i"age, where the liar has lied to hi"self. $he spectacle in general, as the concrete
in'ersion of life, is the autono"ous "o'e"ent of the non*li'ing.
-.
$he spectacle presents itself si"ultaneously as all of society, as part of society, and
as instru"ent of unification. .s a part of society it is specifically the sector which
concentrates all ga,ing and all consciousness. /ue to the 'ery fact that this sector is
separate, it is the co""on ground of the decei'ed ga,e and of false consciousness,
and the unification it achie'es is nothing !ut an official language of generali,ed
separation.
0.
$he spectacle is not a collection of i"ages, !ut a social relation a"ong people,
"ediated !y i"ages.
1.
3
$he spectacle cannot !e understood as an a!use of the world of 'ision, as a product
of the techni2ues of "ass disse"ination of i"ages. &t is, rather, a 3eltanschauung
which has !eco"e actual, "aterially translated. &t is a world 'ision which has !eco"e
o!+ectified.
6.
$he spectacle grasped in its totality is !oth the result and the pro+ect of the
e4isting "ode of production. &t is not a supple"ent to the real world, an additional
decoration. &t is the heart of the unrealis" of the real society. &n all its specific
for"s, as infor"ation or propaganda, as ad'ertise"ent or direct entertain"ent
consu"ption, the spectacle is the present "odel of socially do"inant life. &t is the
o"nipresent affir"ation of the choice already "ade in production and its corollary
consu"ption. $he spectacle s for" and content are identically the total +ustification
of the e4isting syste" s conditions and goals. $he spectacle is also the per"anent
presence of this +ustification, since it occupies the "ain part of the ti"e li'ed
outside of "odern production.
7.
Separation is itself part of the unity of the world, of the glo!al social pra4is split up
into reality and i"age. $he social practice which the autono"ous spectacle confronts
is also the real totality which contains the spectacle. But the split within this totality
"utilates it to the point of "a5ing the spectacle appear as its goal. $he language of
the spectacle consists of signs of the ruling production, which at the sa"e ti"e are
the ulti"ate goal of this production.
6.
7ne cannot a!stractly contrast the spectacle to actual social acti'ity8 such a di'ision
4
is itself di'ided. $he spectacle which in'erts the real is in fact produced. 9i'ed
reality is "aterially in'aded !y the conte"plation of the spectacle while
si"ultaneously a!sor!ing the spectacular order, gi'ing it positi'e cohesi'eness.
7!+ecti'e reality is present on !oth sides. %'ery notion fi4ed this way has no other
!asis than its passage into the opposite8 reality rises up within the spectacle, and the
spectacle is real. $his reciprocal alienation is the essence and the support of the
e4isting society.
9.
&n a world which really is topsy*tur'y, the true is a "o"ent of the false.
1:.
$he concept of spectacle unifies and e4plains a great di'ersity of apparent
pheno"ena. $he di'ersity and the contrasts are appearances of a socially organi,ed
appearance, the general truth of which "ust itself !e recogni,ed. Considered in its
own ter"s, the spectacle is affir"ation of appearance and affir"ation of all hu"an
life, na"ely social life, as "ere appearance. But the criti2ue which reaches the truth
of the spectacle e4poses it as the 'isi!le negation of life, as a negation of life which
has !eco"e 'isi!le.
11.
$o descri!e the spectacle, its for"ation, its functions and the forces which tend to
dissol'e it, one "ust artificially distinguish certain insepara!le ele"ents. 3hen
analy,ing the spectacle one spea5s, to so"e e4tent, the language of the spectacular
itself in the sense that one "o'es through the "ethodological terrain of the 'ery
society which e4presses itself in the spectacle. But the spectacle is nothing other
than the sense of the total practice of a social*econo"ic for"ation, its use of ti"e.
5
&t is the historical "o'e"ent in which we are caught.
1(.
$he spectacle presents itself as so"ething enor"ously positi'e, indisputa!le and
inaccessi!le. &t says nothing "ore than that which appears is good, that which is
good appears. $he attitude which it de"ands in principle is passi'e acceptance which
in fact it already o!tained !y its "anner of appearing without reply, !y its "onopoly
of appearance.
1-.
$he !asically tautological character of the spectacle flows fro" the si"ple fact that
its "eans are si"ultaneously its ends. &t is the sun which ne'er sets o'er the e"pire
of "odern passi'ity. &t co'ers the entire surface of the world and !athes endlessly in
its own glory.
10.
$he society which rests on "odern industry is not accidentally or superficially
spectacular, it is funda"entally spectaclist. &n the spectacle, which is the i"age of
the ruling econo"y, the goal is nothing, de'elop"ent e'erything. $he spectacle ai"s
at nothing other than itself.
11.
.s the indispensa!le decoration of the o!+ects produced today, as the general e4pose
of the rationality of the syste", as the ad'anced econo"ic sector which directly
shapes a growing "ultitude of i"age*o!+ects, the spectacle is the "ain production of
6
present*day society.
16.
$he spectacle su!+ugates li'ing "en to itself to the e4tent that the econo"y has
totally su!+ugated the". &t is no "ore than the econo"y de'eloping for itself. &t is
the true reflection of the production of things, and the false o!+ectification of the
producers.
17.
$he first phase of the do"ination of the econo"y o'er social life !rought into the
definition of all hu"an reali,ation the o!'ious degradation of !eing into ha'
ing. $he present phase of total occupation of social life !y the accu"ulated results of
the econo"y leads to a generali,ed sliding of ha'ing into appearing, fro" which all
actual ha'ing "ust draw its i""ediate prestige and its ulti"ate functi on. .t the
sa"e ti"e all indi'idual reality has !eco"e social reality directly dependent on social
power and shaped !y it. &t is allowed to appear only to the e4tent that it is not.
16.
3here the real world changes into si"ple i"ages, the si"ple i"ages !eco"e real
!eings and effecti'e "oti'ations of hypnotic !eha'ior. $he spectacle, as a tendency
to "a5e one see the world !y "eans of 'arious speciali,ed "ediations (it can no
longer !e grasped directly), naturally finds 'ision to !e the pri'ileged hu"an sense
which the sense of touch was for other epochs; the "ost a!stract, the "ost
"ystifia!le sense corresponds to the generali,ed a!straction of present*day society.
But the spectacle is not identifia!le with "ere ga,ing, e'en co"!ined with hearing. &t
is that which escapes the acti'ity of "en, that which escapes reconsideration and
correction !y their wor5. &t is the opposite of dialogue. 3here'er there is
7
independent representation, the spectacle reconstitutes itself.
19.
$he spectacle inherits all the wea5nesses of the 3estern philosophical pro+ect which
undertoo5 to co"prehend acti'ity in ter"s of the categories of seeing; further"ore,
it is !ased on the incessant spread of the precise technical rationality which grew out
of this thought. $he spectacle does not reali,e philosophy, it philosophi,es reality.
$he concrete life of e'eryone has !een degraded into a speculati'e uni'erse.
(:.
Philosophy, the power of separate thought and the thought of separate power, could
ne'er !y itself supersede theology. $he spectacle is the "aterial reconstruction of
the religious illusion. Spectacular technology has not dispelled the religious clouds
where "en had placed their own powers detached fro" the"sel'es; it has only tied
the" to an earthly !ase. $he "ost earthly life thus !eco"es opa2ue and
un!reatha!le. &t no longer pro+ects into the s5y !ut shelters within itself its
a!solute denial, its fallacious paradise. $he spectacle is the technical reali,ation of
the e4ile of hu"an powers into a !eyond; it is separation perfected within the
interior of "an.
(1.
$o the e4tent that necessity is socially drea"ed, the drea" !eco"es necessary. $he
spectacle is the night"are of i"prisoned "odern society which ulti"ately e4presses
nothing "ore than its desire to sleep. $he spectacle is the guardian of sleep.
8
((.
$he fact that the practical power of "odern society detached itself and !uilt an
independent e"pire in the spectacle can !e e4plained only !y the fact that this
practical power continued to lac5 cohesion and re"ained in contradiction with itself.
(-.
$he oldest social speciali,ation, the speciali,ation of power, is at the root of the
spectacle. $he spectacle is thus a speciali,ed acti'ity which spea5s for al l the others.
&t is the diplo"atic representation of hierarchic society to itself, where all other
e4pression is !anned. <ere the "ost "odern is also the "ost archaic.
(0.
$he spectacle is the e4isting order s uninterrupted discourse a!out itself, its
laudatory "onologue. &t is the self*portrait of power in the epoch of its totalitarian
"anage"ent of the conditions of e4istence. $he fetishistic, purely o!+ecti'e
appearance of spectacular relations conceals the fact that they are relations a"ong
"en and classes8 a second nature with its fatal laws see"s to do"inate our
en'iron"ent. But the spectacle is not the necessary product of technical de'elop"ent
seen as a natural de'elop"ent. $he society of the spectacle is on the contrary the
for" which chooses its own technical content. &f the spectacle, ta5en in the li"ited
sense of "ass "edia which are its "ost glaring superficial "anifestation, see"s to
in'ade society as "ere e2uip"ent, this e2uip"ent is in no way neutral !ut is the 'ery
"eans suited to its total self*"o'e"ent. &f the social needs of the epoch in which
such techni2ues are de'eloped can only !e satisfied through their "ediation, if the
ad"inistration of this society and all contact a"ong "en can no longer ta5e place
e4cept through the inter"ediary of this power of instantaneous co""unication, it is
!ecause this co""unication is essentially unilateral. $he concentration of
co""unication is thus an accu"ulation, in the hands of the e4isting syste" s
ad"inistration, of the "eans which allow it to carry on this particular ad"inistration.
9
$he generali,ed clea'age of the spectacle is insepara!le fro" the "odern State,
na"ely fro" the general for" of clea'age within society, the product of the di'ision
of social la!or and the organ of class do"ination.
(1.
Separation is the alpha and o"ega of the spectacle. $he institutionali,ation of the
social di'ision of la!or, the for"ation of classes, had gi'en rise to a first sacred
conte"plation, the "ythical order with which e'ery power shrouds itself fro" the
!eginning. $he sacred has +ustified the cos"ic and ontological order which
corresponded to the interests of the "asters; it has e4plained and e"!ellished that
which society could not do. $hus all separate power has !een spectacular, !ut the
adherence of all to an i""o!ile i"age only signified the co""on acceptance of an
i"aginary prolongation of the po'erty of real social acti'ity, still largely felt as a
unitary condition. $he "odern spectacle, on the contrary, e4presses what society can
do, !ut in this e4pression the per"itted is a!solutely opposed to the possi!le. $he
spectacle is the preser'ation of unconsciousness within the practical change of the
conditions of e4istence. &t is its own product, and it has "ade its own rules8 it is a
pseudo*sacred entity. &t shows what it is8 separate power de'eloping in itself, in the
growth of producti'ity !y "eans of the incessant refine"ent of the di'ision of la!or
into a parcelli,ation of gestures which are then do"inated !y the independent
"o'e"ent of "achines; and wor5ing for an e'er*e4panding "ar5et. .ll co""unity and
all critical sense are dissol'ed during this "o'e"ent in which the forces that could
grow !y separating are not yet reunited.
(6.
3ith the generali,ed separation of the wor5er and his products, e'ery unitary 'iew
of acco"plished acti'ity and all direct personal co""unication a"ong producers are
lost. .cco"panying the progress of accu"ulation of separate products and the
concentration of the producti'e process, unity and co""unication !eco"e the
e4clusi'e attri!ute of the syste" s "anage"ent. $he success of the econo"ic syste"
1
of separation is the proletariani,ation of the world.
(7.
/ue to the success of separate production as production of the separate, the
funda"ental e4perience which in pri"iti'e societies is attached to a central tas5 i s in
the process of !eing displaced, at the crest of the syste" s de'elop"ent. !y non*
wor5, !y inacti'ity. But this inacti'ity is in no way li!erated fro" producti'e acti'ity8
it depends on producti'e acti'ity and is an uneasy and ad"iring su!"ission to the
necessities and results of production; it is itself a product of its rationality. $here
can !e no freedo" outside of acti'ity, and in the conte4t of the spectacle all acti'ity
is negated. +ust as real acti'ity has !een captured in its entirety for the glo!al
construction of this result. $hus the present li!eration fro" la!or, the increase of
leisure, is in no way a li!eration within la!or, nor a li!eration fro" the world shaped
!y this la!or. one of the acti'ity lost in la!or can !e regained in the su!"ission to
its result.
(6.
$he econo"ic syste" founded on isolation is a circular production of isolation. $he
technology is !ased on isolation, and the technical process isolates in turn. #ro" the
auto"o!ile to tele'ision, all the goods selected !y the spectacular syste" are also its
weapons for a constant reinforce"ent of the conditions of isolation of lonely crowds.
$he spectacle constantly redisco'ers its own assu"ptions "ore concretely.
(9.
$he spectacle originates in the loss of the unity of the world, and the gigantic
e4pansion of the "odern spectacle e4presses the totality of this loss8 the
a!straction of all specific la!or and the general a!straction of the entirety of
11
production are perfectly rendered in the spectacle, whose "ode of !eing concrete is
precisely a!straction. &n the spectacle, one part of the world represents itself to the
world and is superior to it. $he spectacle is nothing "ore than the co""on language
of this separation. 3hat !inds the spectators together is no "ore than an
irre'ersi!le relation at the 'ery center which "aintains their isolation. $he spectacle
reunites the separate, !ut reunites it as separate.
-:.
$he alienation of the spectator to the profit of the conte"plated o!+ect (which is
the result of his own unconscious acti'ity) is e4pressed in the following way8 the "ore
he conte"plates the less he li'es; the "ore he accepts recogni,ing hi"self in the
do"inant i"ages of need, the less he understands his own e4istence and his own
desires. $he e4ternality of the spectacle in relation to the acti'e "an appears in the
fact that his own gestures are no longer his !ut those of another who represents
the" to hi". $his is why the spectator feels at ho"e nowhere, !ecause the spectacle
is e'erywhere.
-1.
$he wor5er does not produce hi"self; he produces an independent power. $he
success of this production, its a!undance, returns to the producer as an a!undance of
dispossession. .ll the ti"e and space of his world !eco"e foreign to hi" with the
accu"ulation of his alienated products. $he spectacle is the "ap of this new world, a
"ap which e4actly co'ers its territory. $he 'ery powers which escaped us show
the"sel'es to us in all their force.
-(.
$he spectacle within society corresponds to a concrete "anufacture of alienation.
12
%cono"ic e4pansion is "ainly the e4pansion of this specific industrial production.
3hat grows with the econo"y in "otion for itself can only !e the 'ery alienation
which was at its origin.
--.
Separated fro" his product, "an hi"self produces all the details of his world with
e'er increasing power, and thus finds hi"self e'er "ore separated fro" his world.
$he "ore his life is now his product, the "ore he is separated fro" his life.
-0.
$he spectacle is capital to such a degree of accu"ulation that it !eco"es an i"age.
Chapter ( Co""odity as Spectacle
$he co""odity can only !e understood in its undistorted essence when it !eco"es
the uni'ersal category of society as a whole. 7nly in this conte4t does the reification
produced !y co""odity relations assu"e decisi'e i"portance !oth for the o!+ecti'e
e'olution of society and for the stance adopted !y "en towards it. 7nly then does
the co""odity !eco"e crucial for the su!+ugation of "en s consciousness to the
for"s in which this reification finds e4pression.... .s la!or is progressi'ely
rationali,ed and "echani,ed "an s lac5 of will is reinforced !y the way in which his
acti'ity !eco"es less and less acti'e and "ore and "ore conte"plati'e. 9u5acs,
<istory and Class Consciousness
-1.
&n the essential "o'e"ent of the spectacle, which consists of ta5ing up all that
e4isted in hu"an acti'ity in a fluid state so as to possess it in a congealed state as
13
things which ha'e !eco"e the e4clusi'e 'alue !y their for"ulation in negati'e of li'ed
'alue, we recogni,e our old ene"y, the co""odity, who 5nows so well how to see" at
first glance so"ething tri'ial and o!'ious, while on the contrary it is so co"ple4 and
so full of "etaphysical su!tleties.
-6.
$his is the principle of co""odity fetishis", the do"ination of society !y intangi!le
as well as tangi!le things, which reaches its a!solute fulfill"ent in the spectacle,
where the tangi!le world is replaced !y a selection of i"ages which e4ist a!o'e it,
and which si"ultaneously i"pose the"sel'es as the tangi!le par e4cellence.
-7.
$he world at once present and a!sent which the spectacle "a5es 'isi!le is the world
of the co""odity do"inating all that is li'ed. $he world of the co""odity is thus
shown for what it is, !ecause its "o'e"ent is identical to the estrange"ent of "en
a"ong the"sel'es and in relation to their glo!al product.
-6.
$he loss of 2uality so e'ident at all le'els of spectacular language, fro" the o!+ects it
praises to the !eha'ior it regulates, "erely translates the funda"ental traits of the
real production which !rushes reality aside8 the co""odity*for" is through and
through e2ual to itself, the category of the 2uantitati'e. $he 2uantitati'e is what the
co""odity*for" de'elops, and it can de'elop only within the 2uantitati'e.
-9.
14
$his de'elop"ent which e4cludes the 2ualitati'e is itself, as de'elop"ent, su!+ect to
2ualitati'e change8 the spectacle indicates that it has crossed the threshold of its
own a!undance; this is as yet true only locally at so"e points, !ut is already true on
the uni'ersal scale which is the original conte4t of the co""odity, a conte4t which
its practical "o'e"ent, enco"passing the %arth as a world "ar5et, has 'erified.
0:.
$he de'elop"ent of producti'e forces has !een the real unconscious history which
!uilt and "odified the conditions of e4istence of hu"an groups as conditions of
sur'i'al, and e4tended those conditions8 the econo"ic !asis of all their underta5ings.
&n a pri"iti'e econo"y, the co""odity sector represented a surplus of sur'i'al. $he
production of co""odities, which i"plies the e4change of 'aried products a"ong
independent producers, could for a long ti"e re"ain craft production, contained
within a "arginal econo"ic function where its 2uantitati'e truth was still "as5ed.
<owe'er, where co""odity production "et the social conditions of large scale
co""erce and of the accu"ulation of capitals, it sei,ed total do"ination o'er the
econo"y. $he entire econo"y then !eca"e what the co""odity had shown itself to
!e in the course of this con2uest8 a process of 2uantitati'e de'elop"ent. $his
incessant e4pansion of econo"ic power in the for" of the co""odity, which
transfor"ed hu"an la!or into co""odity*la!or, into wage*la!or, cu"ulati'ely led to
an a!undance in which the pri"ary 2uestion of sur'i'al is undou!tedly resol'ed, !ut in
such a way that it is constantly redisco'ered; it is continually posed again each ti"e
at a higher le'el. %cono"ic growth frees societies fro" the natural pressure which
re2uired their direct struggle for sur'i'al, !ut at that point it is fro" their li!erator
that they are not li!erated. $he independence of the co""odity is e4tended to the
entire econo"y o'er which it rules. $he econo"y transfor"s the world, !ut
transfor"s it only into a world of econo"y. $he pseudo*nature within which hu"an
la!or is alienated de"ands that it !e ser'ed ad infinitu", and this ser'ice, !eing
+udged and a!sol'ed only !y itself, in fact ac2uires the totality of socially per"issi!le
efforts and pro+ects as its ser'ants. $he a!undance of co""odities, na"ely, of
co""odity relations, can !e nothing "ore than increased sur'i'al.
15
01.
$he co""odity s do"ination was at first e4erted o'er the econo"y in an occult
"anner; the econo"y itself, the "aterial !asis of social life, re"ained unpercei'ed
and not understood, li5e the fa"iliar which is not necessarily 5nown. &n a society
where the concrete co""odity is rare or unusual, "oney, apparently do"inant,
presents itself as an e"issary ar"ed with full powers who spea5s in the na"e of an
un5nown force. 3ith the industrial re'olution, the di'ision of la!or in "anufactures,
and "ass production for the world "ar5et, the co""odity appears in fact as a power
which co"es to occupy social life. &t is then that political econo"y ta5es shape, as
the do"inant science and the science of do"ination.
0(.
$he spectacle is the "o"ent when the co""odity has attained the total occupation
of social life. ot only is the relation to the co""odity 'isi!le !ut it is all one sees8
the world one sees is its world. =odern econo"ic production e4tends its dictatorship
e4tensi'ely and intensi'ely. &n the least industriali,ed places, its reign is already
attested !y a few star co""odities and !y the i"perialist do"ination i"posed !y
regions which are ahead in the de'elop"ent of producti'ity. &n the ad'anced regions,
social space is in'aded !y a continuous superi"position of geological layers of
co""odities. .t this point in the second industrial re'olution, alienated consu"ption
!eco"es for the "asses a duty supple"entary to alienated production. &t is all the
sold la!or of a society which glo!ally !eco"es the total co""odity for which the
cycle "ust !e continued. #or this to !e done, the total co""odity has to return as a
frag"ent to the frag"ented indi'idual, a!solutely separated fro" the producti'e
forces operating as a whole. $hus it is here that the speciali,ed science of do"ination
"ust in turn speciali,e8 it frag"ents itself into sociology, psychotechnics,
cy!ernetics, se"iology, etc., watching o'er the self*regulation of e'ery le'el of the
process.
16
0-.
3hereas in the pri"iti'e phase of capitalist accu"ulation, political econo"y sees in
the proletarian only the wor5er who "ust recei'e the "ini"u" indispensa!le for the
conser'ation of his la!or power, without e'er seeing hi" in his leisure and hu"anity,
these ideas of the ruling class are re'ersed as soon as the production of co""odities
reaches a le'el of a!undance which re2uires a surplus of colla!oration fro" the
wor5er. $his wor5er, suddenly redee"ed fro" the total conte"pt which is clearly
shown hi" !y all the 'arieties of organi,ation and super'ision of production, finds
hi"self e'ery day, outside of production and in the guise of a consu"er, see"ingly
treated as an adult, with ,ealous politeness. .t this point the hu"anis" of the
co""odity ta5es charge of the wor5er s leisure and hu"anity, si"ply !ecause now
political econo"y can and "ust do"inate these spheres as political econo"y. $hus the
perfected denial of "an has ta5en charge of the totality of hu"an e4istence.
00.
$he spectacle is a per"anent opiu" war which ai"s to "a5e people identify goods
with co""odities and satisfaction with sur'i'al that increases according to its own
laws. But if consu"a!le sur'i'al is so"ething which "ust always increase, this is
!ecause it continues to contain pri'ation. &f there is nothing !eyond increasing
sur'i'al, if there is no point where it "ight stop growing, this is not !ecause it is
!eyond pri'ation, !ut !ecause it is enriched pri'ation.
01.
.uto"ation, the "ost ad'anced sector of "odern industry as well as the "odel which
perfectly su"s up its practice, dri'es the co""odity world toward the following
contradiction8 the technical e2uip"ent which o!+ecti'ely eli"inates la!or "ust at the
sa"e ti"e preser'e la!or as a co""odity and as the only source of the co""odity. &f
the social la!or (ti"e) engaged !y the society is not to di"inish !ecause of
auto"ation (or any other less e4tre"e for" of increasing the producti'ity of la!or),
17
then new +o!s ha'e to !e created. Ser'ices, the tertiary sector, swell the ran5s of
the ar"y of distri!ution and are a eulogy to the current co""odities; the additional
forces which are "o!ili,ed +ust happen to !e suita!le for the organi,ation of
redundant la!or re2uired !y the artificial needs for such co""odities.
06.
%4change 'alue could arise only as an agent of use 'alue, !ut its 'ictory !y "eans of
its own weapons created the conditions for its autono"ous do"ination. =o!ili,ing all
hu"an use and esta!lishing a "onopoly o'er its satisfaction, e4change 'alue has ended
up !y directing use. $he process of e4change !eca"e identified with all possi!le use
and reduced use to the "ercy of e4change. %4change 'alue is the condottiere of use
'alue who ends up waging the war for hi"self.
07.
$he tendency of use 'alue to fall, this constant of capitalist econo"y, de'elops a new
for" of pri'ation within increased sur'i'al8 the new pri'ation is not far re"o'ed fro"
the old penury since it re2uires "ost "en to participate as wage wor5ers in the
endless pursuit of its attain"ent, and since e'eryone 5nows he "ust su!"it or die.
$he reality of this !lac5"ail accounts for the general acceptance of the illusion at
the heart of the consu"ption of "odern co""odities8 use in its "ost i"po'erished
for" (food and lodging) today e4ists only to the e4tent that it is i"prisoned in the
illusory wealth of increased sur'i'al. $he real consu"er !eco"es a consu"er of
illusions. $he co""odity is this factually real illusion, and the spectacle is its general
"anifestation.
06.
&n the in'erted reality of the spectacle, use 'alue (which was i"plicitly contained in
18
e4change 'alue) "ust now !e e4plicitly proclai"ed precisely !ecause its factual
reality is eroded !y the o'erde'eloped co""odity econo"y and !ecause counterfeit
life re2uires a pseudo*+ustification.
09.
$he spectacle is the other side of "oney8 it is the general a!stract e2ui'alent of all
co""odities. =oney do"inated society as the representation of general e2ui'alence,
na"ely, of the e4changea!ility of different goods whose uses could not !e co"pared.
$he spectacle is the de'eloped "odern co"ple"ent of "oney where the totality of
the co""odity world appears as a whole, as a general e2ui'alence for what the entire
society can !e and can do. $he spectacle is the "oney which one only loo5s at,
!ecause in the spectacle the totality of use is already e4changed for the totality of
a!stract representation. $he spectacle is not only the ser'ant of pseudo*use, it is
already in itself the pseudo*use of life.
1:.
.t the "o"ent of econo"ic a!undance, the concentrated result of social la!or
!eco"es 'isi!le and su!+ugates all reality to appearance, which is now its product.
Capital is no longer the in'isi!le center which directs the "ode of production8 its
accu"ulation spreads it all the way to the periphery in the for" of tangi!l e o!+ects.
$he entire e4panse of society is its portrait.
11.
$he 'ictory of the autono"ous econo"y "ust at the sa"e ti"e !e its defeat. $he
forces which it has unleashed eli"inate the econo"ic necessity which was the
i""uta!le !asis of earlier societies. 3hen econo"ic necessity is replaced !y the
necessity for !oundless econo"ic de'elop"ent, the satisfaction of pri"ary hu"an
needs is replaced !y an uninterrupted fa!rication of pseudo*needs which are reduced
to the single pseudo*need of "aintaining the reign of the autono"ous econo"y. $he
autono"ous econo"y per"anently !rea5s away fro" funda"ental need to the e4tent
19
that it e"erges fro" the social unconscious which un5nowingly depended on it. .ll
that is conscious wears out. 3hat is unconscious re"ains unaltera!le. But once freed,
does it not fall to ruins in turn> (#reud).
1(.
.s soon as society disco'ers that it depends on the econo"y, the econo"y, in fact,
depends on society. $his su!terranean force, which grew until it appeared so'ereign,
has lost its power. $hat which was the econo"ic it "ust !eco"e the &. $he su!+ect
can e"erge only fro" society, na"ely fro" the struggle within society. $he su!+ect s
possi!le e4istence depends on the outco"e of the class struggle which shows itself
to !e the product and the producer of the econo"ic foundation of history.
1-.
$he consciousness of desire and the desire for consciousness are identically the
pro+ect which, in its negati'e for", see5s the a!olition of classes, the wor5ers direct
possession of e'ery aspect of their acti'ity. &ts opposite is the society of the
spectacle, where the co""odity conte"plates itself in a world it has created.
Chapter - ?nity and /i'ision 3ithin .ppearance
. li'ely new pole"ic a!out the concepts one di'ides into two and two fuse into one
is unfolding on the philosophical front in this country. $his de!ate is a struggle
!etween those who are for and those who are against the "aterialist dialectic, a
struggle !etween two conceptions of the world8 the proletarian conception and the
!ourgeois conception. $hose who "aintain that one di'ides into two is the
funda"ental law of things are on the side of the "aterialist dialectic; those who
"aintain that the funda"ental law of things is that two fuse into one are against the
"aterialist dialectic. $he two sides ha'e drawn a clear line of de"arcation !etween
the", and their argu"ents are dia"etrically opposed. $his pole"ic is a reflection, on
2
the ideological le'el, of the acute and co"ple4 class struggle ta5ing place in China and
in the world.
)ed #lag, (Pe5ing), (1 Septe"!er 1960
10.
$he spectacle, li5e "odern society, is at once unified and di'ided. 9i5e society, it
!uilds its unity on the dis+unction. But the contradiction, when it e"erges in the
spectacle, is in turn contradicted !y a re'ersal of its "eaning, so that the
de"onstrated di'ision is unitary, while the de"onstrated unity is di'ided.
11.
$he struggle of powers constituted for the "anage"ent of the sa"e socio*econo"ic
syste" is disse"inated as the official contradiction !ut is in fact part of the real
unity on a world scale as well as within e'ery nation.
16.
$he spectacular sha" struggles of ri'al for"s of separate power are at the sa"e
ti"e real in that they translate the une2ual and antagonistic de'elop"ent of the
syste", the relati'ely contradictory interests of classes or su!di'isions of classes
which ac5nowledge the syste" and define the"sel'es as participants within its power.
@ust as the de'elop"ent of the "ost ad'anced econo"y is a clash !etween so"e
priorities and others, the totalitarian "anage"ent of the econo"y !y a State
!ureaucracy and the condition of the countries within the sphere of coloni,ation or
se"i*coloni,ation are defined !y specific peculiarities in the 'arieties of production
and power. $hese di'erse oppositions can !e passed off in the spectacle as a!solutely
distinct for"s of society (!y "eans of any nu"!er of different criteria). But in
actual fact, the truth of the uni2ueness of all these specific sectors resides in the
21
uni'ersal syste" that contains the"8 the uni2ue "o'e"ent that "a5es the planet its
field, capitalis".
17.
$he society which carries the spectacle does not do"inate the underde'eloped
regions !y its econo"ic hege"ony alone. &t do"inates the" as the society of the
spectacle. %'en where the "aterial !ase is still a!sent, "odern society has already
in'aded the social surface of each continent !y "eans of the spectacle. &t defines
the progra" of the ruling class and presides o'er its for"ation, +ust as it presents
pseudo*goods to !e co'eted, it offers false "odels of re'olution to local
re'olutionaries. $he spectacle of !ureaucratic power, which holds sway o'er so"e
industrial countries, is an integral part of the total spectacle, its general pseudo*
negation and support. $he spectacle displays certain totalitarian speciali,ations of
co""unication and ad"inistration when 'iewed locally, !ut when 'iewed in ter"s of
the functioning of the entire syste" these speciali,ations "erge in a world di'ision of
spectacular tas5s.
16.
$he di'ision of spectacular tas5s preser'es the entirety of the e4isting order and
especially the do"inant pole of its de'elop"ent. $he root of the spectacle is within
the a!undant econo"y the source of the fruits which ulti"ately ta5e o'er the
spectacular "ar5et despite the ideological*police protectionist !arriers of local
spectacles aspiring to autarchy.
19.
?nder the shi""ering di'ersions of the spectacle, !anali,ation do"inates "odern
society the world o'er and at e'ery point where the de'eloped consu"ption of
22
co""odities has see"ingly "ultiplied the roles and o!+ects to choose fro". $he
re"ains of religion and of the fa"ily (the principal relic of the heritage of class
power) and the "oral repression they assure, "erge whene'er the en+oy"ent of this
world is affir"ed this world !eing nothing other than repressi'e pseudo*en+oy"ent.
$he s"ug acceptance of what e4ists can also "erge with purely spectacular re!ellion;
this reflects the si"ple fact that dissatisfaction itself !eca"e a co""odity as soon
as econo"ic a!undance could e4tend production to the processing of such raw
"aterials.
6:.
$he cele!rity, the spectacular representation of a li'ing hu"an !eing, e"!odies this
!anality !y e"!odying the i"age of a possi!le role. Being a star "eans speciali,ing in
the see"ingly li'ed; the star is the o!+ect of identification with the shallow see"ing
life that has to co"pensate for the frag"ented producti'e speciali,ations which are
actually li'ed. Cele!rities e4ist to act out 'arious styles of li'ing and 'iewing society
unfettered, free to e4press the"sel'es glo!ally. $hey e"!ody the inaccessi!le result
of social la!or !y dra"ati,ing its !y*products "agically pro+ected a!o'e it as its goal8
power and 'acations, decision and consu"ption, which are the !eginning and end of an
undiscussed process. &n one case state power personali,es itself as a pseudo*star; in
another a star of consu"ption gets elected as a pseudo*power o'er the li'ed. But +ust
as the acti'ities of the star are not really glo!al, they are not really 'aried.
61.
$he agent of the spectacle placed on stage as a star is the opposite of the indi'idual,
the ene"y of the indi'idual in hi"self as well as in others. Passing into the spectacle
as a "odel for identification, the agent renounces all autono"ous 2ualities in order to
identify hi"self with the general law of o!edience to the course of things. $he
consu"ption cele!rity superficially represents different types of personality and
shows each of these types ha'ing e2ual access to the totality of consu"ption and
finding si"ilar happiness there. $he decision cele!rity "ust possess a co"plete stoc5
23
of accepted hu"an 2ualities. 7fficial differences !etween stars are wiped out !y the
official si"ilarity which is the presupposition of their e4cellence in e'erything.
Ahrushche' !eca"e a general so as to "a5e decisions on the !attle of Aurs5, not on
the spot, !ut at the twentieth anni'ersary, when he was "aster of the State.
Aennedy re"ained an orator e'en to the point of proclai"ing the eulogy o'er his own
to"!, since $heodore Sorenson continued to edit speeches for the successor in the
style which had characteri,ed the personality of the deceased. $he ad"ira!le people
in who" the syste" personifies itself are well 5nown for not !eing what they are;
they !eca"e great "en !y stooping !elow the reality of the s"allest indi'idual life,
and e'eryone 5nows it.
6(.
#alse choice in spectacular a!undance, a choice which lies in the +u4taposition of
co"peting and co"pli"entary spectacles and also in the +u4taposition of roles
(signified and carried "ainly !y things) which are at once e4clusi'e and o'erlapping,
de'elops into a struggle of 'aporous 2ualities "eant to sti"ulate loyalty to
2uantitati'e tri'iality. $his resurrects false archaic oppositions, regionalis"s and
racis"s which ser'e to raise the 'ulgar hierarchic ran5s of consu"ption to a
preposterous ontological superiority. &n this way, the endless series of tri'ial
confrontations is set up again. fro" co"petiti'e sports to elections, "o!ili,ing a su!*
ludic interest. 3here'er there is a!undant consu"ption, a "a+or spectacular
opposition !etween youth and adults co"es to the fore a"ong the false roles false
!ecause the adult, "aster of his life, does not e4ist and !ecause youth, the
transfor"ation of what e4ists, is in no way the property of those who are now young,
!ut of the econo"ic syste", of the dyna"is" of capitalis". $hings rule and are
young; things confront and replace one another.
6-.
3hat hides under the spectacular oppositions is a unity of "isery. Behind the "as5s
of total choice, different for"s of the sa"e alienation confront each other, all of
24
the" !uilt on real contradictions which are repressed. $he spectacle e4i sts in a
concentrated or a diffuse for" depending on the necessities of the particular stage
of "isery which it denies and supports. &n !oth cases, the spectacle is nothing "ore
than an i"age of happy unification surrounded !y desolation and fear at the tran2uil
center of "isery.
60.
$he concentrated spectacle !elongs essentially to !ureaucratic capitalis", e'en
though it "ay !e i"ported as a techni2ue of state power in "i4ed !ac5ward
econo"ies or, at certain "o"ents of crisis, in ad'anced capitalis". &n fact, !ureaucra
tic property itself is concentrated in such a way that the indi'idual !ureaucrat
relates to the ownership of the glo!al econo"y only through an inter"ediary, the
!ureaucratic co""unity, and only as a "e"!er of this co""unity. =oreo'er, the
production of co""odities, less de'eloped in !ureaucratic capitalis", also ta5es on a
concentrated for"8 the co""odity the !ureaucracy holds on to is the totality of
social la!or, and what it sells !ac5 to society is wholesale sur'i'al. $he dictatorship
of the !ureaucratic econo"y cannot lea'e the e4ploited "asses any significant "argin
of choice, since the !ureaucracy itself has to choose e'erything and since any other
e4ternal choice, whether it concern food or "usic, is already a choice to destroy the
!ureaucracy co"pletely. $his dictatorship "ust !e acco"panied !y per"anent
'iolence. $he i"posed i"age of the good en'elops in its spectacle the totality of what
officially e4ists, and is usually concentrated in one "an, who is the guarantee of
totalitarian cohesion. %'eryone "ust "agically identify with this a!solute cele!rity or
disappear. $his cele!rity is "aster of non*consu"ption, and the heroic i"age which
gi'es an accepta!le "eaning to the a!solute e4ploitation that pri"iti'e accu"ulation
accelerated !y terror really is. &f e'ery Chinese "ust learn =ao, and thus !e =ao, it
is !ecause he can !e nothing else. 3here'er the concentrated spectacle rules, so
does the police.
61.
25
$he diffuse spectacle acco"panies the a!undance of co""odities, the undistur!ed
de'elop"ent of "odern capitalis". <ere e'ery indi'idual co""odity is +ustified in the
na"e of the grandeur of the production of the totality of o!+ects of which the
spectacle is an apologetic catalogue. &rreconcila!le clai"s crowd the stage of the
affluent econo"y s unified spectacle; different star*co""odities si"ultaneously
support contradictory pro+ects for pro'isioning society8 the spectacle of auto"o!iles
de"ands a perfect transport networ5 which destroys old cities, while the spectacle
of the city itself re2uires "useu"*areas. $herefore the already pro!le"atic
satisfaction which is supposed to co"e fro" the consu"ption of the whole, is
falsified i""ediately since the actual consu"er can directly touch only a succession
of frag"ents of this co""odity happiness, frag"ents in which the 2uality attri!uted
to the whole is o!'iously "issing e'ery ti"e.
66.
%'ery gi'en co""odity fights for itself, cannot ac5nowledge the others, and
atte"pts to i"pose itself e'erywhere as if it were the only one. $he spectacle, then,
is the epic poe" of this struggle, an epic which cannot !e concluded !y the fall of any
$roy. $he spectacle does not sing the praises of "en and their weapons, !ut of
co""odities and their passions. &n this !lind struggle e'ery co""odity, pursuing its
passion, unconsciously reali,es so"ething higher8 the !eco"ing*world of the
co""odity, which is also the !eco"ing*co""odity of the world. $hus, !y "eans of a
ruse of co""odity logic, what s specific in the co""odity wears itself out in the
fight while the co""odity*for" "o'es toward its a!solute reali,ation.
67.
$he satisfaction which no longer co"es fro" the use of a!undant co""odities is now
sought in the recognition of their 'alue as co""odities8 the use of co""odities
!eco"es sufficient unto itself; the consu"er is filled with religious fer'or for the
so'ereign li!erty of the co""odities. 3a'es of enthusias" for a gi'en product,
supported and spread !y all the "edia of co""unication, are thus propagated with
26
lightning speed. . style of dress e"erges fro" a fil"; a "aga,ine pro"otes night
spots which launch 'arious clothing fads. @ust when the "ass of co""odities slides
toward puerility, the puerile itself !eco"es a special co""odity; this is epito"i,ed !y
the gadget. 3e can recogni,e a "ystical a!andon to the transcendence of the
co""odity in free gifts, such as 5ey chains which are not !ought !ut are included !y
ad'ertisers with prestigious purchases, or which flow !y e4change in their own
sphere. 7ne who collects the 5ey chains which ha'e !een "anufactured for collection,
accu"ulates the indulgences of the co""odity, a glorious sign of his real presence
a"ong the faithful. )eified "an ad'ertises the proof of his inti"acy with the
co""odity. $he fetishis" of co""odities reaches "o"ents of fer'ent e4altation
si"ilar to the ecstasies of the con'ulsions and "iracles of the old religious fetishis".
$he only use which re"ains here is the funda"ental use of su!"ission.
66.
$he pseudo*need i"posed !y "odern consu"ption clearly cannot !e opposed !y any
genuine need or desire which is not itself shaped !y society and its history. $he
a!undant co""odity stands for the total !reach in the organic de'elop"ent of social
needs. &ts "echanical accu"ulation li!erates unli"ited artificiality, in the face of
which li'ing desire is helpless. $he cu"ulati'e power of independent artificiality sows
e'erywhere the falsification of social life.
69.
&n the i"age of the society happily unified !y consu"ption, real di'ision is only
suspended until the ne4t non*acco"plish"ent in consu"ption. %'ery single product
represents the hope for a da,,ling shortcut to the pro"ised land of total
consu"ption and is cere"oniously presented as the decisi'e entity. But as with the
diffusion of see"ingly aristocratic first na"es carried !y al"ost all indi'iduals of the
sa"e age, the o!+ects which pro"ise uni2ue powers can !e reco""ended to the
de'otion of the "asses only if they re produced in 2uantities large enough for "ass
consu"ption. . product ac2uires prestige when it is placed at the center of social life
27
as the re'ealed "ystery of the ulti"ate goal of production. But the o!+ect which was
prestigious in the spectacle !eco"es 'ulgar as soon as it is ta5en ho"e !y its
consu"er and !y all its other consu"ers. &t re'eals its essential po'erty (which
naturally co"es to it fro" the "isery of its production) too late. But !y then another
o!+ect already carries the +ustification of the syste" and de"ands to !e
ac5nowledged.
7:.
$he fraud of satisfaction e4poses itself !y !eing replaced, !y following the change of
products and of the general conditions of production. $hat which asserted its
definiti'e e4cellence with perfect i"pudence ne'ertheless changes, !oth in the
diffuse and the concentrated spectacle, and it is the syste" alone which "ust
continue8 Stalin as well as the out"oded co""odity are denounced precisely !y those
who i"posed the". %'ery new lie of ad'ertising is also an a'owal of the pre'ious lie.
$he fall of e'ery figure with totalitarian power re'eals the illusory co""unity which
had appro'ed hi" unani"ously, and which had !een nothing "ore than an
agglo"eration of solitudes without illusions.
71.
3hat the spectacle offers as eternal is !ased on change and "ust change with its
!ase. $he spectacle is a!solutely dog"atic and at the sa"e ti"e cannot really achie'e
any solid dog"a. othing stops for the spectacle; this condition is natural to it, yet
co"pletely opposed to its inclination.
7(.
$he unreal unity proclai"ed !y the spectacle "as5s the class di'ision on which the
real unity of the capitalist "ade of production rests. 3hat o!liges the producers to
28
participate in the construction of the world is also what separates the" fro" it.
3hat !rings together "en li!erated fro" their local and national !oundaries is also
what pulls the" apart. 3hat re2uires a "are profound rationality is also what
nourishes the irrationality of hierarchic e4ploitation and repression. 3hat creates
the a!stract power of society creates its concrete unfreedo".
Chapter 0 $he Proletariat as Su!+ect and as )epresentation
$he e2ual right of all to the goods and en+oy"ent of this world, the destruction of all
authority, the negation of all "oral restraints these, at !otto", are the raison d
etre of the =arch 16th insurrection and the charter of the fearso"e organi,ation
that furnished it with an ar"y.
%n2uete parle"entaire sur l insurrection du 16 "ars
7-.
$he real "o'e"ent which suppresses e4isting conditions rules o'er society fro" the
"o"ent of the !ourgeoisie s 'ictory in the econo"y, and 'isi!ly after the political
translation of this 'ictory. $he de'elop"ent of producti'e forces shatters the old
relations of production and all static order turns to dust. 3hate'er was a!solute
!eco"es historical.
70.
By !eing thrown into history, !y ha'ing to participate in the la!or and struggles which
"a5e up history, "en find the"sel'es o!liged to 'iew their relations in a clear
"anner. $his history has no o!+ect distinct fro" what ta5es place within it, e'en
though the last unconscious "etaphysical 'ision of the historical epoch could loo5 at
the producti'e progression through which history has unfolded as the 'ery o!+ect of
29
history. $he su!+ect of history can !e none other than the li'ing producing hi"self,
!eco"ing "aster and possessor of his world which is history, and e4isting as
consciousness of his ga"e.
71.
$he class struggles of the long re'olutionary epoch inaugurated !y the rise of the
!ourgeoisie, de'elop together with the thought of history, the dialectic, the thought
which no longer stops to loo5 for the "eaning of what is, !ut rises to a 5nowledge of
the dissolution of all that is, and in its "o'e"ent dissol'es all separation.
76.
<egel no longer had to interpret the world, !ut the transfor"ation of the world. By
only interpreting the transfor"ation, <egel is only the philosophical co"pletion of
philosophy. <e wants to understand a world which "a5es itself. $his historical
thought is as yet only the consciousness which always arri'es too late, and which
pronounces the +ustification after the fact. $hus it has gone !eyond separation only
in thought. $he parado4 which consists of "a5ing the "eaning of all reality depend on
its historical co"pletion, and at the sa"e ti"e of re'ealing this "eaning as it "a5es
itself the co"pletion of history, flows fro" the si"ple fact that the thin5er of the
!ourgeois re'olutions of the 17th and 16th centuries sought in his philosophy only a
reconciliation with the results of these re'olutions. %'en as a philosophy of the
!ourgeois re'olution, it does not e4press the entire process of this re'olution, !ut
only its final conclusion. &n this sense, it is not a philosophy of the re'olution, !ut of
the restoration (Aarl Aorsch, $heses on <egel and )e'olution). <egel did, for the last
ti"e, the wor5 of the philosopher, the glorification of what e4ists ; !ut what e4isted
for hi" could already !e nothing less than the totality of historical "o'e"ent. $he
e4ternal position of thought ha'ing in fact !een preser'ed, it could he "as5ed only !y
the identification of thought with an earlier pro+ect of Spirit, a!solute hero who did
what he wanted and wanted what he did, and whose acco"plish"ent coincides with
the present. $hus philosophy, which dies in the thought of history, can now glorify its
3
world only !y renouncing it, since in order to spea5, it "ust presuppose that this total
history to which it has reduced e'erything is already co"plete, and that the only
tri!unal where the +udg"ent of truth could !e gi'en is closed.
77.
3hen the proletariat de"onstrates !y its own e4istence, through acts, that this
thought of history is not forgotten, the e4posure of the conclusion is at the sa"e
ti"e the confir"ation of the "ethod.
76.
$he thought of history can !e sa'ed only !y !eco"ing practical thought; and the
practice of the proletariat as a re'olutionary class cannot !e less than historical
consciousness operating on the totality of its world. .ll the theoretical currents of
the re'olutionary wor5ers "o'e"ent grew out of a critical confrontation with
<egelian thought Stirner and Ba5unin as well as =ar4.
79.
$he insepara!ility of =ar4 s theory fro" the <egelian "ethod is itself insepara!le
fro" the re'olutionary character of this theory, na"ely fro" its truth. $his fi rst
relationship has !een generally ignored, "isunderstood, and e'en denounced as the
wea5ness of what fallaciously !eca"e a "ar4ist doctrine. Bernstein, in his
%'olutionary Socialis"8 . Criticis" and .ffir"ation (/ie Borausset,ungen des
So,ialis"us und die .ufga!en der So,ialde"o5ratie), perfectly re'eals the
connection !etween the dialectical "ethod and historical partisanship, !y deploring
the unscientific forecasts of the 1607 =anifesto on the i""inence of proletarian
re'olution in Cer"any8 $his historical self*deception, so erroneous that any political
'isionary could hardly ha'e i"pro'ed on it, would !e inco"prehensi!le in a =ar4, who
31
at that ti"e had already seriously studied econo"ics, if we did not see in this the
product of a relic of the antithetical <egelian dialectic fro" which =ar4, no less than
%ngels, could ne'er co"pletely free hi"self. &n those ti"es of general effer'escence,
this was all the "ore fatal to hi".
6:.
$he in'ersion carried out !y =ar4 to reco'er through transfer the thought of the !
ourgeois re'olutions does not tri'ially consist of putting the "aterialist de'elop"ent
of producti'e forces in the place of the +ourney of the <egelian Spirit "o'ing
towards its encounter with itself in ti"e, its o!+ectification !eing identical to its
alienation, and its historical wounds lea'ing no scars. <istory !eco"e real no longer
has an end. =ar4 ruined <egel s position as separate fro" what happens, as well as
conte"plation !y any supre"e e4ternal agent whate'er. #ro" now on, theory has to
5now only what it does. .s opposed to this, conte"plation of the econo"y s "o'e"ent
within the do"inant thought of the present society is the
untranscended heritage of the undialectical part of <egel s search for a circular
syste"8 it is an appro'al which has lost the di"ension of the concept and which no
longer needs a <egelianis" to +ustify itself, !ecause the "o'e"ent which it praises is
no "ore than a sector without a world 'iew, a sector whose "echanical de'elop"ent
effecti'ely do"inates the whole. =ar4 s pro+ect is the pro+ect of a conscious history.
$he 2uantitati'e which arises in the !lind de'elop"ent of "erely econo"ic producti'e
forces "ust !e transfor"ed into a 2ualitati'e historical appropriation. $he criti2ue of
political econo"y is the first act of this end of prehistory8 7f all the instru"ents of
production the greatest producti'e power is the re'olutionary class itself.
61.
3hat closely lin5s =ar4 s theory with scientific thought is the rational understanding
of the forces which really operate in society. But =ar4 s theory is funda"entally
!eyond scientific thought, and it preser'es scientific thought only !y superseding it8
32
what is in 2uestion is an understanding of struggle, and not of law. 3e 5now only one
science8 the science of history ($he Cer"an &deology).
6(.
$he !ourgeois epoch, which wants to gi'e a scientific foundation to history, o'erloo5s
the fact that this a'aila!le science needed a historical foundation along with the
econo"y. &n'ersely, history directly depends on econo"ic 5nowledge only to the
e4tent that it re"ains econo"ic history. $he e4tent to which the 'iewpoint of
scientific o!ser'ation could o'erloo5 the role of history in the econo"y (the glo!al
process which "odifies its own !asic scientific pre"ises) is shown !y the 'anity of
those socialist calculations which thought they had esta!lished the e4act periodicity
of crises. ow that the constant inter'ention of the State has succeeded in
co"pensating for the effect of tendencies toward crisis, the sa"e type of reasoning
sees in this e2uili!riu" a definiti'e econo"ic har"ony . $he pro+ect of "astering the
econo"y, the pro+ect of appropriating history, if it "ust 5now and a!sor! the science
of society, cannot itself !e scientific. $he re'olutionary 'iewpoint of a "o'e"ent
which thin5s it can do"inate current history !y "eans of scientific 5nowledge
re"ains !ourgeois.
6-.
$he utopian currents of socialis", although the"sel'es historically grounded in the
criti2ue of the e4isting social organi,ation, can rightly !e called utopian to the e4tent
that they re+ect history na"ely the real struggle ta5ing place, as well as the passage
of ti"e !eyond the i""uta!le perfection of their picture of a happy society !ut not
!ecause they re+ect science. 7n the contrary. the utopian thin5ers are co"pletely
do"inated !y the scientific thought of earlier centuries. $hey sought the co"pletion
of this general rational syste"8 they did not in any way consider the"sel'es disar"ed
prophets, since they !elie'ed in the social power of scientific proof and e'en, in the
case of Saint*Si"onis", in the sei,ure of power !y science. <ow did they want to
sei,e through struggle what "ust !e pro'ed> as5ed So"!art. $he scientific
33
conception of the utopians did not e4tend to the 5nowledge that so"e social groups
ha'e interests in the e4isting situation, forces to "aintain it, and also for"s of false
consciousness corresponding to such positions. $his conception did not e'en reach the
historical reality of the de'elop"ent of science itself, which was oriented largely !y
the social de"and of agents who selected not only what could !e ad"itted, !ut also
what could !e studied. $he utopian socialists, re"aining prisoners of the "ode of
e4position of scientific truth, concei'ed this truth in ter"s of its pure a!stract
i"age an i"age which had !een i"posed at a "uch earlier stage of society. .s Sorel
o!ser'ed, it is on the "odel of astrono"y that the utopians thought they would
disco'er and de"onstrate the laws of society. $he har"ony en'isaged !y the",
hostile to history, grows out of the atte"pt to apply to society the science least
dependent on history. $his har"ony is introduced with the e4peri"ental innocence of
ewtonianis", and the happy destiny which is constantly postulated plays in their
social science a role analogous to the role of inertia in rational (=ateriau4 pour une
theorie du proletariat).
60.
$he deter"inistic*scientific facet in =ar4 s thought was precisely the gap through
which the process of ideologi,ation penetrated, during his own lifeti"e, into the
theoretical heritage left to the wor5ers "o'e"ent. $he arri'al of the historical
su!+ect continues to !e postponed, and it is econo"ics, the historical science par
e4cellence, which tends increasingly to guarantee the necessity of its own future
negation. But what is pushed out of the field of theoretical 'ision in this "anner is
re'olutionary practice, the only truth of this negation. 3hat !eco"es i"portant is to
study econo"ic de'elop"ent with patience, and to continue to accept suffering with a
<egelian tran2uility, so that the result re"ains a gra'eyard of good intentions. &t is
suddenly disco'ered that, according to the science of re'olution, consciousness
always co"es too soon, and has to !e taught. <istory has shown that we, and all who
thought as we did, were wrong. <istory has clearly shown that the state of econo"ic
de'elop"ent on the continent at that ti"e was far fro" !eing ripe %ngels was to say
in 1691. $hroughout his life, =ar4 had "aintained a unitary point of 'iew in his
theory, !ut the e4position of the theory was carried out on the terrain of the
34
do"inant thought and !eca"e precise in the for" of criti2ues of particular
disciplines, principally the criti2ue of the funda"ental science of !ourgeois society,
political econo"y. &t is this "utilation, later accepted as definiti'e, which has
constituted "ar4is".
61.
$he wea5ness of =ar4 s theory is naturally the wea5ness of the re'olutionary
struggle of the proletariat of his ti"e. $he wor5ing class did not set off the
per"anent re'olution in the Cer"any of 1606; the Co""une was defeated in isolation.
)e'olutionary theory thus could not yet achie'e its own total e4istence. $he fact that
=ar4 was reduced to defending and clarifying it with cloistered, scholarly wor5, in
the British =useu", caused a loss in the theory itself. $he scientific +ustifications
=ar4 ela!orated a!out the future de'elop"ent of the wor5ing class and the
organi,ational practice that went with the" !eca"e o!stacles to proletarian
consciousness at a later stage.
66.
.ll the theoretical insufficiencies of content as well as for" of e4position of the
scientific defense of proletarian re'olution can !e traced to the identification of the
proletariat with the !ourgeoisie fro" the standpoint of the re'olutionary sei,ure of
power.
67.
By grounding the proof of the scientific 'alidity of proletarian power on repeated
past atte"pts, =ar4 o!scured his historical thought, fro" the =anifesto on, and was
forced to support a linear i"age of the de'elop"ent of "odes of production !rought
on !y class struggles which end, each ti"e, with a re'olutionary transfor"ation of
35
the entire society or with "utual destruction of the classes in struggle. But in the
o!ser'a!le reality of history, as =ar4 pointed out elsewhere, the .siatic "ode of
production preser'ed its i""o!ility in spite of all class confrontations, +ust as the
serf uprisings ne'er defeated the landlords, nor the sla'e re'olts of .nti2uity the
free "en. $he linear sche"a loses sight of the fact that the !ourgeoisie is the only
re'olutionary class that e'er won; at the sa"e ti"e it is the only class for which the
de'elop"ent of the econo"y was the cause and the conse2uence of its ta5ing hold of
society. $he sa"e si"plification led =ar4 to neglect the econo"ic role of the State
in the "anage"ent of a class society. &f the rising !ourgeoisie see"ed to li!erate the
econo"y fro" the State, this too5 place only to the e4tent that the for"er State
was an instru"ent of class oppression in a static econo"y. $he !ourgeoisie de'eloped
its autono"ous econo"ic power in the "edie'al period of the wea5ening of the State,
at the "o"ent of feudal frag"entation of !alanced powers. But the "odern State
which, through =ercantilis", !egan to support the de'elop"ent of the !ourgeoisie,
and which finally !eca"e its State at the ti"e of laisser faire, laisser passer, was to
re'eal later that it was endowed with the central power of calculated "anage"ent of
the econo"ic process. 3ith the concept of Bonapartis", =ar4 was ne'ertheless a!le
to descri!e the shape of the "odern statist !ureaucracy, the fusion of capital and St
ate, the for"ation of a national power of capital o'er la!or, a pu!lic force organi,ed
for social ensla'e"ent, where the !ourgeoisie renounces all historical life which is
not reduced to the econo"ic history of things and would li5e to !e conde"ned to the
sa"e political nothingness as other classes. <ere the socio*political foundations of
the "odern spectacle are already esta!lished, negati'ely defining the proletariat as
the only pretender to historical life.
66.
$he only two classes which effecti'ely correspond to =ar4 s theory, the two pure
classes towards which the entire analysis of Capital leads, the !ourgeoisie and the
proletariat, are also the only two re'olutionary classes in history, !ut in 'ery
different conditions8 the !ourgeois re'olution is o'er; the proletarian re'olution is a
pro+ect !orn on the foundation of the preceding re'olution !ut differing fro" it
2ualitati'ely. By neglecting the originality of the historical role of the !ourgeoisie,
36
one "as5s the concrete originality of the proletarian pro+ect, which can attain
nothing unless it carries its own !anners and 5nows the i""ensity of its tas5s. $he
!ourgeoisie ca"e to power !ecause it is the class of the de'eloping econo"y. $he
proletariat cannot itself co"e to power e4cept !y !eco"ing the class of
consciousness. $he growth of producti'e forces cannot guarantee such power, e'en
!y way of the increasing dispossession which it !rings a!out. . @aco!in sei,ure of
power cannot !e its instru"ent. o ideology can help the proletariat disguise its
partial goals as general goals, !ecause the proletariat cannot preser'e any partial
reality which is really its own.
69.
&f =ar4, in a gi'en period of his participation in the struggle of the proletariat,
e4pected too "uch fro" scientific forecasting, to the point of creating the
intellectual foundation for the illusions of econo"is", it is 5nown that he did not
personally succu"! to those illusions. &n a well*5nown letter of /ece"!er 7, 1667,
acco"panying an article where he hi"self critici,ed Capital, an article which %ngels
would later present to the press as the wor5 of an ad'ersary, =ar4 clearly disclosed
the li"its of his own science8 . . . $he su!+ecti'e tendency of the author (which was
perhaps i"posed on hi" !y his political position and his past), na"ely the "anner in
which he 'iews and presents to others the ulti"ate results of the real "o'e"ent, the
real social process, has no relation to his own actual analysis. $hus =ar4, !y
denouncing the tendentious conclusions of his own o!+ecti'e analysis, and !y the
irony of the perhaps with reference to the e4tra*scientific choices i"posed on hi",
at the sa"e ti"e shows the "ethodological 5ey to the fusion of the two aspects.
9:.
$he fusion of 5nowledge and action "ust !e reali,ed in the historical struggle itself,
in such a way that each of these ter"s guarantees the truth of the other. $he
for"ation of the proletarian class into a su!+ect "eans the organi,ation of
re'olutionary struggles and the organi,ation of society at the re'olutionary "o"ent8
37
it is then that the practical conditions of consciousness "ust e4ist, conditions in
which the theory of pra4is is confir"ed !y !eco"ing practical theory. <owe'er, this
central 2uestion of organi,ation was the 2uestion least de'eloped !y re'olutionary
theory at the ti"e when the wor5ers "o'e"ent was founded, na"ely when this
theory still had the unitary character which ca"e fro" the thought of history.
($heory had underta5en precisely this tas5 in order to de'elop a unitary historical
practice.) $his 2uestion is in fact the locus of inconsistency of this theory, allowing
the return of statist and hierarchic "ethods of application !orrowed fro" the
!ourgeois re'olution. $he for"s of organi,ation of the wor5ers "o'e"ent which
were de'eloped on the !asis of this renunciation of theory ha'e in turn pre'ented the
"aintenance of a unitary theory, !rea5ing it up into 'aried speciali,ed and partial
disciplines. /ue to the !etrayal of unitary historical thought, this ideological
estrange"ent fro" theory can no longer recogni,e the practical 'erification of this
thought when such 'erification e"erges in spontaneous struggles of wor5ers; all it
can do is repress e'ery "anifestation and "e"ory of such 'erification. Det these
historical for"s which appeared in struggle are precisely the practical "ilieu which
the theory needed in order to !e true. $hey are re2uire"ents of the theory which
ha'e not !een for"ulated theoretically. $he so'iet was not a theoretical disco'ery;
yet its e4istence in practice was already the highest theoretical truth of the
&nternational 3or5ing"en s .ssociation.
91.
$he first successes of the struggle of the &nternational led it to free itself fro" the
confused influences of the do"inant ideology which sur'i'ed in it. But the defeat and
repression which it soon encountered !rought to the foreground a conflict !etween
two conceptions of the proletarian re'olution. Both of these conceptions contain an
authoritarian di"ension and thus a!andon the conscious self*e"ancipation of the
wor5ing class. &n effect, the 2uarrel !etween =ar4ists and Ba5uninists (which
!eca"e irreconcila!le) was two*edged, referring at once to power in the re'olutionary
society and to the organi,ation of the present "o'e"ent, and when the positions of
the ad'ersaries passed fro" one aspect to the other, they re'ersed the"sel'es.
Ba5unin fought the illusion of a!olishing classes !y the authoritarian use of state
38
power, foreseeing the reconstitution of a do"inant !ureaucratic class and the
dictatorship of the "ost 5nowledgea!le, or those who would !e reputed to !e such.
=ar4 thought that the growth of econo"ic contradictions insepara!le fro"
de"ocratic education of the wor5ers would reduce the role of the proletarian State
to a si"ple phase of legali,ing the new social relations i"posing the"sel'es
o!+ecti'ely, and denounced Ba5unin and his followers for the authoritarianis" of a
conspiratorial elite which deli!erately placed itself a!o'e the &nternational and
for"ulated the e4tra'agant design of i"posing on society the irresponsi!le
dictatorship of those who are "ost re'olutionary, or those who would designate
the"sel'es to !e such. Ba5unin, in fact, recruited followers on the !asis of such a
perspecti'e8 &n'isi!le pilots in the center of the popular stor", we "ust direct it,
not with a 'isi!le power, !ut with the collecti'e dictatorship of all the allies. .
dictatorship without !adge, without title, without official right, yet all the "ore
powerful !ecause it will ha'e none of the appearances of power. $hus two ideologies
of the wor5ers re'olution opposed each other, each containing a partially true
criti2ue, !ut losing the unity of the thought of history, and instituting the"sel'es
into ideological authorities. Powerful organi,ations, li5e Cer"an Social*/e"ocracy and
the &!erian .narchist #ederation faithfully ser'ed one or the other of these
ideologies; and e'erywhere the result was 'ery different fro" what had !een
desired.
9(.
$he strength and the wea5ness of the real anarchist struggle resides in its 'iewing
the goal of proletarian re'olution as i""ediately present (the pretensions of
anarchis" in its indi'idualist 'ariants ha'e always !een laugha!le). #ro" the historical
thought of "odern class struggles collecti'ist anarchis" retains only the conclusion,
and its e4clusi'e insistence on this conclusion is acco"panied !y deli!erate conte"pt
for "ethod. $hus its criti2ue of the political struggle has re"ained a!stract, while its
choice of econo"ic struggle is affir"ed only as a function of the illusion of a
definiti'e solution !rought a!out !y one single !low on this terrain on the day of the
general stri5e or the insurrection. $he anarchists ha'e an ideal to reali,e. .narchis"
re"ains a "erely ideological negation of the State and of classes, na"ely of the
39
social conditions of separate ideology. &t is the ideology of pure li!erty which
e2uali,es e'erything and dis"isses the 'ery idea of historical e'il. $his 'iewpoint
which fuses all partial desires has gi'en anarchis" the "erit of representing the
re+ection of e4isting conditions in fa'or of the whole of life, and not of a pri'ileged
critical speciali,ation; !ut this fusion is considered in the a!solute, according to
indi'idual caprice, !efore its actual reali,ation, thus conde"ning anarchis" to an
incoherence too easily seen through. .narchis" has "erely to repeat and to replay
the sa"e si"ple, total conclusion in e'ery single struggle, !ecause this first
conclusion was fro" the !eginning identified with the entire outco"e of the
"o'e"ent. $hus Ba5unin could write in 167-, when he left the #ederation @urassiene8
/uring the past nine years, "ore ideas ha'e !een de'eloped within the &nternational
than would !e needed to sa'e the world, if ideas alone could sa'e it, and & challenge
anyone to in'ent a new one. &t is no longer the ti"e for ideas, !ut for facts and acts.
$here is no dou!t that this conception retains an ele"ent of the historical thought of
the proletariat, the certainty that ideas "ust !eco"e practice, !ut it lea'es the
historical terrain !y assu"ing that the ade2uate for"s for this passage to practice
ha'e already !een found and will ne'er change.
9-.
$he anarchists, who distinguish the"sel'es e4plicitly fro" the rest of the wor5ers
"o'e"ent !y their ideological con'iction, reproduce this separation of co"petences
a"ong the"sel'es; they pro'ide a terrain fa'ora!le to infor"al do"ination o'er all
anarchist organi,ations !y propagandists and defenders of their ideology, specialists
who are in general "ore "ediocre the "ore their intellectual acti'ity consists of the
repetition of certain definiti'e truths. &deological respect for unani"ity of decision
has on the whole !een fa'ora!le to the uncontrolled authority, within the
organi,ation itself, of specialists in freedo"; and re'olutionary anarchis" e4pects
the sa"e type of unani"ity fro" the li!erated population, o!tained !y the sa"e
"eans. #urther"ore, the refusal to ta5e into account the opposition !etween the
conditions of a "inority grouped in the present struggle and of a society of free
indi'iduals, has nourished a per"anent separation a"ong anarchists at the "o"ent of
co""on decision, as is shown !y an infinity of anarchist insurrections in Spain,
4
confined and destroyed on a local le'el.
90.
$he illusion entertained "ore or less e4plicitly !y genuine anarchis" is the per"anent
i""inence of an instantaneously acco"plished re'olution which will pro'e the truth of
the ideology and of the "ode of practical organi,ation deri'ed fro" the ideology. &n
19-6, anarchis" in fact led a social re'olution, the "ost ad'anced "odel of
proletarian power in all ti"e. &n this conte4t it should !e noted that the signal for a
general insurrection had !een i"posed !y a pronuncia"iento of the ar"y.
#urther"ore, to the e4tent that this re'olution was not co"pleted during the first
days (!ecause of the e4istence of #ranco s power in half the country, strongly
supported fro" a!road while the rest of the international proletarian "o'e"ent was
already defeated, and !ecause of re"ains of !ourgeois forces or other statist
wor5ers parties within the ca"p of the )epu!lic) the organi,ed anarchist "o'e"ent
showed itself una!le to e4tend the de"i*'ictories of the re'olution, or e'en to
defend the". &ts 5nown leaders !eca"e "inisters and hostages of the !ourgeois
State which destroyed the re'olution only to lose the ci'il war.
91.
$he orthodo4 =ar4is" of the Second &nternational is the scientific ideology of the
socialist re'olution8 it identifies its whole truth with o!+ecti'e processes in the
econo"y and with the progress of a recognition of this necessity !y the wor5ing class
educated !y the organi,ation. $his ideology redisco'ers the confidence in pedagogical
de"onstration which had characteri,ed utopian socialis", !ut "i4es it with a
conte"plati'e reference to the course of history8 this attitude has lost as "uch of
the <egelian di"ension of a total history as it has lost the i""o!ile i"age of totality
in the utopian criti2ue ("ost highly de'eloped !y #ourier). $his scientific attitude can
do no "ore than re'i'e a sy""etry of ethical choices; it is fro" this attitude that
the nonsense of <ilferding springs when he states that recogni,ing the necessity of
socialis" gi'es no indication of the practical attitude to !e adopted. #or it is one
41
thing to recogni,e a necessity, and it is 2uite another thing to put oneself at the
ser'ice of this necessity (#inan,5apital). $hose who failed to recogni,e that for
=ar4 and for the re'olutionary proletariat the unitary thought of history was in no
way distinct fro" the practical attitude to !e adopted, regularly !eca"e 'icti"s of
the practice they adopted.
96.
$he ideology of the social*de"ocratic organi,ation ga'e power to professors who
educated the wor5ing class, and the for" of organi,ation which was adopted was the
for" "ost suita!le for this passi'e apprenticeship. $he participation of socialists of
the Second &nternational in political and econo"ic struggles was ad"ittedly concrete
!ut profoundly uncritical. &t was conducted in the na"e of re'olutionary illusion !y
"eans of an o!'iously refor"ist practice. $he re'olutionary ideology was to !e
shattered !y the 'ery success of those who held it. $he separate position of the
"o'e"ent s deputies and +ournalists attracted the already recruited !ourgeois
intellectuals toward a !ourgeois "ode of life. %'en those who had !een recruited
fro" the struggles of industrial wor5ers and who were the"sel'es wor5ers, were
transfor"ed !y the union !ureaucracy into !ro5ers of la!or power who sold la!or as a
co""odity, for a +ust price. &f their acti'ity was to retain so"e appearance of !eing
re'olutionary, capitalis" would ha'e had to !e con'eniently una!le to support
econo"ically this refor"is" which it tolerated politically (in the legalistic agitation of
the social*de"ocrats). But such an antagonis", guaranteed !y their science, was
constantly !elied !y history.
97.
Bernstein, the social*de"ocrat furthest fro" political ideology and "ost openly
attached to the "ethodology of !ourgeois science, had the honesty to want to
de"onstrate the reality of this contradiction; the %nglish wor5ers refor"ist
"o'e"ent had also de"onstrated it, !y doing without re'olutionary ideology. But the
contradiction was definiti'ely de"onstrated only !y historical de'elop"ent itself.
42
.lthough full of illusions in other respects, Bernstein had denied that a crisis of
capitalist production would "iraculously force the hand of socialists who wanted to
inherit the re'olution only !y this legiti"ate rite. $he profound social uphea'al which
arose with the first world war, though fertile with the awa5ening of consciousness,
twice de"onstrated that the social*de"ocratic hierarchy had not educated
re'olutionarily; and had in no way transfor"ed the Cer"an wor5ers into
theoreticians8 first when the 'ast "a+ority of the party rallied to the i"perialist war;
ne4t when, in defeat, it s2uashed the Sparta5ist re'olutionaries. $he e4*wor5er
%!ert still !elie'ed in sin, since he ad"itted that he hated re'olution li5e sin. $he
sa"e leader showed hi"self a precursor of the socialist representation which soon
after confronted the )ussian proletariat as its a!solute ene"y; he e'en for"ulated
e4actly the sa"e progra" for this new alienation8 Socialis" "eans wor5ing a lot .
96.
9enin, as a =ar4ist thin5er, was no "ore than a consistent and faithful Aauts5yi st
who applied the re'olutionary ideology of orthodo4 =ar4is" to )ussian conditions,
conditions unfa'ora!le to the refor"ist practice carried on elsewhere !y the Second
&nternational. &n the )ussian conte4t, the e4ternal "anage"ent of the pro
letariat, acting !y "eans of a disciplined clandestine party su!ordinated to
intellectuals transfor"ed into professional re'olutionaries, !eco"es a profession
which refuses to deal with the ruling professions of capitalist society (the C,arist
political regi"e !eing in any case una!le to offer such opportunities which are !ased
on an ad'anced stage of !ourgeois power). &t therefore !eca"e the profession of the
a!solute "anage"ent of society.
99.
3ith the war and the collapse of the social*de"ocratic international in the face of
the war, the authoritarian ideological radicalis" of the Bolshe'i5s spread all o'er the
world. $he !loody end of the de"ocratic illusions of the wor5ers "o'e"ent
transfor"ed the entire world into a )ussia, and Bolshe'is", reigning o'er the first
re'olutionary !reach !rought on !y this epoch of crisis, offered to proletarians of all
lands its hierarchic and ideological "odel, so that they could spea5 )ussian to the
43
ruling class. 9enin did not reproach the =ar4is" of the Second &nternational for
!eing a re'olutionary ideology, !ut for ceasing to !e one.
1::.
$he historical "o"ent when Bolshe'is" triu"phed for itself in )ussia and when
social*de"ocracy fought 'ictoriously for the old world "ar5s the inauguration of the
state of affairs which is at the heart of the do"ination of the "odern spectacle8 the
representation of the wor5ing class radically opposes itself to the wor5ing class.
1:1.
&n all pre'ious re'olutions, wrote )osa 9u4e"!urg in )ote #ahne of /ece"!er (1,
1916, the co"!atants faced each other directly8 class against class, progra" against
progra". &n the present re'olution, the troops protecting the old order do not
inter'ene under the insignia of the ruling class, !ut under the flag of a social*
de"ocratic party. &f the central 2uestion of re'olution had !een posed openly and
honestly8 capitalis" or socialis"> the great "ass of the proletariat would today ha'e
no dou!ts or hesitations. $hus, a few days !efore its destruction, the radical
current of the Cer"an proletariat disco'ered the secret of the new conditions which
had !een created !y the preceding process (toward which the representation of the
wor5ing class had greatly contri!uted)8 the spectacular organi,ation of defense of
the e4isting order, the social reign of appearances where no central 2uestion can any
longer !e posed openly and honestly. $he re'olutionary representation of the
proletariat had at this stage !eco"e !oth the "ain factor and the central result of
the general falsification of society.
1:(.
$he organi,ation of the proletariat on the Bolshe'i5 "odel which e"erged fro"
44
)ussian !ac5wardness and fro" the a!andon"ent of re'olutionary struggle !y the
wor5ers "o'e"ent of ad'anced countries, found in this !ac5wardness all the
conditions which carried this for" of organi,ation toward the counter*re'olutionary
in'ersion which it unconsciously contained at its source. $he continuing retreat of the
"ass of the %uropean wor5ers "o'e"ent in the face of the <ic )hodus, hic salta of
the 1916*19(: period, a retreat which included the 'iolent destruction of its radical
"inority, fa'ored the co"pletion of the Bolshe'i5 de'elop"ent and let this fraudulent
outco"e present itself to the world as the only proletarian solution. By sei,ing state
"onopoly o'er representation and defense of wor5ers power, the Bolshe'i5 party
+ustified itself and !eca"e what it was8 the party of the proprietors of the
proletariat (essentially eli"inating earlier for"s of property).
1:-.
/uring twenty years of unresol'ed theoretical de!ate, the 'aried tendencies of
)ussian social*de"ocracy had e4a"ined all the conditions for the li2uidation of
C,aris"8 the wea5ness of the !ourgeoisie, the weight of the peasant "a+ority and the
decisi'e role of a concentrated and co"!ati'e !ut hardly nu"erous proletariat. $he
de!ate was resol'ed in practice !y "eans of a factor which had not !een present in
the hypotheses8 a re'olutionary !ureaucracy which directed the proletariat sei,ed
State power and ga'e society a new class do"ination. Strictly !ourgeois re'olution
had !een i"possi!le; the de"ocratic dictatorship of wor5ers and peasants was
"eaningless; the proletarian power of the So'iets could not "aintain itself
si"ultaneously against the class of s"all landowners, against the national and
international 3hite reaction, and against its own representation e4ternali,ed and
alienated in the for" of a wor5ers party of a!solute "asters of State econo"y,
e4pression, and soon of thought. $he theory of per"anent re'olution of $rots5y and
Par'us, which 9enin adopted in .pril 1917, was the only theory which !eca"e true for
countries where the social de'elop"ent of the !ourgeoisie was retarded, !ut this
theory !eca"e true only after the introduction of the un5nown factor8 the class
power of the !ureaucracy. &n the nu"erous argu"ents a"ong the Bolshe'i5 directors,
9enin was the "ost consistent defender of the concentration of dictatorial power in
the hands of the supre"e representati'es of ideology. 9enin was right e'ery ti"e
45
against his ad'ersaries in that !e supported the solution i"plied !y earlier choices of
a!solute "inority Power8 the de"ocracy which was 5ept fro" peasants !y "eans of
the state would ha'e to !e 5ept fro" wor5ers as well, which led to 5eeping it fro"
co""unist leaders of unions, fro" the entire party, and finally fro" leading party
!ureaucrats. .t the $enth Congress, when the Aronstadt So'iet had !een defeated
!y ar"s and !uried under calu"ny, 9enin pronounced against the leftist !ureaucrats
of the 3or5ers 7pposition the following conclusion (the logic of which Stalin later
e4tended to a co"plete di'ision of the world)8 <ere or there with a rifle, !ut not
with opposition. ... 3e 'e had enough opposition.
1:0.
.fter Aronstadt, the !ureaucracy sole proprietor of a State Capitalis" consolidated
its power internally !y "eans of a te"porary alliance with the peasantry (with the
new econo"ic policy ) and e4ternally !y using wor5ers regi"ented into the
!ureaucratic parties of the $hird &nternational as supports for )ussian diplo"acy,
thus sa!otaging the entire re'olutionary "o'e"ent and supporting !ourgeois
go'ern"ents whose aid it needed in international politics (the power of the
Auon"intang in China in 19(1*(7, the Popular #ront in Spain and in #rance, etc.). $he
!ureaucratic society continued the consolidation !y terrori,ing the peasantry in
order to i"ple"ent the "ast !rutal pri"iti'e capitalist accu"ulation in history. $he
industriali,ation of the Stalin epoch re'ealed the reality !ehind the !ureaucracy8 the
continuation of the power of the econo"y and the preser'ation of the essence of the
"ar5et society co""odity la!or. $he independent econo"y, which do"inates society
to the e4tent of reinstituting the class do"ination it needs for its own ends, is thus
confir"ed. 3hich is to say that the !ourgeoisie created an autono"ous power which,
so long as its autono"y lasts, can e'en do without a !ourgeoisie. $he totalitarian
!ureaucracy is not the last owning class in history in the sense of Bruna )i,,i; it is
only a su!stitute ruling class for the co""odity econo"y. Capitalist pri'ate property
in decline is replaced !y a si"plified, less di'ersified surrogate which is condensed as
collecti'e property of the !ureaucratic class. $his underde'eloped ruling class is the
e4pression of econo"ic underde'elop"ent, and has no perspecti'e other than to
o'erco"e the retardation of this de'elop"ent in certain regions of the world. &t was
46
the wor5ers party organi,ed according to the !ourgeois "odel of separation which
furnished the hierarchical*statist cadre for this supple"entary edition of a ruling
class. 3hile in one of Stalin s prisons, .nton Ciliga o!ser'ed that technical 2uestions
of organi,ation turned out to !e social 2uestions (9enin and the )e'olution).
1:1.
)e'olutionary ideology, the coherence of the separate, of which 9eninis" represents
the greatest 'oluntaristic atte"pt, super'ising a reality which re+ects it, with
Stalinis" returns to its truth in incoherence. .t that paint ideology is no longer a
weapon, !ut a goal. $he lie which is no longer challenged !eco"es lunacy. )eality as
well as the goal dissol'e in the totalitarian ideological procla"ation8 all it says is all
there is. $his is a local pri"iti'is" of the spectacle, whose role is ne'ertheless
essential in the de'elop"ent of the world spectacle. $he ideology which is
"ateriali,ed in this conte4t has not econo"ically transfor"ed the world, as has
capitalis" which reached the stage of a!undance; it has "erely transfor"ed
perception !y "eans of the police.
1:6.
$he totalitarian*ideological class in power is the power of a topsy*tur'y world8 the
stranger it is, the "ore it clai"s not to e4ist, and its force ser'es a!o'e all to affir"
its none4istence. &t is "odest only on this point, !ecause its official none4istence
"ust also coincide with the nec plus ultra of historical de'elop"ent which "ust at the
sa"e ti"e !e attri!uted to its infalli!le co""and. %4tended e'erywhere, the
!ureaucracy "ust !e the class in'isi!le to consciousness; as a result all social life
!eco"es insane. $he social organi,ation of the a!solute lie flows fro" this
funda"ental contradiction.
1:7.
47
Stalinis" was the reign of terror within the !ureaucratic class itself. $he terroris"
at the !ase of this class s power "ust also stri5e this class !ecause it possesses no
+uridical guarantee, no recogni,ed e4istence as owning class, which it could e4tend to
e'ery one of its "e"!ers. &ts real property !eing hidden, the !ureaucracy !eca"e
proprietor !y way of false consciousness. #alse consciousness can "aintain its
a!solute power only !y "eans of a!solute terror, where all real "oti'es are ulti"ately
lost. $he "e"!ers of the !ureaucratic class in power ha'e a right of ownership o'er
society only collecti'ely, as participants in a funda"ental lie8 they ha'e to play the
role of the proletariat directing a socialist society; they ha'e to !e actors loyal to a
script of ideological disloyalty. But effecti'e participation in this falsehood re2uires
that it !e recogni,ed as actual participation. o !ureaucrat can support his right to
power indi'idually, since pro'ing that he s a socialist proletarian would "ean
presenting hi"self as the opposite of a !ureaucrat, and pro'ing that he s a
!ureaucrat is i"possi!le since the official truth of the !ureaucracy is that it does
not e4ist. $hus e'ery !ureaucrat depends a!solutely on the central guarantee of the
ideology which recogni,es the collecti'e participation in its socialist power of all the
!ureaucrats it does not annihilate. &f all the !ureaucrats ta5en together decide
e'erything, the cohesion of their own class can !e assured only !y the concentration
of their terrorist power in a single person. &n this person resides the only practical
truth of falsehood in power8 the indisputa!le per"anence of its constantly ad+usted
frontier. Stalin decides without appeal who is ulti"ately to !e a possessing
!ureaucrat; in other words, who should !e na"ed a proletarian in power and who a
traitor in the pay of the =i5ado or of 3all Street. $he !ureaucratic ato"s find the
co""on essence of their right only in the person of Stalin. Stalin is the world
so'ereign who in this "anner 5nows hi"self as the a!solute person for whose
consciousness there is no higher spirit. $he so'ereign of the world has effecti'e
consciousness of what he is the uni'ersal power of efficacy in the destructi'e
'iolence which he e4erts against the Self of his su!+ects, the contrasting others.
@ust as he is the power that defines the terrain of do"ination, he is the power which
ra'ages this terrain.
1:6.
48
3hen ideology, ha'ing !eco"e a!solute through the possession of a!solute power,
changes fro" partial 5nowledge into totalitarian falsehood, the thought of history is
so perfectly annihilated that history itself, e'en at the le'el of the "ost e"pirical
5nowledge, can no longer e4ist. $he totalitarian !ureaucratic society li'es in a
perpetual present where e'erything that happened e4ists for it only as a place
accessi!le to its police. $he pro+ect already for"ulated !y apoleon of the ruler
directing the energy of "e"ory has found its total concreti,ation in a per"anent
"anipulation of the past, not only of "eanings !ut of facts as well . But the price paid
for this e"ancipation fro" all historical reality is the loss of the rational reference
which is indispensa!le to the historical society, capitalis". &t is 5nown how "uch the
scientific application of insane ideology has cost the )ussian econo"y, if only through
the i"posture of 9ysen5o. $he contradiction of the totalitarian !ureaucracy
ad"inistering an industriali,ed society, caught !etween its need for rationality and
its re+ection of the rational, is one of its "ain deficiencies with regard to nor"al
capitalist de'elop"ent. @ust as the !ureaucracy cannot resol'e the 2uestion of
agriculture the way capitalis" had done, it is ulti"ately inferior to capitalis" in
industrial production, planned fro" the top and !ased on unreality and generali,ed
falsehood.
1:9.
Between the two world wars, the re'olutionary wor5ers "o'e"ent was annihilated !y
the +oint action of the Stalinist !ureaucracy and of fascist totalitarianis" which had
!orrowed its for" of organi,ation fro" the totalitarian party tried out in )ussia.
#ascis" was an e4tre"ist defense of the !ourgeois econo"y threatened !y crisis and
!y proletarian su!'ersion. #ascis" is a state of siege in capitalist society, !y "eans
of which this society sa'es itself and gi'es itself stop*gap rationali,ation !y "a5ing
the State inter'ene "assi'ely in its "anage"ent. But this rationali,ation is itself
!urdened !y the i""ense irrationality of its "eans. .lthough fascis" rallies to the
defense of the "ain points of !ourgeois ideology which has !eco"e conser'ati'e (the
fa"ily, property, the "oral order, the nation), reuniting the petty*!ourgeoisie and
the une"ployed routed !y crisis or decei'ed !y the i"potence of socialist re'olution,
it is not itself funda"entally ideological. &t presents itself as it is8 a 'iolent
49
resurrection of "yth which de"ands participation in a co""unity defined !y archaic
pseudo*'alues8 race, !lood, the leader. #ascis" is technically*e2uipped archais". &ts
deco"posed ersat, of "yth is re'i'ed in the spectacular conte4t of the "ost "odern
"eans of conditioning and illusion. $hus it is one of the factors in the for"ation of
the "odern spectacle, and its role in the destruction of the old wor5ers "o'e"ent
"a5es it one of the funda"ental forces of present*day society. <owe'er, since
fascis" is also the "ost costly for" of preser'ing the capitalist order, it usually had
to lea'e the front of the stage to the great roles played !y the capitalist States; it
is eli"inated !y stronger and "ore rational for"s of the sa"e order.
11:.
ow that the )ussian !ureaucracy has finally succeeded in doing away with the
re"ains of !ourgeois property which ha"pered its rule o'er the econo"y, in
de'eloping this property for its own use, and in !eing recogni,ed e4ternally a"ong the
great powers, it wants to en+oy its world cal"ly and to suppress the ar!itrary
ele"ent which had !een e4erted o'er it8 it denounces the Stalinis" of its origin. But
the denunciation re"ains Stalinist, ar!itrary, une4plained and continually corrected,
!ecause the ideological lie at its origin can ne'er !e re'ealed. $hus the !ureaucracy
can li!erali,e neither culturally nor politically !ecause its e4istence as a class
depends on its ideological "onopoly which, with all its weight, is its only title to
property. $he ideology has no dou!t lost the passion of its positi'e affir"ation, !ut
the indifferent tri'iality which sur'i'es still has the repressi'e function of
prohi!iting the slightest co"petition, of holding capti'e the totality of thought. $hus
the !ureaucracy is !ound to an ideology which is no longer !elie'ed !y anyone. 3hat
used to !e terrorist has !eco"e a laughing "atter, !ut this laughing "atter can
"aintain itself only !y preser'ing, as a last resort, the terroris" it would li5e to !e
rid of. $hus precisely at the "o"ent when the !ureaucracy wants to de"onstrate its
superiority on the terrain of capitalis" it re'eals itself to !e a poor relation of
capitalis". @ust as its actual history contradicts its clai"s and its 'ulgarly
entertained ignorance contradicts its scientific pretentions, so its pro+ect of
!eco"ing a ri'al to the !ourgeoisie in the production of co""odity a!undance is
!loc5ed !y the fact that this a!undance carries its i"plicit ideology within itself, and
5
is usually acco"panied !y an indefinitely e4tended freedo" of spectacular false
choices, a pseudo*freedo" which re"ains irreconcila!le with the !ureaucratic
ideology.
111.
.t the present "o"ent of its de'elop"ent, the !ureaucracy s title to ideological
property is already collapsing internationally. $he power which esta!lished itself
nationally as a funda"entally internationalist "odel "ust ad"it that it can no longer
pretend to "aintain its false cohesion o'er and a!o'e e'ery national frontier. $he
une2ual econo"ic de'elop"ent of so"e !ureaucracies with co"peting interests, who
succeeded in ac2uiring their socialis" !eyond the single country, has led to the
pu!lic and total confrontation !etween the )ussian lie and the Chinese lie. #ro" this
point on, e'ery !ureaucracy in power, or e'ery totalitarian party which is a candidate
to the power left !ehind !y the Stalinist period in so"e national wor5ing classes,
"ust follow its own path. $he glo!al deco"position of the alliance of !ureaucratic
"ystification is further aggra'ated !y "anifestations of internal negation which
!egan to !e 'isi!le to the world with the %ast Berlin wor5ers re'olt, opposing the
!ureaucrats with the de"and for a go'ern"ent of steel wor5ers, "anifestations
which already once led all the way to the power of wor5ers councils in <ungary.
<owe'er, the glo!al deco"position of the !ureaucratic alliance is in the last analysis
the least fa'ora!le factor for the present de'elop"ent of capitalist society. $he
!ourgeoisie is in the process of losing the ad'ersary which o!+ecti'ely supported it
!y pro'iding an illusory unification of all negation of the e4isting order. $his di'ision
of la!or within the spectacle co"es to an end when the pseudo*re'olutionary role in
turn di'ides. $he spectacular ele"ent of the collapse of the wor5ers "o'e"ent will
itself collapse.
11(.
$he 9eninist illusion has no conte"porary !ase outside of the 'arious $rots5yist
tendencies. <ere the identification of the proletarian pro+ect with a hierarchi c
51
organi,ation of ideology stu!!ornly sur'i'es the e4perience of all its results. s, see5
the e2uili!riu" point of a co"pro"ise in order to fuse with a wea5 national
!ourgeoisie, as in .lgeria at the !eginning of its war of independence. #inally, in the
for"er colonies of !lac5 .frica which re"ain openly tied to the ."erican and
%uropean !ourgeoisie, a !ourgeoisie constitutes itself (usually on the !asis of the
power of traditional tri!al chiefs) !y sei,ing the State. $hese countries, where
foreign i"perialis" re"ains the real "aster of the econo"y, enter a stage where the
co"pradores ha'e gotten an indigenous State as co"pensation for their sale of
indigenous products, a State which is independent in the face of the local "asses !ut
not in the face of i"perialis". $his is an artificial !ourgeoisie which is not a!le to
accu"ulate, !ut which si"ply s2uanders the share of surplus 'alue fro" local la!or
which reaches it as well as the foreign su!sidies fro" the States or "onopolies which
protect it. Because of the o!'ious incapacity of these !ourgeois classes to fulfill the
nor"al econo"ic function of a !ourgeoisie, each of the" faces a su!'ersion !ased on
the !ureaucratic "odel, "ore or less adapted to local peculiarities, and eager to sei,e
the heritage of this !ourgeoisie. But the 'ery success of a !ureaucracy in its
funda"ental pro+ect of industriali,ation necessarily contains the perspecti'e of its
historical defeat8 !y accu"ulating capital it accu"ulates a proletariat and thus
creates its own negation in a country where it did not yet e4ist.
110.
&n this co"ple4 and terri!le de'elop"ent which has carried the epoch of class
struggles toward new conditions, the proletariat of the industrial countries has
co"pletely lost the affir"ation of its autono"ous perspecti'e and also, in the last
analysis, its illusions, !ut not its !eing. &t has not !een suppressed. &t re"ains
irreduci!ly in e4istence within the intensified alienation of "odern capitalis"8 it is
the i""ense "a+ority of wor5ers who ha'e lost all power o'er the use of their li'es
and who, once they 5now this, redefine the"sel'es as the proletariat, as negation at
wor5 within this society. $he proletariat is o!+ecti'ely reinforced !y the progressi'e
disappearance of the peasantry and !y the e4tension of the logic of factory la!or to
a large sector of ser'ices and intellectual professions. Su!+ecti'ely the proletariat
is still far re"o'ed fro" its practical class consciousness, not only a"ong white collar
52
wor5ers !ut also a"ong wage wor5ers who ha'e as yet disco'ered only the i"potence
and "ystification of the old politics. e'ertheless, when the proletariat disco'ers
that its own e4ternali,ed power colla!orates in the constant reinforce"ent of
capitalist society, not only in the for" of its la!or !ut also in the for" of unions, of
parties, or of the state power it had !uilt to e"ancipate itself, it also disco'ers fro"
concrete historical e4perience that it is the class totally opposed to all congealed
e4ternali,ation and all speciali,ation of power. &t carries the re'olution which cannot
let anything re"ain outside of itself, the de"and for the per"anent do"ination of
the present o'er the past, and the total criti2ue of separation. &t is this that "ust
find its suita!le for" in action. o 2uantitati'e a"elioration of its "isery, no illusion
of hierarchic integration is a lasting cure for its dissatisfaction, !ecause the
proletariat cannot truly recogni,e itself in a particular wrong it suffered nor in the
righting of a particular wrong. &t cannot recogni,e itself in the righting of a large
nu"!er of wrongs either, !ut only in the a!solute wrong of !eing relegated to the
"argin of life.
111.
$he new signs of negation "ultiplying in the econo"ically de'eloped countries, signs
which are "isunderstood and falsified !y spectacular arrange"ent, already ena!le us
to draw the conclusion that a new epoch has !egun8 now, after the wor5ers first
atte"pt at su!'ersion, it is capitalist a!undance which has failed. 3hen anti*union
struggles of 3estern wor5ers are repressed first of all !y unions, and when the first
a"orphous protests launched !y re!ellious currents of youth directly i"ply the
re+ection of the old speciali,ed politics, of art and of daily life, we see two sides of a
new spontaneous struggle which !egins under a cri"inal guise. $hese are the portents
of a second proletarian assault against class society. 3hen the last children of this
still i""o!ile ar"y reappear on this !attleground which was altered and yet re"ains
the sa"e, they follow a new Ceneral 9udd who, this ti"e, urges the" to destroy the
"achines of per"itted consu"ption.
53
116.
$he political for" at last disco'ered in which the econo"ic e"ancipation of la!or
could !e reali,ed has in this century ac2uired a clear outline in the re'olutionary
wor5ers Councils which concentrate in the"sel'es all the functions of decision and
e4ecution, and federate with each other !y "eans of delegates responsi!le to the
!ase and re'oca!le at any "o"ent. $heir actual e4istence has as yet !een no "ore
than a !rief s5etch, 2uic5ly opposed and defeated !y 'arious defensi'e forces of
class society, a"ong which their own false consciousness "ust often !e included.
Panne5oe5 rightly insisted that choosing the power of wor5ers Councils poses
pro!le"s rather than pro'iding a solution. Det it is precisely in this power where the
pro!le"s of the proletarian re'olution can find their real solution. $his is where the
o!+ecti'e conditions of historical consciousness are reunited. $his is where direct
acti'e co""unication is reali,ed, where speciali,ation, hierarchy and separation end,
where the e4isting conditions ha'e !een transfor"ed into conditions of unity. <ere
the proletarian su!+ect can e"erge fro" his struggle against conte"plation8 his
consciousness is e2ual to the practical organi,ation which it underta5es !ecause this
consciousness is itself insepara!le fro" coherent inter'ention in history.
117.
&n the power of the Councils, which "ust internationally supplant all other power, the
proletarian "o'e"ent is its own product and this product is the producer hi"self. <e
is to hi"self his own goal. 7nly there is the spectacular negation of life negated in its
turn.
116.
$he appearance of the Councils was the highest reality of the proletarian "o'e"ent
in the first 2uarter of this century, a reality which was not seen or was tra'estied
!ecause it disappeared along with the rest of the "o'e"ent that was negated and
eli"inated !y the entire historical e4perience of the ti"e. .t the new "o"ent of
54
proletarian criti2ue, this result returns as the only undefeated point of the defeated
"o'e"ent. <istorical consciousness, which 5nows that this is the only "ilieu where it
can e4ist, can now recogni,e this reality, no longer at the periphery of what is e!!ing,
!ut at the center of what is rising.
119.
. re'olutionary organi,ation e4isting !efore the power of the Councils (it will find its
own far" through struggle), for all these historical reasons, already 5nows that it
does not represent the wor5ing class. &t "ust recogni,e itself as no "ore than a
radical separation fro" the world of separation.
1(:.
$he re'olutionary organi,ation is the coherent e4pression of the theory of pra4is
entering into non*unilateral co""unication with practical struggles, in the process of
!eco"ing practical theory. &ts own practice is the generali,ation of co""unication
and of coherence in these struggles. .t the re'olutionary "o"ent of dissolution of
social separation, this organi,ation "ust recogni,e its own dissolution as a separate
organi,ation.
1(1.
$he re'olutionary organi,ation can !e nothing less than a unitary criti2ue of society,
na"ely a criti2ue which does not co"pro"ise with any for" of separate power
anywhere in the world, and a criti2ue proclai"ed glo!ally against all the aspects of
alienated social life. &n the struggle !etween the re'olutionary organi,ation and class
society, the weapons are nothing other than the essence of the co"!atants
the"sel'es8 the re'olutionary organi,ation cannot reproduce within itself the
do"inant society s conditions of separation and hierarchy. &t "ust struggle
55
constantly against its defor"ation in the ruling spectacle. $he only li"it to
participation in the total de"ocracy of the re'olutionary organi,ation is the
recognition and self*appropriation of the coherence of its criti2ue !y all its "e"!ers,
a coherence which "ust !e pro'ed in the critical theory as such and in the relation
!etween the theory and practical acti'ity.
1((.
3hen constantly growing capitalist alienation at all le'els "a5es it increasingly
difficult for wor5ers to recogni,e and na"e their own "isery, forcing the" to face
the alternati'e of re+ecting the totality of their "isery or nothing, the re'olutionary
organi,ation has to learn that it can no longer co"!at alienation with alienated for"s.
1(-.
Proletarian re'olution depends entirely on the condition that, for the first ti"e,
theory as intelligence of hu"an practice !e recogni,ed and li'ed !y the "asses. &t
re2uires wor5ers to !eco"e dialecticians and to inscri!e their thought into practice.
$hus it de"ands of "en without 2uality "ore than the !ourgeois re'olution de"anded
of the 2ualified "en which it delegated to carry out its tas5s (since the partial
ideological consciousness constructed !y a part of the !ourgeois class was !ased on
the econo"y, this central part of social life in which this class was already in power).
$he 'ery de'elop"ent of class society to the stage of spectacular organi,ation of
non*life thus leads the re'olutionary pro+ect to !eco"e 'isi!ly what it already was
essentially.
1(0.
)e'olutionary theory is now the ene"y of all re'olutionary ideology and 5nows it.
56
Chapter 1 $i"e and <istory
7, gentle"en, the ti"e of life is shortE... .nd if we li'e, we li'e to tread on
5ings.
Sha5espeare, <enry &B, Part &
1(1.
=an, the negati'e !eing who is only to the e4tent that he suppresses Being, is
identical to ti"e. =an s appropriation of his own nature is at the sa"e ti"e his grasp
of the unfolding of the uni'erse. <istory is itself a real part of natural history, of
the transfor"ation of nature into "an (=ar4). &n'ersely, this natural history has no
actual e4istence other than through the process of hu"an history, the only part
which recaptures this historical totality, li5e the "odern telescope whose sight
captures, in ti"e, the retreat of ne!ulae at the periphery of the uni'erse. <istory
has always e4isted, !ut not always in a historical for". $he te"porali,ation of "an as
effected through the "ediation of a society is e2ui'alent to a hu"ani,ation of ti"e.
$he unconscious "o'e"ent of ti"e "anifests itself and !eco"es true within
historical consciousness.
1(6.
Properly historical "o'e"ent, although still hidden, !egins in the slow and intangi!le
for"ation of the real nature of "an, this nature !orn within hu"an history within
the generating action of hu"an society, !ut e'en though that society de'eloped a
technology and a language and is already a product of its own history, it is conscious
only of a perpetual present. $here, all 5nowledge, confined within the "e"ory of the
oldest, is always carried !y the li'ing. either death nor procreation is grasped as a
law of ti"e. $i"e re"ains i""o!ile, li5e an enclosed space. . "ore co"ple4 society
which finally !eco"es conscious of ti"e de'otes itself to negating it !ecause it sees
57
in ti"e not what passes, !ut only what returns. . static society organi,es ti"e in
ter"s of its i""ediate e4perience of nature, on the "odel of cyclical ti"e.
1(7.
Cyclical ti"e already do"inates the e4perience of no"adic populations !ecause they
find the sa"e conditions repeated at e'ery "o"ent of their +ourney8 <egel notes
that the wandering of no"ads is only for"al !ecause it is li"ited to unifor" spaces.
$he society which, !y fi4ing itself in place locally, gi'es space a content !y arranging
indi'iduali,ed places, thus finds itself enclosed inside this locali,ation. $he te"poral
return to si"ilar places now !eco"es the pure return of ti"e in the sa"e place, the
repetition of a series of gestures. $he transition fro" pastoral no"adis" to
sedentary agriculture is the end of the la,y li!erty without content, the !eginning of
la!or. $he agrarian "ode of production in general, do"inated !y the rhyth" of the
seasons, is the !asis for fully constituted cyclical ti"e. %ternity is internal to it; it is
the return of the sa"e here on earth. =yth is the unitary construction of the
thought which guarantees the entire cos"ic order surrounding the order which this
society has in fact already reali,ed within its frontiers.
1(6.
$he social appropriation of ti"e, the production of "an !y hu"an la!or, de'elops
within a society di'ided into classes. $he power which constituted itself a!o'e the
penury of the society of cyclical ti"e, the class which organi,es the social la!or and
appropriates the li"ited surplus 'alue, si"ultaneously appropriates the te"poral
surplus 'alue of its organi,ation of social ti"e8 it possesses for itself alone the
irre'ersi!le ti"e of the li'ing. $he wealth that can !e concentrated in the real" of
power and "aterially used up in su"ptuous feasts is also used up as a s2uandering of
historical ti"e at the surface of society. $he owners of historical surplus 'alue
possess the 5nowledge and the en+oy"ent of li'ed e'ents. Separated fro" the
collecti'e organi,ation of ti"e which predo"inates with the repetiti'e production at
the !ase of social life, this ti"e flows a!o'e its own static co""unity. $his is the
58
ti"e of ad'enture and war, when the "asters of the cyclical society tra'el through
their personal histories, and it is also the ti"e which appears in confrontations with
foreign co""unities, in the derange"ent of the unchangea!le order of the society.
<istory then passes !efore "en as an alien factor, as that which they ne'er wanted
and against which they thought the"sel'es protected. But !y way of this detour
returns the hu"an negati'e an4iety which had !een at the 'ery origin of the entire
de'elop"ent that had fallen asleep.
1(9.
Cyclical ti"e in itself is ti"e without conflict. But conflict is installed within this
infancy of ti"e8 history first struggles to !e history in the practical acti'ity of
"asters. $his history superficially creates the irre'ersi!le; its "o'e"ent constitutes
precisely the ti"e it uses up within the interior of the ine4hausti!le ti"e of cyclical
society.
1-:.
#ro,en societies are those which slowed down their historical acti'ity to the li"it
and "aintained in constant e2uili!riu" their opposition to the natural and hu"an
en'iron"ent as well as their internal oppositions. &f the e4tre"e di'ersity of
institutions esta!lished for this purpose de"onstrates the fle4i!ility of the self*
creation of hu"an nature, this de"onstration !eco"es o!'ious only for the e4ternal
o!ser'er, for the anthropologist who returns fro" historical ti"e. &n each of these
societies a definiti'e structuring e4cluded change. .!solute confor"is" in e4isting
social practices. with which all hu"an possi!ilities are identified for all ti"e, has no
e4ternal li"it other than the fear of falling !ac5 into for"less ani"ality. <ere, in
order to re"ain hu"an, "en "ust re"ain the sa"e.
1-1.
59
$he !irth of political power which see"s to !e related to the last great technological
re'olutions (li5e iron s"elting), at the threshold of a period which would not
e4perience profound shoc5s until the appearance of industry, also "ar5s the "o"ent
when 5inship ties !egin to dissol'e. #ro" then on, the succession of generations
lea'es the sphere of pure cyclical nature in order to !eco"e an e'ent*oriented
succession of powers. &rre'ersi!le ti"e is now the ti"e of those who rule, and
dynasties are its first "easure. 3riting is its weapon. &n writing, language attains its
co"plete independent reality as "ediation !etween consciousnesses. But this
independence is identical to the general independence of separate power as the
"ediation which constitutes society. 3ith writing there appears a consciousness
which is no longer carried and trans"itted directly a"ong the li'ing8 an i"personal
"e"ory, the "e"ory of the ad"inistration of society. 3ritings are the thoughts of
the State; archi'es are its "e"ory (o'alis).
1-(.
$he chronicle is the e4pression of the irre'ersi!le ti"e of power and also the
instru"ent that preser'es the 'oluntaristic progression of this ti"e fro" its
predecessor, since this orientation of ti"e collapses with the fall of e'ery specific
power and returns to the indifferent o!li'ion of cyclical ti"e, the only ti"e 5nown to
peasant "asses who, during the collapse of e"pires and their chronologies, ne'er
change. $he owners of history ha'e gi'en ti"e a "eaning8 a direction which is also a
significance. But this history deploys itself and succu"!s separately, lea'ing the
underlying society unchanged precisely !ecause this history re"ains separated fro"
the co""on reality. $his is why we reduce the history of 7riental e"pires to the
history of religions8 the chronologies which ha'e fallen to ruins left no "ore than the
apparently autono"ous history of the illusions which en'eloped the". $he "asters
who "a5e history their pri'ate property, under the protection of "yth, possess first
of all a pri'ate ownership of the "ode of illusion8 in China and %gypt they long held a
"onopoly o'er the i""ortality of the soul, +ust as their fa"ous early dynasties are
i"aginary arrange"ents of the past. But the "asters possession of illusion is at that
"o"ent the only possi!le possession of a co""on history and of their own history.
$he growth of their real historical power goes together with a populari,ation of the
6
possession of "yth and illusion. .ll this flows fro" the si"ple fact that, to the
e4tent that the "asters too5 it upon the"sel'es to guarantee the per"anence of
cyclical ti"e "ythically, as in the seasonal rites of Chinese e"perors, they
the"sel'es achie'ed a relati'e li!eration fro" cyclical ti"e.
1--.
$he dry une4plained chronology of di'ine power spea5ing to its ser'ants, which wants
to !e understood only as the earthly e4ecution of the co""and"ents of "yth, can !e
sur"ounted and !eco"e conscious history; this re2uires that real participation in
history !e li'ed !y e4tended groups. 7ut of this practical co""unication a"ong those
who recogni,ed each other as possessors of a singular present, who e4perienced the
2ualitati'e richness of e'ents as their acti'ity and as the place where they li'ed their
epoch arises the general language of historical co""unication. $hose for who"
irre'ersi!le ti"e has e4isted disco'er within it the "e"ora!le as well as the "enace
of forgetting8 <erodotus of <alicarnassus here presents the results of his study, so
that ti"e "ay not a!olish the wor5s of "en...
1-0.
)easoning a!out history is insepara!ly reasoning a!out power. Creece was the "o"ent
when power and its change were discussed and understood, the de"ocracy of the
"asters of society. Cree5 conditions were the in'erse of the conditions 5nown to the
despotic State, where power settles its accounts only with itself within the
inaccessi!le o!scurity of its densest point8 through palace re'olution, which is placed
!eyond the pale of discussion !y success or failure ali5e. <owe'er, the power shared
a"ong the Cree5 co""unities e4isted only with the e4penditure of a social life whose
production re"ained separate and static within the ser'ile class. 7nly those who do
not wor5 li'e. &n the di'ision a"ong the Cree5 co""unities, and in the struggle to
e4ploit foreign cities, the principle of separation which internally grounded each of
the" was e4ternali,ed. Creece, which had drea"ed of uni'ersal history, did not
succeed in unifying itself in the face of in'asion or e'en in unifying the calendars of
61
its independent cities. &n Creece historical ti"e !eca"e conscious, !ut not yet
conscious of itself.
1-1.
.fter the disappearance of the locally fa'ora!le conditions 5nown to the Cree5
co""unities, the regression of western historical thought was not acco"panied !y a
reha!ilitation of ancient "ythic organi,ations. 7ut of the confrontations of the
=editerranean populations, out of the for"ation and collapse of the )o"an State,
appeared se"i*historical religions which !eca"e funda"ental factors in the new
consciousness of ti"e, and in the new ar"or of separate power.
1-6.
$he "onotheistic religions were a co"pro"ise !etween "yth and history, !etween
cyclical ti"e which still do"inated production and irre'ersi!le ti"e where populations
clash and regroup. $he religions which grew out of @udais" are a!stract uni'ersal
ac5nowledge"ents of irre'ersi!le ti"e which is de"ocrati,ed, opened to all, !ut in
the real" of illusion. $i"e is totally oriented toward a single final e'ent8 $he
Aingdo" of Cod is at hand. $hese religions arose on the soil of history, and
esta!lished the"sel'es there. But there they still preser'e the"sel'es in radical
opposition to history. Se"i*historical religion esta!lishes a 2ualitati'e point of
departure in ti"e (the !irth of Christ, the flight of =oha""ed), !ut its irre'ersi!le
ti"e introducing real accu"ulation which in &sla" can ta5e the for" of a con2uest, or
in )efor"ation Christianity the for" of increased capital is actually in'erted in
religious thought and !eco"es a countdown8 the hope of access to the genuine other
world !efore ti"e runs out, the e4pectation of the last @udg"ent. %ternity ca"e out
of cyclical ti"e and is !eyond it. %ternity is the ele"ent which holds !ac5 the
irre'ersi!ility of ti"e, suppressing history within history itself !y placing itself on
the other side of irre'ersi!le ti"e as a pure punctual ele"ent to which cyclical ti"e
returned and a!olished itself. Bossuet will still say8 .nd !y "eans of the ti"e that
passes we enter into the eternity which does not pass.
62
1-7.
$he =iddle .ges, this inco"plete "ythical world whose perfection lay outside it, is
the "o"ent when cyclical ti"e, which still regulates the greater part of production,
is really chewed away !y history. . certain irre'ersi!le te"porality is recogni,ed
indi'idually in e'eryone, in the succession of stages of life, in the consideration of life
as a +ourney, a passage with no return through a world whose "eaning lies elsewhere8
the pilgri" is the "an who lea'es cyclical ti"e and !eco"es in reality the tra'eller
that e'eryone is sy"!olically. Personal historical life still finds its fulfill"ent within
the sphere of power, within participation in struggles led !y power and in struggles
o'er disputed power; !ut the irre'ersi!le ti"e of power is shared to infinity under
the general unification of the oriented ti"e of the Christian era, in a world of ar"ed
faith, where the ga"e of the "asters re'ol'es around fidelity and disputes o'er owed
fidelity. $his feudal society, !orn out of the encounter of the organi,ational
structure of the con2uering ar"y as it de'eloped during the con2uest with the
producti'e forces found in the con2uered country (Cer"an &deology) and in the
organi,ation of these producti'e forces one "ust count their religious language
di'ided the do"ination of society !etween the Church and the state power, in turn
su!di'ided in the co"ple4 relations of su,erainty and 'assalage of territorial tenures
and ur!an co""unes. &n this di'ersity of possi!le historical life, the irre'ersi!le ti"e
which silently carried off the underlying society, the ti"e li'ed !y the !ourgeoisie in
the production of co""odities, in the foundation and e4pansion of cities and in the
co""ercial disco'ery of the earth practical e4peri"entation which fore'er
destroyed all "ythical organi,ation of the cos"os slowly re'ealed itself as the
un5nown wor5 of this epoch when the great official historical underta5ing of this
world collapsed with the Crusades.
1-6.
/uring the decline of the =iddle .ges, the irre'ersi!le ti"e which in'ades society is
e4perienced !y the consciousness attached to the ancient order in the for" of an
63
o!session with death. $his is the "elancholy of the de"ise of a world, the last world
where the security of "yth still counterpoised history, and for this "elancholy
e'erything worldly "o'es only toward corruption. $he great re'olts of the %uropean
peasants are also their atte"pt to respond to history which was 'iolently wrenching
the peasants out of the patriarchal sleep that had guaranteed their feudal tutelage.
$his "illenarian utopia of achie'ing hea'en on earth re'i'es what was at the origin of
se"i*historical religion, when Christian co""unities which grew out of @udaic
"essianis" responded to the trou!les and unhappiness of the epoch !y loo5ing to the
i""inent reali,ation of the Aingdo" of Cod and !rought a dis2uieting and su!'ersi'e
factor into ancient society. 3hen Christianity reached the point of sharing power
within the e"pire, it e4posed what still sur'i'ed of this hope as a si"ple superstition8
that is the "eaning of the .ugustinian affir"ation, archetype of all the satisfecit of
"odern ideology, according to which the esta!lished Church has already for a long
ti"e !een this 5ingdo" one spo5e of. $he social re'olt of the "illenarian peasantry
defines itself naturally first of all as a will to destroy the Church. But "illenarianis"
spreads in the historical world, and not on the terrain of "yth. =odern re'olutionary
e4pectations are not irrational continuations of the religious passion of
"illenarianis", as or"an Cohn thought he had de"onstrated in $he Pursuit of the
=illenniu". 7n the contrary, it is "illenarianis", re'olutionary class struggle spea5ing
the language of religion for the last ti"e, which is already a "odern re'olutionary
tendency that as yet lac5s the consciousness that it is only historical. $he
"illenarians had to lose !ecause they could not recogni,e the re'olution as their own
operation. $he fact that they waited to act on the !asis of an e4ternal sign of Cod s
decision is the translation into thought of the practice of insurgent peasants
following chiefs ta5en fro" outside their ran5s. $he peasant class could not attain an
ade2uate consciousness of the functioning of society or of the way to lead its own
struggle8 !ecause it lac5ed these conditions of unity in its action and consciousness, it
e4pressed its pro+ect and led its wars with the i"agery of an earthly paradise.
1-9.
$he new possession of historical life, the )enaissance, which finds its past and its
legiti"acy in .nti2uity, carries with it a +oyous rupture with eternity. &ts irre'ersi!le
64
ti"e is that of the infinite accu"ulation of 5nowledge, and the historical
consciousness which grows out of the e4perience of de"ocratic co""unities and of
the forces which ruin the" will ta5e up, with =achia'elli, the analysis of desanctified
power, saying the unspea5a!le a!out the State. &n the e4u!erant life of the &talian
cities, in the art of the festi'al, life is e4perienced as en+oy"ent of the passage of
ti"e. But this en+oy"ent of passage is itself a passing en+oy"ent. $he song of
9oren,o di =edici considered !y Burc5hardt to !e the e4pression of the 'ery spirit
of the )enaissance is the eulogy which this fragile feast of history pronounces on
itself8 <ow !eautiful the spring of life which 'anishes so 2uic5ly.
10:.
$he constant "o'e"ent of "onopoli,ation of historical life !y the State of the
a!solute "onarchy, transitional for" toward co"plete do"ination !y the !ourgeois
class, !rings into clear 'iew the new irre'ersi!le ti"e of the !ourgeoisie. $he
!ourgeoisie is attached to la!or ti"e, which is li!erated for the first ti"e fro" the
cyclical. 3ith the !ourgeoisie, wor5 !eco"es la!or which transfor"s historical
conditions. $he !ourgeoisie is the first ruling class for which la!or is a 'alue. .nd the
!ourgeoisie which suppresses all pri'ilege, which recogni,es no 'alue that does not
flow fro" the e4ploitation of la!or, has +ustly identified with la!or its own 'alue as a
do"inant class, and has "ade the progress of la!or its own progress. $he class which
accu"ulates co""odities and capital continually "odifies nature !y "odifying la!or
itself, !y unleashing its producti'ity. .ll social life has already !een concentrated
within the orna"ental po'erty of the Court, the tinsel of the cold state
ad"inistration which cul"inates in the 'ocation of 5ing ; and all particular historical
li!erty has had to consent to its defeat. $he li!erty of the irre'ersi!le te"poral
ga"e of the no!les is consu"ed in their last lost !attles, the wars of the #ronde and
the rising of the Scotch for Charles*%dward. $he world s foundation has changed.
101.
$he 'ictory of the !ourgeoisie is the 'ictory of profoundly historical ti"e, !ecause
65
this is the ti"e of econo"ic production which transfor"s society, continuously and
fro" top to !otto". So long as agrarian production re"ains the central acti'ity, the
cyclical ti"e which re"ains at the !ase of society nourishes the coalesced forces of
tradition which fetter all "o'e"ent. But the irre'ersi!le ti"e of the !ourgeois
econo"y eradicates these 'estiges on e'ery corner of the glo!e. <istory, which until
then had see"ed to !e only the "o'e"ent of indi'iduals of the ruling class, and thus
was written as the history of e'ents, is now understood as the general "o'e"ent, and
in this relentless "o'e"ent indi'iduals are sacrificed. $his history which disco'ers
its foundation in political econo"y now 5nows of the e4istence of what had !een its
unconscious, !ut this still cannot !e !rought to light and re"ains unconscious. $his
!lind prehistory, a new fatality do"inated !y no one, is all that the co""odity
econo"y de"ocrati,ed.
10(.
$he history which is present in all the depths of society tends to !e lost at the
surface. $he triu"ph of irre'ersi!le ti"e is also its "eta"orphosis into the ti"e of
things, !ecause the weapon of its 'ictory was precisely the "ass production of
o!+ects according to the laws of the co""odity. $he "ain product which econo"ic
de'elop"ent has transferred fro" lu4urious scarcity to daily consu"ption is
therefore history, !ut only in the for" of the history of the a!stract "o'e"ent of
things which do"inates all 2ualitati'e use of life. 3hile the earlier cyclical ti"e had
supported a growing part of historical ti"e li'ed !y indi'iduals and groups, the
do"ination of the irre'ersi!le ti"e of production tends, socially, to eli"inate this
li'ed ti"e.
10-.
$hus the !ourgeoisie "ade 5nown to society and i"posed on it an irre'ersi!le
historical ti"e, !ut 5ept its use fro" society. $here was history, !ut there is no
"ore, !ecause the class of owners of the econo"y, which cannot !rea5 with econo"ic
history, is directly threatened !y all other irre'ersi!le use of ti"e and "ust repress
66
it. $he ruling class, "ade up of specialists in the possession of things who are
the"sel'es therefore a possession of things, "ust lin5 its fate with the preser'ation
of this reified history, with the per"anence of a new i""o!ility within history. #or
the first ti"e the wor5er, at the !ase of society, is not "aterially a stranger to
history, !ecause it is now the !ase that irre'ersi!ly "o'es society. &n the de"and to
li'e the historical ti"e which it "a5es, the proletariat finds the si"ple unforgetta!le
center of its re'olutionary pro+ect; and e'ery atte"pt (thwarted until now) to reali,e
this pro+ect "ar5s a point of possi!le departure for new historical life.
100.
$he irre'ersi!le ti"e of the !ourgeoisie in power at first presented itself under its
own na"e, as an a!solute origin, Dear 7ne of the )epu!lic. But the re'olutionary
ideology of general freedo" which had destroyed the last re"nants of the "ythical
organi,ation of 'alues and the entire traditional regulation of society, already "ade
'isi!le the real will which it had clothed in )o"an dress8 the freedo" of generali,ed
co""erce. $he co""odity society, now disco'ering that it needed to reconstruct the
passi'ity which it had profoundly sha5en in order to set up its own pure reign, finds
that Christianity with its cultus of a!stract "an ... is the "ost fitting for" of
religion (Capital). $hus the !ourgeoisie esta!lishes a co"pro"ise with this religion, a
co"pro"ise which also e4presses itself in the presentation of ti"e8 its own calendar
a!andoned, its irre'ersi!le ti"e returns to unwind within the Christian era whose
succession it continues.
101.
3ith the de'elop"ent of capitalis", irre'ersi!le ti"e is unified on a world scale.
?ni'ersal history !eco"es a reality !ecause the entire world is gathered under the
de'elop"ent of this ti"e. But this history, which is e'erywhere si"ultaneously the
sa"e, is still only the refusal within history of history itself. 3hat appears the world
o'er as the sa"e day is the ti"e of econo"ic production cut up into e2ual a!stract
frag"ents. ?nified irre'ersi!le ti"e is the ti"e of the world "ar5et and, as a
67
corollary, of the world spectacle.
106.
$he irre'ersi!le ti"e of production is first of all the "easure of co""odities.
$herefore the ti"e officially affir"ed o'er the entire e4panse of the glo!e as the
general ti"e of society refers only to the speciali,ed interests which constitute it
and is no "ore than a particular ti"e.Chapter 6 Spectacular $i"e 3e ha'e nothing
that is ours e4cept ti"e, which e'en those without a roof can en+oy.
Baltasar Cracian, 7raculo =anual y .rte de Prudencia
107.
$he ti"e of production, co""odity*ti"e, is an infinite accu"ulation of e2ui'alent
inter'als. &t is the a!straction of irre'ersi!le ti"e, all of whose seg"ents "ust pro'e
on the chrono"eter their "erely 2uantitati'e e2uality. $his ti"e is in reality e4actly
what it is in its e4changea!le character. &n this social do"ination !y co""odity*ti"e,
ti"e is e'erything, "an is nothing; he is at "ost the carcass of ti"e (Po'erty of
Philosophy). $his is ti"e de'alued, the co"plete in'ersion of ti"e as the field of
hu"an de'elop"ent.
106.
$he general ti"e of hu"an non*de'elop"ent also e4ists in the co"ple"entary for" of
consu"a!le ti"e which returns as pseudo*cyclical ti"e to the daily life of the society
!ased on this deter"ined production.
109.
68
Pseudo*cyclical ti"e is actually no "ore than the consu"a!le disguise of the
co""odity*ti"e of production. &t contains the essential properties of co""odity*
ti"e, na"ely e4changea!le ho"ogeneous units and the suppression of the 2ualitati'e
di"ension. But !eing the !y*product of this ti"e which ai"s to retard concrete daily
life and to 5eep it retarded, it "ust !e charged with pseudo*'aluations and appear in
a se2uence of falsely indi'iduali,ed "o"ents.
11:.
Pseudo*cyclical ti"e is the ti"e of consu"ption of "odern econo"ic sur'i'al, of
increased sur'i'al, where daily life continues to !e depri'ed of decision and re"ains
!ound, no longer to the natural order, !ut to the pseudo*nature de'eloped in
alienated la!or; and thus this ti"e naturally reesta!lishes the ancient cyclical rhyth"
which regulated the sur'i'al of preindustrial societies. Pseudo*cyclical ti"e leans on
the natural re"ains of cyclical ti"e and also uses it to co"pose new ho"ologous
co"!inations8 day and night, wor5 and wee5ly rest, the recurrence of 'acations.
111.
Pseudo*cyclical ti"e is a ti"e transfor"ed !y industry. $he ti"e which has its !asis
in the production of co""odities is itself a consu"a!le co""odity which includes
e'erything that pre'iously (during the phase of dissolution of the old unitary society)
was differentiated into pri'ate life, econo"ic life, political life. .ll the consu"a!le
ti"e of "odern society co"es to !e treated as a raw "aterial for 'aried new
products which i"pose the"sel'es on the "ar5et as uses of socially organi,ed ti"e.
. product which already e4ists in a for" which "a5es it suita!le for consu"ption can
ne'ertheless in its turn !eco"e a raw "aterial for another product (Capital).
11(.
69
&n its "ost ad'anced sector, concentrated capitalis" orients itself towards the sale
of co"pletely e2uipped !loc5s of ti"e, each one constituting a single unified
co""odity which integrates a nu"!er of di'erse co""odities. &n the e4panding
econo"y of ser'ices and leisure, this gi'es rise to the for"ula of calculated pay"ent
in which e'erything s included 8 spectacular en'iron"ent, the collecti'e pseudo*
displace"ent of 'acations, su!scriptions to cultural consu"ption, and the sale of
socia!ility itself in the for" of passionate con'ersations and "eetings with
personalities. $his sort of spectacular co""odity, which can o!'iously circulate only
!ecause of the increased po'erty of the corresponding realities, +ust as o!'iously
fits a"ong the pilot*articles of "oderni,ed sales techni2ues !y !eing paya!le on
credit.
11-.
Consu"a!le pseudo*cyclical ti"e is spectacular ti"e, !oth as the ti"e of consu"ption
of i"ages in the narrow sense, and as the i"age of consu"ption of ti"e in the !road
sense. $he ti"e of i"age*consu"ption, the "ediu" of all co""odities, is insepara!ly
the field where the instru"ents of the spectacle e4ert the"sel'es fully, and also
their goal, the location and "ain for" of all specific consu"ption8 it is 5nown that the
ti"e*sa'ing constantly sought !y "odern society, whether in the speed of 'ehicles or
in the use of dried soups, is concretely translated for the population of the ?nited
States in the fact that the "ere conte"plation of tele'ision occupies it for an
a'erage of three to si4 hours a day. $he social i"age of the consu"ption of ti"e, in
turn, is e4clusi'ely do"inated !y "o"ents of leisure and 'acation, "o"ents presented
at a distance and desira!le !y definition, li5e e'ery spectacular co""odity. <ere this
co""odity is e4plicitly presented as the "o"ent of real life, and the point is to wait
for its cyclical return. But e'en in those 'ery "o"ents reser'ed for li'ing, it is still
the spectacle that is to !e seen and reproduced, !eco"ing e'er "ore intense. 3hat
was represented as genuine life re'eals itself si"ply as "ore genuinely spectacular
life.
7
110.
$he epoch which displays its ti"e to itself as essentially the sudden return of
"ultiple festi'ities is also an epoch without festi'als. 3hat was, in cyclical ti"e, the
"o"ent of a co""unity s participation in the lu4urious e4penditure of life is
i"possi!le for the society without co""unity or lu4ury. 3hen its 'ulgari,ed pseudo*
festi'als, parodies of the dialogue and the gift, incite a surplus of econo"ic
e4penditure, they lead only to deception always co"pensated !y the pro"ise of a new
deception. &n the spectacle, the lower the use 'alue of "odern sur'i'al*ti"e, the
"ore highly it is e4alted. $he reality of ti"e has !een replaced !y the ad'ertise"ent
of ti"e.
111.
3hile the consu"ption of cyclical ti"e in ancient societies was consistent with the
real la!or of those societies, the pseudo*cyclical consu"ption of the de'eloped
econo"y is in contradiction with the a!stract irre'ersi!le ti"e of its production.
3hile cyclical ti"e was the ti"e of i""o!ile illusion, really li'ed, spectacular ti"e is
the ti"e of self*changing reality, li'ed in illusion.
116.
3hat is constantly new in the process of production of things is not found in
consu"ption, which re"ains the e4panded repetition of the sa"e. &n spectacular
ti"e, since dead la!or continues to do"inate li'ing la!or, the past do"inates the
present.
117.
.nother side of the deficiency of general historical life is that indi'idual life as yet
has no history. $he pseudo*e'ents which rush !y in spectacular dra"ati,ations ha'e
71
not !een li'ed !y those infor"ed of the"; "oreo'er they are lost in the inflation of
their hurried replace"ent at e'ery thro! of the spectacular "achinery. #urther"ore,
what is really li'ed has no relation to the official irre'ersi!le ti"e of society and is in
direct opposition to the pseudo*cyclical rhyth" of the consu"a!le !y*product of this
ti"e. $his indi'idual e4perience of separate daily life re"ains without language,
without concept, without critical access to its own past which has !een recorded
nowhere. &t is not co""unicated. &t is not understood and is forgotten to the profit
of the false spectacular "e"ory of the un"e"ora!le.
116.
$he spectacle, as the present social organi,ation of the paralysis of history and
"e"ory, of the a!andon"ent of history !uilt on the foundation of historical ti"e, is
the false consciousness of ti"e.
119.
$he preli"inary condition re2uired for propelling wor5ers to the status of free
producers and consu"ers of co""odity ti"e was the 'iolent e4propriation of their
own ti"e. $he spectacular return of ti"e !eca"e possi!le only after this first
dispossession of the producer.
16:.
$he irreduci!ly !iological ele"ent which re"ains in la!or, !oth in the dependence on
the natural cycle of wa5ing and sleep and in the e4istence of irre'ersi!le ti"e in the
e4penditure of an indi'idual life, is a "ere accessory fro" the point of 'iew of
"odern production; conse2uently, these ele"ents are ignored in the official
procla"ations of the "o'e"ent of production and in the consu"a!le trophies which
are the accessi!le translation of this incessant 'ictory. $he spectator s
72
consciousness, i""o!ili,ed in the falsified center of the "o'e"ent of its world, no
longer e4periences its life as a passage toward self*reali,ation and toward death.
7ne who has renounced using his life can no longer ad"it his death. 9ife insurance
ad'ertise"ents suggest "erely that he is guilty of dying without ensuring the
regularity of the syste" after this econo"ic loss; and the ad'ertise"ent of the
."erican way of death insists on his capacity to "aintain in this encounter the
greatest possi!le nu"!er of appearances of life. 7n all other fronts of the
ad'ertising onslaught, it is strictly for!idden to grow old. %'en a youth*capital,
contri'ed for each and all and put to the "ost "ediocre uses, could ne'er ac2uire the
dura!le and cu"ulati'e reality of financial capital. $his social a!sence of death is
identical to the social a!sence of life.
161.
$i"e, as <egel showed, is the necessary alienation, the en'iron"ent where the
su!+ect reali,es hi"self !y losing hi"self, where he !eco"es other in order to
!eco"e truly hi"self. Precisely the opposite is true in the do"inant alienation, which
is undergone !y the producer of an alien present. &n this spatial alienation, the
society that radically separates the su!+ect fro" the acti'ity it ta5es fro" hi",
separates hi" first of all fro" his own ti"e. &t is this sur"ounta!le social alienation
that has prohi!ited and petrified the possi!ilities and ris5s of the li'ing alienation of
ti"e.
16(.
?nder the 'isi!le fashions which disappear and reappear on the tri'ial surface of
conte"plated pseudo*cyclical ti"e, the grand style of the age is always located in
what is oriented !y the o!'ious and secret necessity of re'olution.
16-.
73
$he natural !asis of ti"e, the actual e4perience of the flow of ti"e, !eco"es hu"an
and social !y e4isting for "an. $he restricted condition of hu"an practice, la!or at
'arious stages, is what has hu"ani,ed and also dehu"ani,ed ti"e as cyclical and as
separate irre'ersi!le ti"e of econo"ic production. $he re'olutionary pro+ect of
reali,ing a classless society, a generali,ed historical life, is the pro+ect of a withering
away of the social "easure of ti"e, to the !enefit of a playful "odel of irre'ersi!le
ti"e of indi'iduals and groups, a "odel in which independent federated ti"es are
si"ultaneously present. &t is the progra" of a total reali,ation, within the conte4t of
ti"e, of co""unis" which suppresses all that e4ists independently of indi'iduals.
160.
$he world already possesses the drea" of a ti"e whose consciousness it "ust now
possess in order to actually li'e it.
Chapter 7 $he 7rgani,ation of $erritory .
.nd he who !eco"es "aster of a city used to !eing free and does not destroy her
can e4pect to !e destroyed !y her, !ecause always she has as prete4t in re!ellion the
na"e of li!erty and her old custo"s, which ne'er through either length of ti"e or
!enefits are forgotten, and in spite of anything that can !e done or foreseen, unless
citi,ens are disunited or dispersed, they do not forget that na"e and those
institutions...
=achia'elli, $he Prince
161.
Capitalist production has unified space, which is no longer !ounded !y e4ternal
societies. $his unification is at the sa"e ti"e an e4tensi'e and intensi'e process of
!anali,ation. $he accu"ulation of co""odities produced in "ass for the a!stract
74
space of the "ar5et, which had to !rea5 down all regional and legal !arriers and all
the corporati'e restrictions of the =iddle .ges that preser'ed the 2uality of craft
production, also had to destroy the autono"y and 2uality of places. $his power of
ho"ogeni,ation is the hea'y artillery which !rought down all Chinese walls.
166.
&n order to !eco"e e'er "ore identical to itself, to get as close as possi!le to
"otionless "onotony, the free space of the co""odity is henceforth constantly
"odified and reconstructed.
167.
$his society which eli"inates geographical distance reproduces distance internal
ly as spectacular separation.
166.
$ouris", hu"an circulation considered as consu"ption, a !y*product of the circulation
of co""odities, is funda"entally nothing "ore than the leisure of going to see what
has !eco"e !anal. $he econo"ic organi,ation of 'isits to different places is already
in itself the guarantee of their e2ui'alence. $he sa"e "oderni,ation that re"o'ed
ti"e fro" the 'oyage also re"o'ed fro" it the reality of space.
169.
$he society that "olds all of its surroundings has de'eloped a special techni2ue for
shaping its 'ery territory, the solid ground of this collection of tas5s. ?r!anis" is
capitalis" s sei,ure of the natural and hu"an en'iron"ent; de'eloping logically into
75
a!solute do"ination, capitalis" can and "ust now re"a5e the totality of space into its
own setting.
17:.
$he capitalist need which is satisfied !y ur!anis" in the for" of a 'isi!le free,ing of
life can !e e4pressed in <egelian ter"s as the a!solute predo"inance of the
peaceful coe4istence of space o'er the restless !eco"ing in the passage of ti"e.
171.
&f all the technical forces of capitalis" "ust !e understood as tools for the "a5ing
of separations, in the case of ur!anis" we are dealing with the e2uip"ent at the !asis
of these technical forces, with the treat"ent of the ground that suits their
deploy"ent, with the 'ery techni2ue of separation.
17(.
?r!anis" is the "odern fulfill"ent of the uninterrupted tas5 which safeguards class
power8 the preser'ation of the ato"i,ation of wor5ers who had !een dangerously
!rought together !y ur!an conditions of production. $he constant struggle that had
to !e waged against e'ery possi!le for" of their co"ing together disco'ers its
fa'ored field in ur!anis". .fter the e4periences of the #rench )e'olution, the
efforts of all esta!lished powers to increase the "eans of "aintaining order in the
streets finally cul"inates in the suppression of the street. 3ith the present "eans
of long*distance "ass co""unication, sprawling isolation has pro'ed an e'en "ore
effecti'e "ethod of 5eeping a population under control, says 9ewis =u"ford in $he
City in <istory, descri!ing henceforth a one*way world. But the general "o'e"ent of
isolation, which is the reality of ur!anis", "ust also include a controlled reintegration
of wor5ers depending on the needs of production and consu"ption that can !e
76
planned. &ntegration into the syste" re2uires that isolated indi'iduals !e recaptured
and isolated together8 factories and halls of culture, tourist resorts and housing
de'elop"ents are e4pressly organi,ed to ser'e this pseudo*co""unity that follows
the isolated indi'idual right into the fa"ily cell. $he widespread use of recei'ers of
the spectacular "essage ena!les the indi'idual to fill his isolation with the do"inant
i"ages i"ages which deri'e their power precisely fro" this isolation.
17-.
#or the first ti"e a new architecture, which in all pre'ious epochs had !een reser'ed
for the satisfaction of the ruling classes, is directly ai"ed at the poor. $he for"al
po'erty and the gigantic spread of this new li'ing e4perience !oth co"e fro" its
"ass character, which is i"plicit in its purpose and in "odern conditions of
construction. .uthoritarian decision, which a!stractly organi,es territory into
territory of a!straction, is o!'iously at the heart of these "odern conditions of
construction. $he sa"e architecture appears in all industriali,ing countries that are
!ac5ward in this respect, as a suita!le terrain for the new type of social e4istence
which is to !e i"planted there. $he threshold crossed !y the growth of society s
"aterial power alongside the lag in the conscious do"ination of this power, are
displayed as clearly !y ur!anis" as !y pro!le"s of ther"onuclear ar"a"ent or of
!irth control (where the possi!ility of "anipulating heredity has already !een
reached).
170.
$he present is already the ti"e of the self*destruction of the ur!an "ilieu. $he
e4plosion of cities which co'er the countryside with for"less "asses of ur!an
residues (9ewis =u"ford) is directly regulated !y the i"perati'es of consu"ption.
$he dictatorship of the auto"o!ile, pilot*product of the first phase of co""odity
a!undance, has !een sta"ped into the en'iron"ent with the do"ination of the
freeway, which dislocates old ur!an centers and re2uires an e'er*larger dispersion.
.t the sa"e ti"e, stages of inco"plete reorgani,ation of the ur!an fa!ric polari,e
77
te"porarily around distri!ution factories, enor"ous shopping centers !uilt on the
!are ground of par5ing lots; and these te"ples of fren,ied consu"ption, after
!ringing a!out a partial rearrange"ent of congestion, the"sel'es flee within the
centrifugal "o'e"ent which re+ects the" as soon as they in turn !eco"e
o'er!urdened secondary centers. But the technical organi,ation of consu"ption is
only the first ele"ent of the general dissolution which has led the city to the point of
consu"ing itself.
171.
%cono"ic history, which de'eloped entirely around the opposition !etween town and
country, has reached a le'el of success which si"ultaneously cancels out !oth ter"s.
$he current paralysis of total historical de'elop"ent for the sa5e of the "ere
continuation of the econo"y s independent "o'e"ent "a5es the "o"ent when town
and country !egin to disappear, not the supersession of their clea'age, !ut their
si"ultaneous collapse. $he reciprocal erosion of town and country, product of the
failure of the historical "o'e"ent through which e4isting ur!an reality should ha'e
!een sur"ounted, is 'isi!le in the eclectic "elange of their decayed ele"ents which
co'er the "ost industrially ad'anced ,ones.
176.
?ni'ersal history was !orn in cities and reached "aturity at the "o"ent of the
decisi'e 'ictory of city o'er country. $o =ar4, one of the greatest re'olutionary
"erits of the !ourgeoisie was the su!+ection of the country to the city whose 'ery
air e"ancipates. But if the history of the city is the history of freedo", it is also the
history of tyranny, of state ad"inistration that controls the countryside and the city
itself. $he city could as yet only struggle for historical freedo", !ut not possess it.
$he city is the locus of history !ecause it is conscious of the past and also
concentrates the social power that "a5es the historical underta5ing possi!le. $he
present tendency to li2uidate the city is thus "erely another e4pression of the delay
in the su!ordination of the econo"y to historical consciousness and in the unification
78
of society reassu"ing the powers that were detached fro" it.
177.
$he countryside shows the e4act opposite8 isolation and separation (Cer"an
&deology). ?r!anis" destroys cities and reesta!lishes a pseudo*countryside which
lac5s the natural relations of the old countryside as well as the direct social relations
which were directly challenged !y the historical city. . new artificial peasantry is
recreated !y the conditions of housing and spectacular control in today s organi,ed
territory 8 the geographic dispersal and narrow"indedness that always 5ept the
peasantry fro" underta5ing independent action and fro" affir"ing itself as a
creati'e historical force again today !eco"e characteristics of the producers the
"o'e"ent of a world which they the"sel'es produce re"aining as co"pletely !eyond
their reach as the natural rhyth" of tas5s was for the agrarian society. But when
this peasantry, which was the unsha5a!le foundation of 7riental despotis" and
whose 'ery frag"entation called for !ureaucratic centrali,ation ree"erges as a
product of the conditions of growth of "odern state !ureaucracy, its apathy "ust
now !e historically "anufactured and "aintained; natural ignorance has !een replaced
!y the organi,ed spectacle of error. $he new towns of the technological pseudo*
peasantry clearly inscri!e on the landscape their rupture with the historical ti"e on
which they are !uilt; their "otto could !e8 7n this spot nothing will e'er happen, and
nothing e'er has. &t is o!'iously !ecause history, which "ust !e li!erated in the
cities, has not yet !een li!erated, that the forces of historical a!sence !egin to
co"pose their own e4clusi'e landscape.
176.
<istory, which threatens this twilight world, is also the force which could su!+ect
space to li'ed ti"e. Proletarian re'olution is the criti2ue of hu"an geography through
which indi'iduals and co""unities ha'e to create places and e'ents suita!le for the
appropriation, no longer +ust of their la!or, !ut of their total history. &n this ga"e s
changing space, and in the freely chosen 'ariations in the ga"e s rules, the autono"y
79
of place can !e redisco'ered without the reintroduction of an e4clusi'e attach"ent
to the land, thus !ringing !ac5 the reality of the 'oyage and of life understood as a
'oyage which contains its entire "eaning within itself.
179.
$he greatest re'olutionary idea concerning ur!anis" is not itself ur!anistic,
technological or esthetic. &t is the decision to reconstruct the entire en'iron"ent in
accordance with the needs of the power of the 3or5ers Councils, of the anti*statist
dictatorship of the proletariat, of enforcea!le dialogue. .nd the power of the
Councils which can !e effecti'e only if it transfor"s e4isting conditions in their
entirety, cannot assign itself a s"aller tas5 if it wants to !e recogni,ed and to
recogni,e itself in its world.
Chapter 6 egation and Consu"ption 3ithin Culture
/o you seriously thin5 we shall li'e long enough to see a political re'olution> we, the
conte"poraries of these Cer"ans> =y friend, you !elie'e what you want to !elie'e....
9et us +udge Cer"any on the !asis of its present history and surely you are not
going to o!+ect that all its history is falsified, or that all its present pu!lic life does
not reflect the actual state of the people> )ead whate'er papers you please, and you
cannot fail to !e con'inced that we ne'er stop (and you "ust concede that the
censorship pre'ents no one fro" stopping) cele!rating the freedo" and national
happiness that we en+oy...
)uge to =ar4, =arch 160-.
16:.
&n the historical society di'ided into classes, culture is the general sphere of
5nowledge and of representations of the li'ed; which is to say that culture is the
8
power of generali,ation e4isting apart, as di'ision of intellectual la!or and as
intellectual la!or of di'ision. Culture detaches itself fro" the unity of the society of
"yth when the power of unification disappears fro" the life of "an and when
opposites lose their li'ing relation and interaction and ac2uire autono"y... (<egel s
$reatise on the /ifferences !etween the Syste"s of #ichte and Schelling). By
gaining its independence, culture !egins an i"perialist "o'e"ent of enrich"ent which
is at the sa"e ti"e the decline of its independence. $he history which creates the
relati'e autono"y of culture and the ideological illusions a!out this autono"y also
e4presses itself as history of culture. .nd the entire 'ictorious history of culture
can !e understood as the history of the re'elation of its inade2uacy, as a "arch
toward its self*suppression. Culture is the locus of the search for lost unity. &n this
search for unity, culture as a separate sphere is o!liged to negate itself.
161.
$he struggle !etween tradition and inno'ation, which is the principle of internal
cultural de'elop"ent in historical societies, can !e carried on only through the
per"anent 'ictory of inno'ation. Det cultural inno'ation is carried !y nothing other
than the total historical "o'e"ent which, !y !eco"ing conscious of its totality, tends
to supersede its own cultural presuppositions and "o'es toward the suppression of all
separation.
16(.
$he growth of 5nowledge a!out society, which includes the understanding of history
as the heart of culture, deri'es fro" itself an irre'ersi!le 5nowledge, which is
e4pressed !y the destruction of Cod. But this first condition of any criti2ue is also
the first o!ligation of a criti2ue without end. 3hen it is no longer possi!le to
"aintain a single rule of conduct, e'ery result of culture forces culture to ad'ance
toward its dissolution. 9i5e philosophy at the "o"ent when it gained its full autono"y,
e'ery discipline which !eco"es autono"ous has to collapse, first of all as a pretention
to e4plain social totality coherently, and finally e'en as a frag"ented tool which can
81
!e used within its own !oundaries. $he lac5 of rationality of separate culture is the
ele"ent which conde"ns it to disappear, !ecause within it the 'ictory of the rational
is already present as a re2uire"ent.
16-.
Culture grew out of the history which a!olished the way of life of the old world, !ut
as a separate sphere it is still no "ore than percepti!le intelligence and
co""unication, which re"ain partial in a partially historical society. &t is the sense of
a world which hardly "a5es sense.
160.
$he end of cultural history "anifests itself on two opposite sides8 the pro+ect of its
supersession in total history, and the organi,ation of its preser'ation as a dead
o!+ect in spectacular conte"plation. 7ne of these "o'e"ents has lin5ed its fate to
social criti2ue, the other to the defense of class power.
161.
$he two sides of the end of culture in all the aspects of 5nowledge as well as in all
the aspects of percepti!le representations e4ist in a unified "anner in what used to
!e art in the "ost general sense. &n the case of 5nowledge, the accu"ul ation of
!ranches of frag"entary 5nowledge, which !eco"e unusa!le !ecause the appro'al of
e4isting conditions "ust finally renounce 5nowledge of itself, confronts the theory of
pra4is which alone holds the truth of the" all since it alone holds the secret of their
use. &n the case of representations, the critical self*destruction of society s for"er
co""on language confronts its artificial reco"position in the co""odity spectacle,
the illusory representation of the non*li'ed.
82
166.
3hen society loses the co""unity of the society of "yth, it "ust lose all the
references of a really co""on language until the ti"e when the rifts within the
inacti'e co""unity can !e sur"ounted !y the inauguration of the real historical
co""unity. 3hen art, which was the co""on language of social inaction, !eco"es
independent art in the "odern sense, e"erging fro" its original religious uni'erse and
!eco"ing indi'idual production of separate wor5s, it too e4periences the "o'e"ent
that do"inates the history of the entirety of separate culture. $he affir"ation of
its independence is the !eginning of its disintegration.
167.
$he loss of the language of co""unication is positi'ely e4pressed !y the "odern
"o'e"ent of deco"position of all art, its for"al annihilation. $his "o'e"ent
e4presses negati'ely the fact that a co""on language "ust !e redisco'ered no longer
in the unilateral conclusion which, in the art of the historical society, always arri'ed
too late, spea5ing to others a!out what was li'ed without real dialogue, and ad"itting
this deficiency of life !ut it "ust !e redisco'ered in pra4is, which unifies direct
acti'ity and its language. $he pro!le" is to actually possess the co""unity of
dialogue and the ga"e with ti"e which ha'e !een represented !y poetico*artistic
wor5s.
166.
3hen art, !eco"e independent, depicts its world in da,,ling colors, a "o"ent of life
has grown old and it cannot !e re+u'enated with da,,ling colors. &t can only !e e'o5ed
as a "e"ory. $he greatness of art !egins to appear only at the dus5 of life.
83
169.
$he historical ti"e which in'ades art e4pressed itself first of all in the sphere of art
itself, starting with the !aro2ue. Baro2ue is the art of a world which has lost its
center8 the last "ythical order, in the cos"os and in terrestrial go'ern"ent,
accepted !y the =iddle .ges the unity of Christianity and the phanto" of an %"pire
has fallen. $he art of the change "ust carry within itself the ephe"eral principle it
disco'ers in the world. &t chose, said %ugenio d 7rs, life against eternity. $heater
and the festi'al, the theatrical festi'al, are the outstanding achie'e"ents of the
!aro2ue where e'ery specific artistic e4pression !eco"es "eaningful only with
reference to the setting of a constructed place, a construction which is its own
center of unification; this center is the passage, which is inscri!ed as a threatened
e2uili!riu" in the dyna"ic disorder of e'erything. $he so"ewhat e4cessi'e
i"portance gi'en to the concept of the !aro2ue in the conte"porary discussion of
esthetics is an e4pression of the awareness that artistic classicis" is i"possi!le8 for
three centuries the atte"pts to reali,e a nor"ati'e classicis" or neoclassicis" were
no "ore than !rief artificial constructions spea5ing the e4ternal language of the
State, the a!solute "onarchy, or the re'olutionary !ourgeoisie in )o"an clothes.
3hat followed the general path of the !aro2ue, fro" ro"anticis" to cu!is", was
ulti"ately an e'er "ore indi'iduali,ed art of negation perpetually renewing itself to
the point of the frag"entation and co"plete negation of the artistic sphere. $he
disappearance of historical art, which was lin5ed to the internal co""unication of an
elite and had its se"i*independent social !asis in the partly playful conditions still
li'ed !y the last aristocracies, also e4presses the fact that capitalis" possesses the
first class power which ad"its itself stripped of any ontological 2uality, a power
which, rooted in the si"ple "anage"ent of the econo"y, is e2ually the loss of all
hu"an "astery. $he !aro2ue, artistic creation s long*lost unity, is in so"e way
redisco'ered in the current consu"ption of the totality of past art. 3hen all past art
is recogni,ed and sought historically and retrospecti'ely constituted into a world art,
it is relati'i,ed into a glo!al disorder which in turn constitutes a !aro2ue edifice on a
higher le'el, an edifice in which the 'ery production of !aro2ue art "erges with all its
re'i'als. $he arts of all ci'ili,ations and all epochs can !e 5nown and accepted
together for the first ti"e. 7nce this collection of sou'enirs of art history
!eco"es possi!le, it is also the end of the world of art. &n this age of "useu"s, when
artistic co""unication can no longer e4ist, all the for"er "o"ents of art can !e
84
ad"itted e2ually, !ecause they no longer suffer fro" the loss of their specific
conditions of co""unication in the current general loss of the conditions of
co""unication.
19:.
.s a negati'e "o'e"ent which see5s the supersession of art in a historical society
where history is not yet li'ed, art in the epoch of its dissolution is si"ultaneously an
art of change and the pure e4pression of i"possi!le change. $he "ore grandiose its
reach, the "ore its true reali,ation is !eyond it. $his art is perforce a'ant*garde,
and it is not. &ts a'ant*garde is its disappearance.
191.
/adais" and surrealis" are the two currents which "ar5 the end of "odern art. $hey
are conte"poraries, though only in a relati'ely conscious "anner, of the last great
assault of the re'olutionary proletarian "o'e"ent; and the defeat of this "o'e"ent,
which left the" i"prisoned in the sa"e artistic field whose decrepitude they had
announced, is the !asic reason for their i""o!ili,ation. /adais" and surrealis" are at
once historically related and opposed to each other. $his opposition, which each of
the" considered to !e its "ost i"portant and radical contri!ution, re'eals the
internal inade2uacy of their criti2ue, which each de'eloped one*sidedly. /adais"
wanted to suppress art without reali,ing it; surrealis" wanted to reali,e art without
suppressing it. $he critical position later ela!orated !y the Situationists has shown
that the suppression and the reali,ation of art are insepara!le aspects of a single
supersession of art.
19(.
Spectacular consu"ption which preser'es congealed past culture, including the
85
recuperated repetition of its negati'e "anifestations, openly !eco"es in the cultural
sector what it is i"plicitly in its totality8 the co""unication of the inco""unica!le.
$he flagrant destruction of language is flatly ac5nowledged as an officially positi'e
'alue !ecause the point is to ad'ertise reconciliation with the do"inant state of
affairs and here all co""unication is +oyously proclai"ed a!sent. $he critical truth of
this destruction the real life of "odern poetry and art is o!'iously hidden, since the
spectacle, whose function is to "a5e history forgotten within culture, applies, in the
pseudo*no'elty of its "odernist "eans, the 'ery strategy which constitutes its core.
$hus a school of neo*literature, which si"ply ad"its that it conte"plates the written
word for its own sa5e, can present itself as so"ething new. #urther"ore, ne4t to the
si"ple procla"ation of the sufficient !eauty of the decay of the co""unica!le, the
"ost "odern tendency of spectacular culture and the one "ost closely lin5ed to the
repressi'e practice of the general organi,ation of society see5s to re"a5e, !y "eans
of tea" pro+ects, a co"ple4 neo*artistic en'iron"ent "ade up of deco"posed
ele"ents8 nota!ly in ur!anis" s atte"pts to integrate artistic de!ris or esthetico*
technical hy!rids. $his is an e4pression, on the le'el of spectacular pseudo*culture, of
de'eloped capitalis" s general pro+ect, which ai"s to recapture the frag"ented
wor5er as a personality well integrated in the group, a tendency descri!ed !y
."erican sociologists ()ies"an, 3hyte, etc.). &t is the sa"e pro+ect e'erywhere8 a
restructuring without co""unity.
19-.
3hen culture !eco"es nothing "ore than a co""odity, it "ust also !eco"e the star
co""odity of the spectacular society. Clar5 Aerr, one of the fore"ost ideologues of
this tendency, has calculated that the co"ple4 process of production, distri!ution
and consu"ption of 5nowledge already gets (9F of the yearly national product in the
?nited States; and he predicts that in the second half of this century culture will !e
the dri'ing force in the de'elop"ent of the econo"y, a role played !y the auto"o!ile
in the first half of this century, and !y railroads in the second half of the pre'ious
century.
86
190.
.ll the !ranches of 5nowledge, which continue to de'elop as the thought of the
spectacle, ha'e to +ustify a society without +ustification, and constitute a general
science of false consciousness. $his thought is co"pletely conditioned !y the fact
that it cannot and will not in'estigate its own "aterial !asis in the spectacular
syste".
191.
$he syste" s thought, the thought of the social organi,ation of appearance, is itself
o!scured !y the generali,ed su!*co""unication which it defends. &t does not 5now
that conflict is at the origin of all things in its world. Specialists in the power of the
spectacle, an a!solute power within its syste" of language without response, are
a!solutely corrupted !y their e4perience of conte"pt and of the success of
conte"pt; and they find their conte"pt confir"ed !y their 5nowledge of the
conte"pti!le "an, who the spectator really is.
196.
3ithin the speciali,ed thought of the spectacular syste", a new di'ision of tas5s
ta5es place to the e4tent that the i"pro'e"ent of this syste" itself poses new
pro!le"s8 on one hand, "odern sociology which studies separation !y "eans of the
conceptual and "aterial instru"ents of separation itself, underta5es the spectacular
criti2ue of the spectacle; on the other hand, in the 'arious disciplines where
structuralis" ta5es root, the apology for the spectacle institutes itself as the
thought of non*thought, as the official a"nesia of historical practice. e'ertheless,
the false despair of non*dialectical criti2ue and the false opti"is" of pure
ad'ertising of the syste" are identical in that they are !oth su!"issi'e thought.
87
197.
$he sociology which !egan, first in the ?nited States, to focus discussion on the
li'ing conditions !rought a!out !y present de'elop"ent, co"piled a great deal of
e"pirical data, !ut could not fatho" the truth of its su!+ect !ecause it lac5ed the
criti2ue i""anent in this su!+ect. .s a result, the sincerely refor"ist tendency of
this sociology resorts to "orality, co""on sense, appeals de'oid of all rele'ance to
practical "easures, etc. Because this type of criti2ue is ignorant of the negati'e at
the core of its world, it insists on descri!ing only a sort of negati'e surplus which it
finds deplora!ly annoying on the surface, li5e an irrational parasitic proliferation.
$his indignant good will, e'en if genuine, ends up !la"ing only the e4ternal
conse2uences of the syste", yet thin5s itself critical, forgetting the essentially
apologetic character of its assu"ptions and "ethod.
196.
$hose who denounce the a!surdity or the perils of incite"ent to waste in the society
of econo"ic a!undance do not understand the purpose of waste. $hey conde"n with
ingratitude, in the na"e of econo"ic rationality, the good irrational guardians without
who" the power of this econo"ic rationality would collapse. #or e4a"ple, Boorstin, in
9 &"age, descri!es the co""ercial consu"ption of the ."erican spectacle !ut ne'er
reaches the concept of spectacle !ecause he thin5s he can e4e"pt pri'ate life, or
the notion of the honest co""odity, fro" this disastrous e4aggeration. <e does not
understand that the co""odity itself "ade the laws whose honest application leads
to the distinct reality of pri'ate life and to its su!se2uent recon2uest !y the social
consu"ption of i"ages.
199.
Boorstin descri!es the e4cesses of a world which has !eco"e foreign to us as if they
were e4cesses foreign to our world. But the nor"al !asis of social life, to which he
88
i"plicitly refers when he characteri,es the superficial reign of i"ages with
psychological and "oral +udg"ents as a product of our e4tra'agant pretentions, has
no reality whate'er, either in his !oo5 or in his epoch. Boorstin cannot understand the
full profundity of a society of i"ages !ecause the real hu"an life he spea5s of is for
hi" in the past, including the past of religious resignation. $he truth of this society is
nothing other than the negation of this society.
(::.
$he sociology which thin5s that an industrial rationality functioning separately can !e
isolated fro" the whole of social life can go so far as to isolate the techni2ues of
reproduction and trans"ission fro" the general industrial "o'e"ent. $hus Boorstin
finds that the results he depicts are caused !y the unfortunate, al"ost fortuitous
encounter of an o'ersi,ed technical apparatus for i"age diffusion with an e4cessi'e
attraction to the pseudo*sensational on the part of the people of our epoch. $hus the
spectacle would !e caused !y the fact that "odern "an is too "uch of a spectator.
Boorstin fails to understand that the proliferation of the prefa!ricated pseudo*
e'ents which he denounces flows fro" the si"ple fact that, in the "assi'e reality of
present social life, "en do not the"sel'es li'e e'ents. Because history itself haunts
"odern society li5e a spectre, pseudo*histories are constructed at e'ery le'el of
consu"ption of life in order to preser'e the threatened e2uili!riu" of present fro,en
ti"e.
(:1.
$he assertion of the definiti'e sta!ility of a short period of fro,en historical ti"e is
the undenia!le !asis, proclai"ed consciously and unconsciously, of the present
tendency toward a structuralist syste"ati,ation. $he 'antage point fro" which anti*
historical structuralist thought 'iews the world is that of the eternal presence of a
syste" which was ne'er created and which will ne'er end. $he drea" of the
dictatorship of a pree4isting unconscious structure o'er all social pra4is could !e
erroneously drawn fro" "odels of structures ela!orated !y linguistics and
89
anthropology (and e'en the analysis of the functioning of capitalis") "odels already
"isunderstood in this conte4t only !ecause the acade"ic i"agination of "inor
functionaries, easily o'erwhel"ed and co"pletely entrenched in the awestruc5
cele!ration of the e4isting syste", flatly reduces all reality to the e4istence of the
syste".
(:(.
&n order to understand structuralist categories, one "ust 5eep in "ind, as with
e'ery historical social science, that the categories e4press for"s as well as
conditions of e4istence. @ust as one cannot appraise the 'alue of a "an in ter"s of
the conception he has of hi"self, one cannot appraise and ad"ire this particular
society !y ta5ing as indisputa!ly true the language it spea5s to itself; ...we cannot
+udge such epochs of transfor"ation !y their own consciousness; on the contrary,
this consciousness "ust rather !e e4plained in the light of the contradictions of
"aterial life... Structure is the daughter of present power. Structuralis" is the
thought guaranteed !y the State which regards the present conditions of
spectacular co""unication as an a!solute. &ts "ethod of studying the code of
"essages is itself nothing !ut the product, and the ac5nowledge"ent, of a society
where co""unication e4ists in the for" of a cascade of hierarchic signals.
Conse2uently it is not structuralis" which ser'es to pro'e the transhistorical 'alidity
of the society of the spectacle; it is on the contrary the society of the spectacle
i"posing itself as "assi'e reality which ser'es to pro'e the cold drea" of
structuralis".
(:-.
$he critical concept of spectacle can undou!tedly also !e 'ulgari,ed into a
co""onplace hollow for"ula of sociologico*political rhetoric to e4plain and a!stractly
denounce e'erything, and thus ser'e as a defense of the spectacular syste". &t is
o!'ious that no idea can lead !eyond the e4isting spectacle, !ut only !eyond the
e4isting ideas a!out the spectacle. $o effecti'ely destroy the society of the
9
spectacle, what is needed is "en putting a practical force into action. $he critical
theory of the spectacle can !e true only !y uniting with the practical current of
negation in society, and this negation, the resu"ption of re'olutionary class struggle,
will !eco"e conscious of itself !y de'eloping the criti2ue of the spectacle which is
the theory of its real conditions (the practical conditions of present oppression), and
in'ersely !y un'eiling the secret of what this negation can !e. $his theory does not
e4pect "iracles fro" the wor5ing class. &t en'isages the new for"ulation and the
reali,ation of proletarian i"perati'es as a long*range tas5. $o "a5e an artificial
distinction !etween theoretical and practical struggle since on the !asis defined
here, the 'ery for"ulation and co""unication of such a theory cannot e'en !e
concei'ed without a rigorous practice it is certain that the o!scure and difficult path
of critical theory "ust also !e the lot of the practical "o'e"ent acting on the scale
of society.
(:0.
Critical theory "ust !e co""unicated in its own language. &t is the language of
contradiction, which "ust !e dialectical in for" as it is in content. &t is criti2ue of
the totality and historical criti2ue. &t is not the nadir of writing !ut its in'ersion. &t
is not a negation of style, !ut the style of negation.
(:1.
&n its 'ery style. the e4position of dialectical theory is a scandal and an a!o"ination
in ter"s of the rules and the corresponding tastes of the do"inant language, !ecause
when it uses e4isting concrete concepts it is si"ultaneously aware of their
redisco'ered fluidity, their necessary destruction.
(:6.
91
$his style which contains its own criti2ue "ust e4press the do"ination of the present
criti2ue o'er its entire past. $he 'ery "ode of e4position of dialectical theory
displays the negati'e spirit within it. $ruth is not li5e a product in which one can no
longer find any trace of the tool that "ade it (<egel). $his theoretical consciousness
of "o'e"ent, in which the "o'e"ent s 'ery trace "ust !e e'ident, "anifests itself
!y the in'ersion of the esta!lished relations !etween concepts and !y the di'ersion
of all the ac2uisitions of pre'ious criti2ue. $he in'ersion of the geneti'e is this
e4pression of historical re'olutions, consigned to the for" of thought, which was
considered <egel s epigra""atic style. $he young =ar4, reco""ending the techni2ue
#euer!ach had syste"atically used of replacing the su!+ect with the predicate,
achie'ed the "ost consistent use of this insurrectional style, drawing the "isery of
philosophy out of the philosophy of "isery. /i'ersion leads to the su!'ersion of past
critical conclusions which were fro,en into respecta!le truths, na"ely transfor"ed
into lies. Aier5egaard already used it deli!erately, adding his own denunciation to it8
But despite all the tours and detours, +ust as +a" always returns to the pantry, you
always end up !y sliding in a little word which isn t yours and which !others you !y
the "e"ory it awa5ens (Philosophical #rag"ents). &t is the o!ligation of distance
toward what was falsified into official truth which deter"ines the use of di'ersion,
as was ac5nowledged !y Aier5egaard in the sa"e !oo58 7nly one "ore co""ent on
your nu"erous allusions ai"ing at all the grief & "i4 into "y state"ents of !orrowed
sayings. & do not deny it here nor will & deny that it was 'oluntary and that in a new
continuation to this pa"phlet, if & e'er write it, & intend to na"e the o!+ect !y its
real na"e and to clothe the pro!le" in historical attire.
(:7.
&deas i"pro'e. $he "eaning of words participates in the i"pro'e"ent. Plagiaris" is
necessary. Progress i"plies it. &t e"!races an author s phrase, "a5es use of his
e4pressions, erases a false idea, and replaces it with the right idea.
(:6.
92
/i'ersion is the opposite of 2uotation, of the theoretical authority which is always
falsified !y the "ere fate of ha'ing !eco"e a 2uotation a frag"ent torn fro" its
conte4t, fro" its "o'e"ent, and ulti"ately fro" the glo!al fra"ewor5 of its epoch
and fro" the precise choice, whether e4actly recogni,ed or erroneous, which it was
in this fra"ewor5. /i'ersion is the fluid language of anti*ideology. &t appears in
co""unication which 5nows it cannot pretend to guarantee anything definiti'ely and
in itself. .t its pea5, it is language which cannot !e confir"ed !y any for"er or
supra*critical reference. 7n the contrary, its own coherence, in itself and with the
applica!le facts, can confir" the for"er core of truth which it !rings out. /i'ersion
has grounded its cause on nothing e4ternal to its own truth as present criti2ue.
(:9.
3hat openly presents itself as di'erted in theoretical for", denying the dura!le
autono"y of the sphere of the theoretically e4pressed !y introducing there, through
this 'iolence, the action which upsets and o'erthrows the entire e4isting order,
re"inds us that the e4istence of theory is nothing in itself, and that it can 5now
itself only through historical action and the historical correction which is its real
counterpart.
(1:.
7nly the real negation of culture can preser'e its "eaning. &t can no longer !e
cultural. $hus it is what in so"e way re"ains at the le'el of culture, !ut with a
co"pletely different "eaning.
(11.
&n the language of contradiction, the criti2ue of culture presents itself as a unified
criti2ue in that it do"inates the whole of culture, its 5nowledge as well as its poetry,
93
and in that it no longer separates itself fro" the criti2ue of the social totality. $his
unified theoretical criti2ue goes alone to "eet unified social practice.
Chapter 9 &deology =ateriali,ed
Self*consciousness e4ists in itself and for itself, in that, and !y the fact that it
e4ists for another self*consciousness; that is to say, it is only !y !eing ac5nowledged
or recogni,ed.
<egel, $he Pheno"enology of =ind
(1(.
&deology is the !asis of the thought of a class society in the conflict*laden course of
history. &deological facts were ne'er a si"ple chi"aera, !ut rather a defor"ed
consciousness of realities, and in this for" they ha'e !een real factors which set in
"otion real defor"ing acts; all the "ore so when the "ateriali,ation, in the for" of
spectacle, of the ideology !rought a!out !y the concrete success of autono"i,ed
econo"ic production in practice confounds social reality with an ideology which has
tailored all reality in ter"s of its "odel.
(1-.
3hen ideology, the a!stract will and the illusion of the uni'ersal, is legiti"i,ed !y the
uni'ersal a!straction and the effecti'e dictatorship of illusion in "odern society, it is
no longer a 'oluntaristic struggle of the partial, !ut its 'ictory. .t this point,
ideological pretention ac2uires a sort of flat positi'istic e4actitude8 it is no longer a
historical choice !ut a fact. &n this type of assertion, the particular na"es of
ideologies ha'e disappeared. %'en the role of specifically ideological la!or in the
ser'ice of the syste" co"es to !e considered as nothing "ore than the recognition
94
of an episte"ological !ase that pretends to !e !eyond all ideological pheno"ena.
=ateriali,ed ideology itself has no na"e, +ust as it has no e4pressi!le historical
progra". $his is another way of saying that the history of ideologies is o'er.
(10.
&deology, whose whole internal logic led to total ideology in =annhei" s sense the
despotis" of the frag"ent which i"poses itself as pseudo*5nowledge of a fro,en
totality, the totalitarian 'ision is now co"pleted in the i""o!ili,ed spectacle of non*
history. &ts co"pletion is also its disintegration throughout society. 3ith the
practical disintegration of this society, ideology the final unreason that !loc5s access
to historical life "ust disappear.
(11.
$he spectacle is ideology par e4cellence, !ecause it e4poses and "anifests in its
fullness the essence of all ideological syste"s8 the i"po'erish"ent, ser'itude and
negation of real life. $he spectacle is "aterially the e4pression of the separation
and estrange"ent !etween "an and "an. $hrough the new power of fraud,
concentrated at the !ase of the spectacle in this production, the new do"ain of alien
!eings to who" "an is su!ser'ient... grows coe4tensi'ely with the "ass of o!+ects.
&t is the highest stage of an e4pansion which has turned need against life. $he need
for "oney is thus the real need produced !y political econo"y, and the only need it
produces (%cono"ic and Philosophical =anuscripts). $he spectacle e4tends to all
social life the principle which <egel (in the )ealphilosophie of @ena) concei'es as the
principle of "oney8 it is the life of what is dead, "o'ing within itself.
(16.
&n opposition to the pro+ect su""ari,ed in the $heses on #euer!ach (the reali,ation
95
of philosophy in pra4is which supersedes the opposition !etween idealis" and
"aterialis"), the spectacle si"ultaneously preser'es, and i"poses within the pseudo*
concrete of its uni'erse, the ideological characteristics of "aterialis" and idealis".
$he conte"plati'e side of the old "aterialis" which concei'es the world as
representation and not as acti'ity and which ulti"ately ideali,es "atter is fulfilled in
the spectacle, where concrete things are auto"atically the "asters of social life.
)eciprocally, the drea"ed acti'ity of idealis" is e2ually fulfilled in the spectacle,
through the technical "ediation of signs and signals*which ulti"ately "ateriali,e an
a!stract ideal.
(17.
$he parallel !etween ideology and schi,ophrenia, esta!lished !y Ca!el (9a #ausse
Conscience) "ust !e placed in this econo"ic process of "ateriali,ation of ideology.
Society has !eco"e what ideology already was. $he re"o'al of pra4is and the anti*
dialectical false consciousness which acco"panies it are i"posed during e'ery hour of
daily life su!+ected to the spectacle; this "ust !e understood as a syste"atic
organi,ation of the failure of the faculty of encounter and as its replace"ent !y a
hallucinatory social fact8 the false consciousness of encounter, the illusion of
encounter. &n a society where no one can any longer !e recogni,ed !y others, e'ery
indi'idual !eco"es una!le to recogni,e his own reality. &deology is at ho"e;
separation has !uilt its world.
(16.
&n clinical charts of schi,ophrenia, says Ca!el, the decay of the dialectic of totality
(with dissociation as its e4tre"e for") and the decay of the dialectic of !eco"ing
(with catatonia as its e4tre"e for") see" solidly united. $he spectator s
consciousness, i"prisoned in a flattened uni'erse, !ound !y the screen of the
spectacle !ehind which his life has !een deported, 5nows only the fictional spea5ers
who unilaterally surround hi" with their co""odities and the politics of their
co""odities. $he spectacle, in its entirety, is his "irror i"age. <ere the stage is
96
set with the false e4it of generali,ed autis".
(19.
$he spectacle o!literates the !oundaries !etween self and world !y crushing the self
!esieged !y the presence*a!sence of the world and it o!literates the !oundaries
!etween true and false !y dri'ing all li'ed truth !elow the real presence of fraud
ensured !y the organi,ation of appearance. 7ne who passi'ely accepts his alien daily
fate is thus pushed toward a "adness that reacts in an illusory way to this fate !y
resorting to "agical techni2ues. $he acceptance and consu"ption of co""odities are
at the heart of this pseudo*response to a co""unication without response. $he need
to i"itate which is felt !y the consu"er is precisely the infantile need conditioned !y
all the aspects of his funda"ental dispossession. &n the ter"s applied !y Ca!el to a
co"pletely different pathological le'el, the a!nor"al need for representation here
co"pensates for a tortuous feeling of !eing on the "argin of e4istence.
((:.
&f the logic of false consciousness cannot 5now itself truly, the search for critical
truth a!out the spectacle "ust si"ultaneously !e a true criti2ue. &t "ust struggle in
practice a"ong the irreconcila!le ene"ies of the spectacle and ad"it that it is
a!sent where they are a!sent. $he a!stract desire for i""ediate effecti'eness
accepts the laws of the ruling thought, the e4clusi'e point of 'iew of the present,
when it throws itself into refor"ist co"pro"ises or trashy pseudo*re'olutionary
co""on actions. $hus "adness reappears in the 'ery posture which pretends to fight
it. Con'ersely, the criti2ue which goes !eyond the spectacle "ust 5now how to wait.
((1.
%"ancipation fro" the "aterial !ases of in'erted truth this is what the self*
97
e"ancipation of our epoch consists of. $his historical "ission of installing truth in
the world cannot !e acco"plished either !y the isolated indi'idual, or !y the
ato"i,ed crowd su!+ected to "anipulation, !ut now as e'er !y the class which is a
!le to effect the dissolution of all classes !y !ringing all power into the dealienating
for" of reali,ed de"ocracy, the Council, in which practical theory controls itself and
sees its own action. $his is possi!le only where indi'iduals are directly lin5ed to
uni'ersal history ; only where dialogue ar"s itself to "a5e its own conditions
'ictorious.

Cuy /e!ord .rchi'e
98
THE COMMENTS
ON THE SOCIETY
OF THE SPECTACLE
(1988)
99
In memory of Gerard Lebovici, assassinated in Paris on
5 March 1984, in a trap that remains mysterious
<owe'er critical the situation and circu"stances in which you find yourself,
despair of nothing;
it is on the occasions in which e'erything is to !e feared that it is necessary to fear
1
nothing;
it is when one is surrounded !y all the dangers that it is not necessary to dread any;
it is when one is without resources that it is necessary to count on all of the";
it is when one is surprised that it is necessary to surprise the ene"y hi"self.
Sun $,u, $he .rt of 3ar
&.
$hese co""ents are sure to !e welco"ed !y fifty or si4ty people; a large nu"!er
gi'en the ti"es in which we li'e and the gra'ity of the "atters under discussion. But
then, of course, in so"e circles & a" considered to !e an authority. &t "ust also !e
!orne in "ind that a good half of this interested elite will consist of people who
de'ote the"sel'es to "aintaining the spectacular syste" of do"ination, and the
other half of people who persist in doing 2uite the opposite. <a'ing, then, to ta5e
account of readers who are !oth attenti'e and di'ersely influential, & o!'iously
cannot spea5 with co"plete freedo". .!o'e all, & "ust ta5e care not to gi'e too "uch
infor"ation to +ust any!ody. 7ur unfortunate ti"es thus co"pel "e, once again, to
write in a new way. So"e ele"ents will !e intentionally o"itted; and the plan will ha'e
to re"ain rather unclear. )eaders will encounter certain decoys, li5e the 'ery
hall"ar5 of the era. .s long as certain pages are interpolated here and there, the
o'erall "eaning "ay appear +ust as secret clauses ha'e 'ery often !een added to
whate'er treaties "ay openly stipulate; +ust as so"e che"ical agents only re'eal
their hidden properties when they are co"!ined with others. <owe'er, in this !rief
wor5 there will !e only too "any things which are, alas, easy to understand.
&&.
&n 1967, in a !oo5 entitled $he Society of the Spectacle, & showed what the "odern
11
spectacle was already in essence8 the autocratic reign of the "ar5et econo"y which
had acceded to an irresponsi!le so'ereignty, and the totality of new techni2ues of
go'ern"ent which acco"panied this reign. $he distur!ances of 1966, which in se'eral
countries lasted into the following years, ha'ing nowhere o'erthrown the e4isting
organi,ation of the society fro" which it springs apparently spontaneously, the
spectacle has thus continued to gather strength, that is, to spread to the furthest
li"its on all sides, while increasing its density in the center. &t has e'en learnt new
defensi'e techni2ues, as powers under attac5 always do. 3hen & !egan the criti2ue of
spectacular society, what was particularly noticed ** gi'en the period ** was the
re'olutionary content that could !e disco'ered in that criti2ue; and it was naturally
felt to !e its "ost trou!leso"e ele"ent. .s to the spectacle itself, & was so"eti"es
accused of ha'ing in'ented it out of thin air, and was always accused of indulging
"yself to e4cess in "y e'aluation of its depth and unity, and its real wor5ings. & "ust
ad"it that others who later pu!lished new !oo5s on the sa"e su!+ect de"onstrated
that it was 2uite possi!le to say less. .ll they had to do was to replace the totality
and its "o'e"ent !y a single static detail on the surface of the pheno"enon, with
each author de"onstrating his originality !y choosing a different and all the less
distur!ing one. o one wanted to taint the onetheless, the society of the spectacle
has continued to ad'ance. &t "o'es 2uic5ly for in 1967 it had !arely forty years
!ehind it, though it had used the" to the full. .nd !y its own de'elop"ent, which no
one too5 the trou!le to in'estigate, it has since shown with so"e astonishing
achie'e"ents that it was effecti'ely +ust what & said it was. Pro'ing this point has
"ore than acade"ic 'alue, !ecause it is undou!tedly indispensa!le to ha'e understood
the spectacleGs unity and articulation as an acti'e force in order to e4a"ine the
directions in which this force has since !een a!le to tra'el. $hese 2uestions are of
great interest, for it is under such conditions that the ne4t stage of social conflict
will necessarily !e played out. Since the spectacle today is certainly "ore powerful
than it was !efore, what is it doing with this additional power> 3hat point has it
reached, that it had not reached pre'iously> 3hat, in short, are its present lines of
ad'ance> $he 'ague feeling that there has !een a rapid in'asion which has forced
people to lead their li'es in an entirely different way is now widespread; !ut this is
e4perienced rather li5e so"e ine4plica!le change in the cli"ate, or in so"e other
natural e2uili!riu", a change faced with which ignorance 5nows only that it has
nothing to say. 3hat is "ore, "any see it as a ci'ili,ing in'asion, as so"ething
ine'ita!le, and e'en want to colla!orate. Such people would rather not 5now the
12
precise purpose of this con2uest, and how it is ad'ancing. & a" going to outline certain
practical conse2uences, still little 5nown, of the spectacleGs rapid e4tension o'er the
last twenty years. & ha'e no intention of entering into pole"ics on any aspect of this
2uestion; these are now too easy, and too useless. or will & try to con'ince. $he
present co""ents are not concerned with "orali,ing. $hey do not propose what is
desira!le, or "erely prefera!le. $hey si"ply record what is.
&&&.
o one today can reasona!ly dou!t the e4istence or the power of the spectacle; on
the contrary, one "ight dou!t whether it is reasona!le to add anything on a 2uestion
which e4perience has already settled in such draconian fashion. 9e =onde of 19
Septe"!er 1967 offered a felicitous illustration of the saying, H&f it e4ists, thereGs
no need to tal5 a!out it,I a funda"ental law in these spectacular ti"es which, at least
in this respect, ensure there is no such thing as a !ac5ward country. $hat "odern
society is a society of the spectacle now goes without saying. &ndeed people will soon
only !e conspicuous !y their reticence. 7ne loses count of all the !oo5s descri!ing a
pheno"enon which now "ar5s all the industriali,ed nations yet e2ually spares none of
the countries which has still to catch up. 3hat is so droll, howe'er, is that all the
!oo5s which do analy,e this pheno"enon, usually to deplore it, cannot !ut +oin the
spectacle if theyGre to get attention. &t is true that this spectacular criti2ue of the
spectacle, which is not only late !ut, e'en worse, see5s JattentionG on the sa"e le'el,
ine'ita!ly stic5s to 'ain generalities or hypocritical regrets; +ust as futile as the
clowns who parade their well*"annered disillusion in newspapers. $he e"pty de!ate
on the spectacle ** that is, on the acti'ities of the worldGs owners ** is thus organi,ed
!y the spectacle itself8 e'erything is said a!out the e4tensi'e "eans at its disposal,
to ensure that nothing is said a!out their e4tensi'e deploy"ent. )ather than tal5 of
the spectacle, people often prefer to use the ter" J"edia.G .nd !y this they "ean to
descri!e a "ere instru"ent, a 5ind of pu!lic ser'ice which with i"partial
Jprofessionalis"G would facilitate the new wealth of "ass co""unication through "ass
"edia a for" of co""unication which has at last attained a unilateral purity, where!y
decisions already ta5en are presented for passi'e ad"iration. #or what is
co""unicated are orders; and with perfect har"ony, those who gi'e the" are also
13
those who tell us what they thin5 of the". Spectacular power, which is so
funda"entally unitary, so concentrated !y the 'ery weight of things, and entirely
despotic in spirit, fre2uently rails at the appearance in its real" of a spectacular
politics, a spectacular +ustice, a spectacular "edicine and all the other si"ilarly
surprising e4a"ples of J"edia e4cess.G $hus the spectacle would !e "erely the
e4cesses of the "edia, whose nature, un2uestiona!ly good since it facilitates
co""unication, is so"eti"es dri'en to e4tre"es. 7ften enough societyGs !osses
declare the"sel'es ill*ser'ed !y their "edia e"ployees8 "ore often they !la"e the
spectators for the co""on, al"ost !estial "anner in which they indulge in the "ediaGs
delights. . 'irtually infinite nu"!er of supposed differences within the "edia thus
ser'e to screen what is in fact the result of a spectacular con'ergence, pursued with
re"ar5a!le tenacity. @ust as the logic of the co""odity reigns o'er capitalistsG
co"peting a"!itions, and the logic of war always do"inates the fre2uent
"odifications in weaponry, so the harsh logic of the spectacle controls the a!undant
di'ersity of "edia e4tra'agances. &n all that has happened in the last twenty years,
the "ost i"portant change lies in the 'ery continuity of the spectacle. $his has
nothing to do with the perfecting of its "edia instru"ents, which had already
reached a highly ad'anced stage of de'elop"ent; it "eans 2uite si"ply that the
spectacleGs do"ination has succeeded in raising a whole generation "olded to its laws.
$he e4traordinary new conditions in which this entire generation has effecti'ely li'ed
constitute a precise and co"prehensi'e su""ary of all that, henceforth, the
spectacle will for!id; and also all that it will per"it.
&B.
7n a theoretical le'el & only need add a single detail to "y earlier for"ulations, al!eit
one which has arreaching conse2uences. &n 1967 & distinguished two ri'al and
successi'e for"s of spectacular power, the concentrated and the diffuse. Both of
the" floated a!o'e real society, as its goal and its lie. $he for"er, fa'oring the
ideology condensed around a dictatorial personality, had acco"plished the totalitarian
counter*re'olution, fascist as well as Stalinist. $he latter, dri'ing wage*earners to
apply their freedo" of choice to the 'ast range of new co""odities now on offer,
had represented the ."ericani,ation of the world, a process which in so"e respects
14
frightened !ut also successfully seduced those countries where it had !een possi!le
to "aintain traditional for"s of !ourgeois de"ocracy. Since then a third for" has
!een esta!lished, through the rational co"!ination of these two, and on the !asis of
a general 'ictory of the for" which had showed itself stronger8 the diffuse. $his is
the integrated spectacle, which has since tended to i"pose itself glo!ally. 3hereas
)ussia and Cer"any were largely responsi!le for the for"ation of the concentrated
spectacle, and the ?nited States for the diffuse for", the integrated spectacle has
!een pioneered !y #rance and &taly. $he e"ergence of this new for" is attri!uta!le
to a nu"!er of shared historical features, na"ely, the i"portant role of the Stalinist
party and unions in political and intellectual life, a wea5 de"ocratic tradition, the long
"onopoly of power en+oyed !y a single party of go'ern"ent, and the need to eli"inate
an une4pected upsurge in re'olutionary acti'ity. $he integrated spectacle shows
itself to !e si"ultaneously concentrated and diffuse, and e'er since the fruitful union
of the two has learnt to e"ploy !oth these 2ualities on a grander scale. $heir for"er
"ode of application has changed considera!ly. .s regards concentration, the
controlling center has now !eco"e occult ne'er to !e occupied !y a 5nown leader, or
clear ideology. .nd on the diffuse side, the spectacle has ne'er !efore put its "ar5
to such a degree on al"ost the full range of socially produced !eha'ior and o!+ects.
#or the final sense of the integrated spectacle is this ** that it has integrated itself
into reality to the sa"e e4tent as it was descri!ing it, and that it was reconstructing
it as it was descri!ing it. .s a result, this reality no longer confronts the integrated
spectacle as so"ething alien. 3henthe spectacle was concentrated, the greater part
of surrounding society escaped it; when diffuse, a s"all part; today, no part. $he
spectacle has spread itself to the point where it now per"eates all reality. &t was
easy to predict in theory what has !een 2uic5ly and uni'ersally de"onstrated !y
practical e4perience of econo"ic reasonGs relentless acco"plish"ents8 that the
glo!alisation of the false was also the falsification of the glo!e. Beyond a legacy of
old !oo5s and old !uildings, still of so"e significance !ut destined to continual
reduction and, "oreo'er, increasingly highlighted and classified to suit the
spectacleGs re2uire"ents, there re"ains nothing, in culture or in nature, which has not
!een transfor"ed, and polluted, according to the "eans and interests of "odern
industry. %'en genetics has !eco"e readily accessi!le to the do"inant social forces.
Spectacular go'ern"ent, which now possesses all the "eans necessary to falsify the
whole of production and perception, is the a!solute "aster of "e"ories +ust as it is
the unfettered "aster of plans which will shape the "ost distant future. &t reigns
15
unchec5ed; it e4ecutes its su""ary +udg"ents. &t is in these conditions that a
parodic end of the di'ision of la!or suddenly appears, with carni'ales2ue gaiety, all
the "ore welco"e !ecause it coincides with the generali,ed disappearance of all real
a!ility. . financier can !e a singer, a lawyer a police spy, a !a5er can parade his
literary tastes, an actor can !e president, a chef can philosophi,e on coo5ery
techni2ues as if they were land"ar5s in uni'ersal history. .nyone can +oin the
spectacle, in order pu!licly to adopt, or so"eti"es secretly practice, an entirely
different acti'ity fro" whate'er specialis" first "ade their na"e. 3here J"edia
statusG has ac2uired infinitely "ore i"portance than the 'alue of anything one "ight
actually !e capa!le of doing, it is nor"al for this status to !e readily transfera!le;
for anyone, anywhere, to ha'e the sa"e right to the sa"e 5ind of stardo". =ost
often these accelerated "edia particles pursue their own careers in the glow of
statutorily guaranteed ad"iration. But it so"eti"es happens that the transition to
the "edia pro'ides the co'er for se'eral different enterprises, officially
independent !ut in fact secretly lin5ed !y 'arious ad hoc networ5s. 3ith the result
that occasionally the social di'ision of la!or, along with the readily foreseea!le unity
of its application, reappears in 2uite new for"s8 for e4a"ple, one can now pu!lish a
no'el in order to arrange an assassination. Such pictures2ue e4a"ples also go to show
that one should ne'er trust so"eone !ecause of their +o!. Det the highest a"!ition
of the integrated spectacle is still to turn secret agents into re'olutionaries, and
re'olutionaries into secret agents.
B.
$he society whose "oderni,ation has reached the stage of the integrated spectacle
is characteri,ed !y the co"!ined effect of fi'e principal features8 incessant
technological renewal; integration of state and econo"y; generali,ed secrecy,
unanswera!le lies; an eternal present. $echnological inno'ation has a long history, and
is an essential co"ponent of capitalist society, so"eti"es descri!ed as industrial or
post*industrial. But since its "ost recent acceleration (in the after"ath of the
Second 3orld 3ar) it has greatly reinforced spectacular authority, !y surrendering
16
e'ery!ody to the "ercy of specialists, to their calculations and to the +udg"ents
which always depend on the". $he integration of state and econo"y is the "ost
e'ident trend of the century; it is at the 'ery least the "otor of all recent econo"ic
de'elop"ents. $he defensi'e and offensi'e pact concluded !etween these two
powers, econo"y and state, has pro'ided the" with the greatest co""on ad'antages
in e'ery field8 each "ay !e said to own the other; at any rate, it is a!surd to oppose
the", or to distinguish !etween their reasons and follies. $his union, too, has pro'ed
to !e highly fa'ora!le to the de'elop"ent of spectacular do"ination ** indeed, the
two ha'e !een indistinguisha!le fro" the 'ery start. $he other three features are
direct effects of this do"ination, in its integrated stage. Ceneralised secrecy stands
!ehind the spectacle, as the decisi'e co"ple"ent of all it displays and, in the last
analysis, as its "ost 'ital operation. $he si"ple fact of !eing unanswera!le has gi'en
what is false an entirely new 2uality. .t a stro5e it is truth which has al"ost
e'erywhere ceased to e4ist or, at !est, has !een reduced to the status of pure
hypothesis. ?nanswera!le lies ha'e succeeded in eli"inating pu!lic opinion, which first
lost the a!ility to "a5e itself heard and then 'ery 2uic5ly dissol'ed altogether. $his
e'idently has significant conse2uences for politics, the applied sciences, the legal
syste" and the arts. $he "anufacture of a present where fashion itself, fro"
clothes to "usic, has co"e to a halt, which wants to forget the past and no longer
see"s to !elie'e in a future, is achie'ed !y the ceaseless circularity of infor"ation,
always returning to the sa"e short list of tri'ialities, passionately proclai"ed as
"a+or disco'eries. =eanwhile news of what is genuinely i"portant, of what is actually
changing, co"es rarely, and then in fits and starts. &t always concerns this worldGs
apparent conde"nation of its own e4istence, the stages in its progra""ed self*
destruction.
17
B&.
Spectacular do"inationGs first priority was to eradicate historical 5nowledge in
general; !eginning with +ust a!out all rational infor"ation and co""entary on the
"ost recent past. $he e'idence for this is so glaring it hardly needs further
e4planation. 3ith consu""ate s5ill the spectacle organi,es ignorance of what is
a!out to happen and, i""ediately afterwards, the forgetting of whate'er has
nonetheless !een understood. $he "ore i"portant so"ething is, the "ore it is hidden.
othing in the last twenty years has !een so thoroughly coated in o!edient lies as the
history of =ay 1966. So"e useful lessons ha'e indeed !een learnt fro" certain
de"ystifying studies of those days; these, howe'er, re"ain state secrets. &n #rance,
it is so"e ten years now since a president of the repu!lic, long ago forgotten !ut at
the ti"e still !as5ing on the spectacleGs surface, nai'ely e4pressed his delight at
H5nowing that henceforth we will li'e in a world without "e"ory, where i"ages flow
and "erge, li5e reflections on the water.I Con'enient indeed for those in !usiness,
and who 5now how to stay there. $he end of history gi'es power a welco"e !rea5.
Success is guaranteed in all its underta5ings, or at least the ru"or of success. <ow
drastically any a!solute power will suppress history depends on the e4tent of its
i"perious interests or o!ligations, and especially on its practical capacity to e4ecute
its ai"s. $sGin Che <oang $i had !oo5s !urned, !ut he ne'er "anaged to get rid of all
of the". &n our own century Stalin went further, yet despite the 'arious acco"plices
he "anaged to find outside his e"pireGs !orders, there re"ained a 'ast area of the
world !eyond the reach of his police, where his sche"es could !e ridiculed. 3ith its
new techni2ues now adopted glo!ally, the integrated spectacle has done "uch !etter.
&neptitude co"pels uni'ersal respect; it is no longer per"itted to laugh at it. &n any
case, it has !eco"e i"possi!le to show that one is laughing. <istoryGs do"ain was the
"e"ora!le, the totality of e'ents whose conse2uences would !e lastingly apparent.
.nd thus, insepara!ly, history was 5nowledge that should endure and aid in
understanding, at least in part, what was to co"e8 Han e'erlasting possession,I
according to $hucydides. &n this way history was the "easure of genuine no'elty. &t
is in the interest of those who sell no'elty at any price to eradicate the "eans of
"easuring it. 3hen social significance is attri!uted only to what is i""ediate, and to
what will !e i""ediate i""ediately afterwards, always replacing another, identical,
i""ediacy, it can !e seen that the uses of the "edia guarantee a 5ind of eternity of
noisy insignificance. $he precious ad'antage which the spectacle has ac2uired through
18
the outlawing of history, fro" ha'ing dri'en the recent past into hiding, and fro"
ha'ing "ade e'eryone forget the spirit of history within society, is a!o'e all the
a!ility to co'er its own trac5s ** to conceal the 'ery progress of its recent world
con2uest. &ts power already see"s fa"iliar, as if it had always !een there. .ll
usurpers ha'e shared this ai"8 to "a5e us forget that they ha'e only +ust arri'ed.
B&&.
3ith the destruction of history, conte"porary e'ents the"sel'es retreat into a
re"ote and fa!ulous real" of un'erifia!le stories, unchec5a!le statistics, unli5ely
e4planations and untena!le reasoning. #or e'ery i"!ecility presented !y the
spectacle, there are only the "ediaGs professionals to gi'e an answer, with a few
respectful rectifications or re"onstrations. .nd they are hardly e4tra'agant, e'en
with these, for !esides their e4tre"e ignorance, their personal and professional
solidarity with the spectacleGs o'erall authority and the society it e4presses "a5es it
their duty, and their pleasure, ne'er to di'erge fro" that authority whose "a+esty
"ust not !e threatened. &t "ust not !e forgottenthat e'ery "edia professional is
!ound !y wages and other rewards and reco"penses to a "aster, and so"eti"es to
se'eral; and that e'ery one of the" 5nows he is dispensa!le. .ll e4perts ser'e the
state and the "edia and only in that way do they achie'e their status. %'ery e4pert
follows his "aster, for all for"er possi!ilities for independence ha'e !een gradually
reduced to nil !y present societyGs "ode of organi,ation. $he "ost useful e4pert, of
course, is the one who can lie. 3ith their different "oti'es, those who need e4perts
are falsifiers and fools. 3hene'er indi'iduals lose the capacity to see things for
the"sel'es, the e4pert is there to offer an a!solute reassurance. 7nce there were
e4perts in %truscan art, and co"petent ones, for %truscan art was not for sale. But a
period which, for e4a"ple, finds it profita!le to fa5e !y che"ical "eans 'arious
fa"ous wines, can only sell the" if it has created wine e4perts a!le to con
connoisseurs into ad"iring their new, "ore distincti'e, fla'ors. Cer'antes re"ar5s
that Hunder a poor cloa5 you co""only find a good drin5er.I So"eone who 5nows his
wine "ay often understand nothing a!out the rules of the nuclear industry, !ut
spectacular power calculates that if one e4pert can "a5e a fool of hi" with nuclear
energy, another can easily do the sa"e with wine. .nd it is well 5nown, for e4a"ple,
19
that "edia "eteorologists, forecasting te"perature or rainfall for the ne4t forty*
eight hours, are se'erely li"ited in what they say !y the o!ligation to "aintain
certain econo"ic, touristic and regional !alances, when so "any people "a5e so "any
+ourneys on so "any roads, !etween so "any e2ually desolate places; thus they can
only try to "a5e their na"es as entertainers. 7ne aspect of the disappearance of all
o!+ecti'e historical 5nowledge can !e seen in the way that indi'idual reputations ha'e
!eco"e "allea!le and altera!le at will !y those who control all infor"ation8
infor"ation which is gathered and also ** an entirely different "atter ** infor"ation
which is !roadcast. $heir a!ility to falsify is thus unli"ited. <istorical e'idence which
the spectacle does not need to 5now ceases to !e e'idence. 3hen the only fa"e is
that !estowed !y the grace and fa'or of a spectacular Court, disgrace "ay swiftly
follow. .n anti*spectacular notoriety has !eco"e so"ething e4tre"ely rare. & "yself
a" one of the last people to retain one, ha'ing ne'er had any other. But it has also
!eco"e e4traordinarily suspect. Society has officially declared itself to !e
spectacular. $o !e 5nown outside spectacular relations is already to !e 5nown as an
ene"y of society. . personGs past can !e entirely rewritten, radically altered,
recreated in the "anner of the =oscow trials ** and without e'en ha'ing to !other
with anything as clu"sy as a trial. Ailling co"es cheaper these days. $hose who run
the spectacle, or their friends, surely ha'e no lac5 of false witnesses, though they
"ay !e uns5illed ** and how could the spectators who witness the e4ploits of these
false witnesses e'er recogni,e their !lunders> ** or false docu"ents, which are
always highly effecti'e. $hus it is no longer possi!le to !elie'e anything a!out anyone
that you ha'e not learned for yourself, directly. But in fact false accusations are
rarely necessary. 7nce one controls the "echanis" which operates the only for" of
social 'erification to !e fully and uni'ersally recogni,ed, one can say what one li5es.
$he spectacle pro'es its argu"ents si"ply !y going round in circles8 !y co"ing !ac5
to the start, !y repetition, !y constant reaffir"ation in the only space left where
anything can !e pu!licly affir"ed, and !elie'ed, precisely !ecause that is the only
thing to which e'eryone is witness. Spectacular power can si"ilarly deny whate'er it
li5es, once, or three ti"es o'er, and change the su!+ect, 5nowing full well there is no
danger of any riposte, in its own space or any other. #or the agora, the general
co""unity, has gone, along with co""unities restricted to inter"ediary !odies or to
independent institutions, to salons or cafes, or to wor5ers in a single co"pany. $here
is no place left where people can discuss the realities which concern the", !ecause
they can ne'er lastingly free the"sel'es fro" the crushing presence of "edia
11
discourse and of the 'arious forces organi,ed to relay it. othing re"ains of the
relati'ely independent +udg"ent of those who once "ade up the world of learning; of
those, for e4a"ple, who used to !ase their self*respect on their a!ility to 'erify, to
co"e close to an i"partial history of facts, or at least to !elie'e that such a history
deser'ed to !e 5nown. $here is no longer e'en any incontesta!le !i!liographical truth,
and the co"puteri,ed catalogues of national li!raries are well*e2uipped to re"o'e any
residual traces. &t is disorienting to consider what it "eant to !e a +udge, a doctor or
a historian not so long ago, and to recall the o!ligations and i"perati'es they often
accepted, within the li"its of their co"petence8 "en rese"!le their ti"es "ore than
their fathers. 3hen the spectacle stops tal5ing a!out so"ething for three days, it is
as if it did not e4ist. #or it has then gone on to tal5 a!out so"ething else, and it is
that which henceforth, in short, e4ists. $he practical conse2uences, as we see, are
enor"ous. 3e !elie'e we 5now that in Creece, history and de"ocracy entered the
world at the sa"e ti"e. 3e can pro'e that their disappearances ha'e also !een
si"ultaneous. $o this list of the triu"phs of power we should, howe'er, add one result
which has pro'ed negati'e8 once the running of a state in'ol'es a per"anent and
"assi'e shortage of historical 5nowledge, that state can no longer !e led
strategically.
B&&&.
7nce it attains the stage of the integrated spectacle, self*proclai"ed de"ocratic
society see"s to !e generally accepted as the reali,ation of a fragile perfection. So
that it "ust no longer !e e4posed to attac5s, !eing fragile; and indeed is no longer
open to attac5, !eing perfect as no other society !efore it. &t is a fragile society
!ecause it has great difficulty "anaging its dangerous technological e4pansion. But it
is a perfect society for go'erning; and the proof is that all those who aspire to
go'ern want to go'ern this one, in the sa"e way, changing hardly a thing. #or the first
ti"e in conte"porary %urope no party or fraction of a party e'en tries to pretend
that they wish to change anything significant. $he co""odity is !eyond criticis"8 as a
general syste" and e'en as the particular for"s of +un5 which heads of industry
choose to put on the "ar5et at any gi'en ti"e. 3here'er the spectacle has its
do"inion the only organi,ed forces are those which want the spectacle. $hus no one
111
can !e the ene"y of what e4ists, nor transgress the o"erta which applies to
e'erything. 3e ha'e dispensed with that distur!ing conception, which was do"inant
for o'er two hundred years, in which a society was open to criticis" or
transfor"ation, refor" or re'olution. ot than5s to any new argu"ents, !ut 2uite
si"ply !ecause all argu"ent has !eco"e useless. #ro" this result we can esti"ate not
uni'ersal happiness, !ut the redou!ta!le strength of tyrannyGs tentacles. e'er
!efore has censorship !een so perfect. e'er !efore ha'e those who are still led to
!elie'e, in a few countries, that they re"ain free citi,ens, !een less entitled to "a5e
their opinions heard, where'er it is a "atter of choices affecting their real li'es.
e'er !efore has it !een possi!le to lie to the" so !ra,enly. $he spectator is si"ply
supposed to 5now nothing, and deser'e nothing. $hose who are always watching to see
what happens ne4t will ne'er act8 such "ust !e the spectatorGs condition. People
often cite the ?nited States as an e4ception !ecause there i4on e'entually ca"e to
grief with a series of denials whose clu"siness was too cynical8 !ut this entirely local
e4ception, for which there were so"e old historical causes, clearly no longer holds
true, since )eagan has recently !een a!le to do the sa"e thing with i"punity. =any
things "ay !e unauthori,ed; e'erything is per"itted. $al5 of scandal is thus archaic.
$he "ost profound su""ing up of the period which the whole world entered shortly
after &taly and the ?nited States, can !e found in the words of a senior &talian
states"an, a "e"!er, si"ultaneously, of !oth the official go'ern"ent and the parallel
go'ern"ent, P(, Potere /ue8 H7nce there were scandals, !ut not any "ore.I &n $he
%ighteenth Bru"aire of 9ouis Bonaparte, =ar4 descri!ed the stateGs encroach"ent
upon Second %"pire #rance, then !lessed with half a "illion !ureaucrats8
HK%'erything wasL "ade a su!+ect for go'ern"ental acti'ity, whether it was a !ridge,
a schoolhouse, the co""unal property of a 'illage co""unity, or the railways, the
national wealth and the national uni'ersity of #rance.I $he fa"ous 2uestion of the
funding of political parties was already !eing posed, for =ar4 noted that, H$he
parties that stro'e in turn for "astery regarded possession of this i""ense state
edifice as the "ain !ooty for the 'ictor.I Det this "ay nonetheless sound so"ewhat
!ucolic and out of date, at a ti"e when the stateGs speculations in'ol'e new towns and
highways, channel tunnels and nuclear energy, oil wells and co"puters, the
ad"inistration of !an5sand cultural centers, the "odification of the Jaudio'isual
landscapeG and secret ar"s e4ports, property speculation and phar"aceuticals,
agri!usiness and hospitals, "ilitary credits and the secret
112
funds of the e'er*e4panding depart"ents charged with running societyGs
nu"erous defense ser'ices. But =ar4 unfortunately re"ains all too up to
date when in the sa"e !oo5 he descri!es this go'ern"ent, which Hrather
than deciding !y night, and stri5ing !y day, decides !y day and stri5es !y
night.I
&M. Such a perfect de"ocracy constructs its own inconcei'a!le foe, terroris".
&ts wish is to !e +udged !y its ene"ies rather than !y its results. $he story
of terroris" is written !y the state and it is therefore highly instructi'e.
$he spectators "ust certainly ne'er 5now e'erything a!out terroris", !ut
they "ust always 5now enough to con'ince the" that, co"pared with
terroris", e'erything else "ust !e accepta!le, or in any case "ore rational
and de"ocratic.
$he "oderni,ation of repression has succeeded in perfecting ** first in
the &talian pilot*pro+ect under the na"e of pentiti ** sworn professional
accusers; a pheno"enon first seen in the se'enteenth century after the
#ronde, when such people were called Jcertified witnesses.G $his spectacular
+udicial progress has filled &talyGs prisons with thousands of people
conde"ned to do penance for a ci'il war which did not ta5e place, a 5ind
of "ass ar"ed insurrection which, !y chance, ne'er actually happened, a
putsch wo'en of such stuff as drea"s are "ade on.
&t can !e seen that interpretations of terroris"Gs "ysteries appear to ha'e
!rought a!out a sy""etry !etween contradictory 'iews, rather li5e two
schools of philosophy adhering to a!solutely inco"pati!le "etaphysical
syste"s. So"e would see terroris" as si"ply a nu"!er of acts of !latant
113
"anipulation on the part of the secret ser'ices; others would reproach
the terrorists for their total lac5 of historical understanding. But a little
historical logic should rapidly con'ince us that there is nothing contradictory
in recogni,ing that people who understand nothing of history can readily
!e "anipulated; e'en "ore so than others. .nd it is "uch easier to lead
so"eone to JrepentG when it can !e shown that e'erything he thought he
did freely was actually 5nown in ad'ance. &t is an ine'ita!le conse2uence
of clandestine, "ilitary for"s of organi,ation that a few infiltrators can
acti'ate, and eli"inate, a lot of people. Criticis", when e'aluating ar"ed
struggles, "ust so"eti"es analy,e particular operations without !eing led
astray !y the general rese"!lance that will finally !e i"posed on all of the".
3e should e4pect, as a logical possi!ility, that the stateGs security ser'ices
intend to use all the ad'antages they find in the real" of the spectacle,
which has indeed !een organi,ed with that in "ind for so"e considera!le
ti"e8 on the contrary, it is a difficulty in percei'ing this which is astonishing,
and rings false.
@udicial repressionGs present o!+ecti'e here, of course, is to generali,e "atters
as fast as possi!le. 3hat is i"portant in this co""odity is the pac5ing, or the
la!eling8 the price codes. 7ne ene"y of spectacular de"ocracy is the sa"e
as another, +ust li5e spectacular de"ocracies the"sel'es. $hus there "ust
!e no right of asylu" for terrorists, and e'en those who ha'e not yet !een
accused of !eing terrorists can certainly !eco"e the", with e4tradition
swiftly following. &n o'e"!er 1976, dealing with the case of a young print
wor5er, Ca!or 3inter, wanted !y the 3est Cer"an go'ern"ent "ainly for
ha'ing printed certain re'olutionary leaflets, =lle icole Pradain, acting
on !ehalf of the /epart"ent of Pu!lic Prosecution in the .ppeal Court
114
of Paris, 2uic5ly showed that the Jpolitical "oti'esG which could !e the
only grounds for refusing e4tradition under the #ranco*Cer"an agree"ent
of (9 o'e"!er 1911, could not !e in'o5ed8 HCa!or 3inter is a social
cri"inal, not a political one. <e refuses to accept social constraints. .
true political cri"inal doesnGt re+ect society. <e attac5s political structures
and not, li5e Ca!or 3inter, social structures.I $he notion of accepta!le
political cri"e only !eca"e recogni,ed in %urope once the !ourgeoisie
had successfully attac5ed pre'ious social structures. $he nature of political
cri"e could not !e separated fro" the 'aried o!+ecti'es of social criti2ue.
$his was true for Blan2ui, Barlin, /urruti. owadays there is a pretense of
wishing to preser'e a purely political cri"e, li5e so"e ine4pensi'e lu4ury,
a cri"e which dou!tless no one will e'er ha'e the occasion to co""it
again, since no one is interested in the su!+ect any "ore; e4cept for the
professional politicians the"sel'es, whose cri"es are rarely pursued, nor
for that "atter called political. .ll cri"es and offenses are effecti'ely social.
But of all social cri"es, none "ust !e seen as worse than the i"pertinent
clai" to still want to change so"ething in a society which has so far !een
only too 5ind and patient, !ut has had enough of !eing !la"ed.
M. .ccording to the !asic interests of the new syste" of do"ination, the
dissolution of logic has !een pursued !y different, !ut "utually supporti'e,
"eans. So"e of these "eans in'ol'e the technology which the spectacle
has tested and populari,ed; others are "ore lin5ed to the "ass psychology
of su!"ission.
.t the technological le'el, when i"ages chosen and constructed !y so"eone
115
else ha'e e'erywhere !eco"e the indi'idualGs principal connection to the
world he for"erly o!ser'ed for hi"self, it has certainly not !een forgotten
that these i"ages can tolerate anything and e'erything; !ecause within the
sa"e i"age all things can !e +u4taposed without contradiction. $he flow
of i"ages carries e'erything !efore it, and it is si"ilarly so"eone else who
controls at will this si"plified su""ary of the sensi!le world; who decides
where the flow will lead as well as the rhyth" of what should !e shown,
li5e so"e perpetual, ar!itrary surprise, lea'ing no ti"e for reflection, and
entirely independent of what the spectator "ight understand or thin5 of it.
&n this concrete e4perience of per"anent su!"ission lies the psychological
origin of such general acceptance of what is; an acceptance which co"es
to find in it, ipso facto, a sufficient 'alue. Beyond what is strictly secret,
spectacular discourse o!'iously silences anything it finds incon'enient.
&t isolates all it shows fro" its conte4t, its past, its intentions and its
conse2uences. &t is thus co"pletely illogical. Since no one "ay contradict
it, it has the right to contradict itself, to correct its own past. $he arrogant
intention of its ser'ants, when they ha'e to put forward so"e new, and
perhaps still "ore dishonest 'ersion of certain facts, is to harshly correct
the ignorance and "isinterpretations they attri!ute to their pu!lic, while
the day !efore they the"sel'es were !usily disse"inating the error, with
their ha!itual assurance. $hus the spectacleGs instruction and the spectatorsG
ignorance are wrongly seen as antagonistic factors when in fact they gi'e
!irth to each other. &n the sa"e way, the co"puterGs !inary language is
an irresisti!le induce"ent to the continual and unreser'ed acceptance of
what has !een progra""ed according to the wishes of so"eone else and
passes for the ti"eless source of a superior, i"partial and total logic. Such
116
progress, such speed, such !readth of 'oca!ularyE Political> Social> =a5e
your choice. Dou cannot ha'e !oth. =y own choice is inescapa!le. $hey are
+eering at us, and we 5now who" these progra"s are for. $hus it is hardly
surprising that children should enthusiastically start their education at an
early age with the .!solute Anowledge of co"puter science; while they are
still una!le to read, for reading de"ands "a5ing +udg"ents at e'ery line;
and is the only access to the wealth of pre*spectacular hu"an e4perience.
Con'ersation is al"ost dead, and soon so too will !e those who 5new how
to spea5.
$he pri"ary cause of the decadence of conte"porary thought e'idently
lies in the fact that spectacular discourse lea'es no roo" for any reply;
while logic was only socially constructed through dialogue. #urther"ore,
when respect for those who spea5 through the spectacle is so widespread,
when they are held to !e rich, i"portant, prestigious, to !e authority itself,
the spectators tend to want to !e +ust as illogical as the spectacle, there!y
proudly displaying an indi'idualreflection of this authority. .nd finally,
logic is not easy, and no one has tried to teach it. /rug addicts do not study
logic; they no longer need it, nor are they capa!le of it. $he spectatorGs
la,iness is shared !y all intellectual functionaries and o'ernight specialists,
all of who" do their !est to conceal the narrow li"its of their 5nowledge
!y the dog"atic repetition of argu"ents with illogical authority.
M&. &t is generally !elie'ed that those who ha'e displayed the greatest incapacity
in "atters of logic are self*proclai"ed re'olutionaries. $his un+ustified
reproach dates fro" an age when al"ost e'eryone thought with so"e
117
"ini"u" of logic, with the stri5ing e4ception of cretins and "ilitants; and
in the case of the latter !ad faith played its part, intentionally, !ecause it
was held to !e effecti'e. But today there is no escaping the fact that intense
a!sorption of the spectacle has, as we should ha'e e4pected, turned "ost
of our conte"poraries into ideologues, if only in fits and starts, !its and
pieces. .!sence of logic, that is to say, loss of the a!ility i""ediately to
percei'e what is significant and what is insignificant or irrele'ant, what is
inco"pati!le or what could well !e co"ple"entary, all that a particular
conse2uence i"plies and at the sa"e ti"e all that it e4cludes ** high doses
of this disease ha'e !een intentionally in+ected into the population !y the
spectacleGs anaesthetistsNresuscitators.
)e!els ha'e certainly not !een any "ore illogical than passi'e 'icti"s.
&t is si"ply that the for"er display a "ore intense "anifestation of the
generali,ed irrationality, !ecause while parading their ai"s and progra""es
they ha'e actually tried to carry out practical pro+ects ** e'en if it is only
to read certain te4ts and show that they 5now what they "ean. $hey ha'e
co""itted the"sel'es to o'erco"ing logic, e'en at the le'el of strategy,
which is precisely the entire operational field of the dialectical logic
of conflicts; !ut, li5e e'eryone else, they lac5 the !asic a!ility to orient
the"sel'es !y the old, i"perfect tools of for"al logic. o one worries
a!out the"; and hardly anyone thin5s a!out the others.
$he indi'idual who has !een "ore deeply "ar5ed !y this i"po'erished
spectacular thought than !y any other aspect of his e4perience puts
hi"self at the ser'ice of the esta!lished order right fro" the start, e'en
though su!+ecti'ely he "ay ha'e had 2uite the opposite intention. <e will
essentially follow the language of the spectacle, for it is the only one he is
118
fa"iliar with; the one in which he learned to spea5. o dou!t he would li5e
to !e regarded as an ene"y of its rhetoric; !ut he will use its synta4. $his
is one of the "ost i"portant aspects of spectacular do"inationGs success.
$he swift disappearance of our for"er 'oca!ulary is "erely one "o"ent
in this process. &t helps it along.
M&&. $he erasure of the personality is the fatal acco"pani"ent to an e4istence
which is concretely su!"issi'e to the spectacleGs rules, e'er "ore re"o'ed
fro" the possi!ility of authentic e4perience and thus fro" the disco'ery of
indi'idual preferences. Parado4ically, per"anent self*denial is the price the
indi'idual pays for the tiniest !it of social status. Such an e4istence de"ands
a fluid fidelity, a succession of continually disappointing co""it"ents to
false products. &t is a "atter of running hard to 5eep up with the inflation
of de'alued signs of life. /rugs help one to co"e to ter"s with this state
of affairs, while "adness allows one to escape fro" it.
&n all sorts of !usiness in this society, where the distri!ution of goods is
centrali,ed in such a way that it deter"ines ** !oth notoriously and secretly
** the 'ery definition of what could !e desira!le, it so"eti"es happens
that certain people are attri!uted with 5nowledge, 2ualities, or e'en 'ices,
all entirely i"aginary, in order to e4plain the satisfactory de'elop"ent of
particular enterprises. $he only ai" is to hide, or at least to disguise as far as
possi!le, the wor5ing of 'arious agree"ents which decide e'erything. Det
despite its fre2uent intentions, and the redou!ta!le "eans at its disposal,
to highlight the full stature of supposedly re"ar5a!le personalities, present
society "ore often only succeeds in de"onstrating 2uite the opposite, and
119
not "erely in what has today replaced the arts, or discussion of the arts.
7ne total inco"petent will collide with another; panic ensues and it is then
si"ply a "atter of who will fall apart first. . lawyer, for e4a"ple, forgetting
that he is supposed to represent one side in a trial, will !e genuinely swayed
!y the argu"ents of his opposite nu"!er, e'en when these argu"ents are as
hollow as his own. &t can also happen that an innocent suspect te"porarily
confesses to a cri"e he did not co""it si"ply !ecause he is i"pressed !y
the logic of an infor"er who wants hi" to !elie'e he is guilty (see the case
of /r. .rcha"!eau in Poitiers, in 1960).6 =c9uhan hi"self, the spectacleGs
first apologist, who had see"ed to !e the "ost con'inced i"!ecile of the
century, changed his "ind when he finally disco'ered in 1976 that Hthe
pressure of the "ass "edia leads to irrationality,I and that it was !eco"ing
urgent to "odify their usage. $he sage of $oronto had for"erly spent
se'eral decades "ar'eling at the nu"erous freedo"s created !y a Jglo!al
'illageG instantly and effortlessly accessi!le to all. Billages, unli5e towns,
ha'e always !een ruled !y confor"is", isolation, petty sur'eillance,
!oredo" and repetiti'e "alicious gossip a!out the sa"e fa"ilies. 3hich
is a precise enough description of the glo!al spectacleGs present 'ulgarity,
in which it has !eco"e i"possi!le to distinguish the Cri"aldi*=onaco or
Bour!on*#ranco dynasties fro" those who succeeded the Stuarts. <owe'er,
=c9uhanGs ungrateful "odern disciples are now trying to "a5e people
forget hi", hoping to esta!lish their own careers in "edia cele!ration of all
these new freedo"s to JchooseG at rando" fro" ephe"era. .nd no dou!t
they will retract their clai"s e'en faster than the "an who inspired the".
12
M&&&.
$he spectacle "a5es no secret of the fact that certain dangers surround
the wonderful order it has esta!lished. 7cean pollution and the destruction
of e2uatorial forests threaten o4ygen renewal; the earthGs o,one layer is
"enaced !y industrial growth; nuclear radiation accu"ulates irre'ersi!ly. &t
"erely concludes that none of these things "atter. &t will only tal5 a!out
dates and "easures. .nd on these alone, it is successfully reassuring **
so"ething which a pre*spectacular "ind would ha'e thought i"possi!le.
Spectacular de"ocracy approaches "atters with great su!tlety, 'ery
different fro" the straightforward !rutality of the totalitarian di5tat. &t
can 5eep the original na"e for so"ething secretly changed (!eer, !eef or
philosophers). .nd it can +ust as easily change the na"e when the thing
itself has !een secretly "aintained. &n %ngland, for e4a"ple, the nuclear
waste reprocessing plant at 3indscale was rena"ed Sellafield in order to
allay the suspicions which were aroused !y a disastrous fire in 1917, though
this topony"ic reprocessing did nothing to li"it the rise in local "ortality
rates fro" cancer and leu5e"ia. $he British go'ern"ent, as the population
de"ocratically learned thirty years later, had decided to suppress a report on
the catastrophe which it +udged, reasona!ly enough, would pro!a!ly sha5e
pu!lic confidence in nuclear power. $he nuclear industry, !oth "ilitary and
ci'il, de"ands a far higher dose of secrecy than in other fields ** which
already ha'e plenty, as we 5now. $o "a5e life ** that is to say, lying ** easier
for the sages chosen !y the syste"Gs "asters, it has !een found useful also
to change "easure"ents, to 'ary the" according to a large nu"!er of
criteria, and refine the", so as to !e a!le to +uggle as necessary with a range
of figures which are hard to con'ert. <ence, to "easure radioacti'ity le'els,
121
one can choose fro" a range of units of "easure"ent curies, !ec2uerels,
roentgens, rads alias centigrays, and re"s, not forgetting the hu"!le
"illirads, and sie'erts which are worth 1:: re"s. &t re"inds one of the
old su!di'isions of British currency which foreigners found so confusing,
!ac5 in the days when Sellafield was still called 3indscale. 7ne can i"agine
the rigor and precision which would ha'e !een achie'ed in the nineteenth
century !y "ilitary history, and thus !y theorists of strategy, if, so as not to
gi'e too "uch confidential infor"ation to neutral co""entators or ene"y
historians, ca"paigns were in'aria!ly descri!ed in the following "anner8
H$he preli"inary phase in'ol'ed a series of engage"ents in which, fro"
our side, a strong ad'ance force "ade up of four generals and the units
under their co""and, "et an ene"y force of 1-,::: !ayonets. &n the
su!se2uent phase a fiercely disputed pitched !attle de'eloped, in which
our entire ar"y ad'anced, with (9: canons and a hea'y ca'alry of 16,:::
sa!ers; the confronting ene"y align"ent co"prised no less than -,6::
infantry lieutenants, 0: captains of hussars and (0 of cuirassiers. #ollowing
alternate ad'ances and retreats on !oth sides, the !attle can finally !e seen as
inconclusi'e. 7ur losses, so"ewhat lower than the a'erage figure nor"ally
e4pected in co"!at of si"ilar duration and intensity, were apprecia!ly
superior to those of the Cree5s at =arathon, !ut re"ained inferior to
those of the Prussians at @ena.I &n this e4a"ple, it is not i"possi!le for a
specialist to gather so"e 'ague idea of the forces engaged. But the conduct
of operations re"ains securely concealed.
&n @une 1967, Pierre Bacher, deputy director of installations at %lectricite
de #rance, re'ealed the latest safety doctrine for nuclear power stations.
By installing 'al'es and filters it !eco"es "uch easier to a'oid "a+or
122
catastrophes, li5e crac5s or e4plosions in the reactors, which would affect a
whole Jregion.G Such catastrophes are produced !y e4cessi'e contain"ent.
3hene'er the plant loo5s li5e !lowing, it is !etter to deco"press gently,
showering only a restricted area of a few 5ilo"eters, an area which on each
occasion will !e differently and hapha,ardly e4tended depending on the
wind. <e discloses that in the past two years discreet e4peri"ents carried
out at Cadarache, in the /ro"e, Hclearly showed that waste gas essentially
is infinitesi"al, representing at worst one per cent of the radioacti'ity in
the power station itself.I $hus a 'ery "oderate worst case8 one per cent.
#or"erly, we were assured there was no ris5 at all, e4cept in the case of
accidents, which were logically i"possi!le. $he e4perience of the first few
years changed this reasoning as follows8 since accidents can always happen,
what "ust !e a'oided is their reaching a catastrophic threshold, and that
is easy. .ll that is necessary is to conta"inate little !y little, in "oderation.
3ho would not agree that it is infinitely healthier to li"it yourself to an
inta5e of 10: centilitres of 'od5a per day for se'eral years, rather than
getting drun5 right away li5e the Poles> &t is indeed unfortunate that hu"an
society should encounter such !urning pro!le"s +ust when it has !eco"e
"aterially i"possi!le to "a5e heard the least o!+ection to the language of
the co""odity, +ust when power ** 2uite rightly !ecause it is shielded !y
the spectacle fro" any response to its piece"eal and delirious decisions and
+ustifications ** !elie'es that it no longer needs to thin5; and indeed can no
longer thin5. 3ould not e'en the staunchest de"ocrat ha'e preferred to
ha'e !een gi'en "ore intelligent "asters> .t the international conference
of e4perts held in Cene'a in /ece"!er 1966, the 2uestion was 2uite
si"ply whether to introduce a worldwide !an on the production of
123
chlorofluorocar!ons (C#Cs), the gases which ha'e recently and rapidly
started to destroy the thin layer of o,one, which as will !e recalled protects
this planet against the har"ful effects of solar rays. /aniel Berilhe,
representing %lf* .2uitaineGs che"icals su!sidiary, and in this capacity part
of a #rench delegation fir"ly opposed to any !an, "ade a sensi!le point,
Hit will ta5e at least three years to de'elop su!stitutes and the costs will !e
2uadrupled.I .s we 5now, this fugiti'e o,one layer, so high up, !elongs to
no one and has no "ar5et 'alue. $his industrial strategist could thus show
his opponents the e4tent of their ine4plica!le disregard for econo"ics8
H&t is highly dangerous to !ase an industrial strategy on en'iron"ental
i"perati'es.I $hose who long ago had e"!ar5ed on a criti2ue of political
econo"y !y defining it as Hthe final denial of hu"anityI were not "ista5en.7
$his will !e seen as its defining characteristic.
M&B. &t is so"eti"es said that science today is su!ser'ient to the i"perati'es
of profit, !ut that is nothing new. 3hat is new is the way the econo"y
has now co"e to declare open war on hu"anity, attac5ing not only our
possi!ilities for li'ing, !ut our chances of sur'i'al. &t is here that science
** renouncing the opposition to sla'ery that for"ed a significant part of
its own history ** has chosen to put itself at the ser'ice of spectacular
do"ination. ?ntil it got to this point, science possessed a relati'e autono"y.
&t 5new how to understand its own portion of reality and in this has "ade
an i""ense contri!ution to increasing econo"ic resources. 3hen an allpowerful
econo"y lost its reason ** and that is precisely what defines these
spectacular ti"es ** it suppressed the last 'estiges of scientific autono"y,
124
!oth in "ethodology and, !y the sa"e to5en, in the practical wor5ing
conditions of its Jresearchers.G o longer is science as5ed to understand
the world, or to i"pro'e any part of it. &t is as5ed instead to i""ediately
+ustify e'erything that happens. .s stupid in this field, which it e4ploits with
the "ost ruinous disregard, as it is e'erywhere else, pectacular do"ination
has cut down the 'ast tree of scientific 5nowledge in order to "a5e
itself a truncheon. $o o!ey this ulti"ate social de"and for a "anifestly
i"possi!le ustification, it is !etter not to !e a!le to thin5 at all, !ut ather
to !e well trained in the con'eniences of spectacular language. .nd it is
in such a career that the prostituted science of our despica!le ti"es has
found its latest speciali,ation, with goodwill and alacrity. $he science of
lying +ustifications naturally appeared with the first sy"pto"s of !ourgeois
societyGs decadence, with the cancerous proliferation of those pseudosciences
5nown as Jhu"anG; yet "odern "edicine, for e4a"ple, had once
!een a!le to pass as useful, and those who eradicated s"allpo4 or leprosy
were 'ery different fro" those who conte"pti!ly capitulated in the face of
nuclear radiation or che"ical far"ing. &t can readily !e seen, of course, that
"edicine today no longer has the right to defend pu!lic health against a
pathogenic en'iron"ent, for that would !e to challenge the state, or at least
the phar"aceuticals industry. But it is not only !y its o!ligation to 5eep
2uiet that conte"porary science ac5nowledges what it has !eco"e. &t is also
!y its fre2uent and artless out!ursts. &n o'e"!er 1961, professors %'en
and .ndrieu at 9aennec hospital announced that they had perhaps found
an effecti'e cure for .&/S, following an e4peri"ent on four patients which
had lasted a wee5. $wo days later, the patients ha'ing died, se'eral other
doctors, whose research was not so far ad'anced, or who were perhaps
125
+ealous, e4pressed certain reser'ations as to the professorsG precipitate haste
in !roadcasting what was "erely the "isleading appearance of 'ictory **
a few hours !efore the patientsG condition finally deteriorated. %'en and
.ndrieu defended the"sel'es nonchalantly, arguing that Hafter all, false
hopes are !etter than no hope at all.I $heir ignorance was too great for
the" to recogni,e this argu"ent as a precise and co"plete disa'owal of
the spirit of science; as the one which had historically always ser'ed to
endorse the profita!le daydrea"s of charlatans and sorcerers, long !efore
such people were put in charge of hospitals.
3hen official science has co"e to such a pass, li5e all the rest of the social
spectacle that for all its "aterially "oderni,ed and enhanced presentation
is "erely re'i'ing the ancient techni2ues of fairground "ounte!an5s **
illusionists, !an5ers and stool*pigeons ** it is not surprising to see a si"ilar
and widespread re'i'al of the authority of seers and sects, of 'acuu"pac5ed
Oen or =or"ontheology. &gnorance, which has always ser'ed the
authorities well, has also always !een e4ploited !y ingenious 'entures on
the fringes of the law. .nd what !etter "o"ent than one where illiteracy
has !eco"e so widespread> But this reality in its turn is denied !y a new
display of sorcery. #ro" its inception, ?%SC7 had adopted a 'ery
precise scientific definition of the illiteracy which it stro'e to co"!at in
!ac5ward countries. 3hen the sa"e pheno"enon was une4pectedly seen
to !e returning, !ut this ti"e in the so*called ad'anced nations, rather in
the way that the one who was waiting for Crouchy instead saw Blucher
+oin the !attle, it was si"ply a "atter of calling in the Cuard of e4perts;
they carried the day with a single, unstoppa!le assault, replacing the word
illiteracy !y Jlanguage difficultiesG8 +ust as a Jfalse patriotG can so"eti"es
126
arri'e at an opportune "o"ent to support a good national cause. .nd to
ensure that the pertinence of this neologis" was, !etween pedagogues,
car'ed in stone, a new definition was 2uic5ly handed round ** as if it
had always !een accepted ** according to which, while the illiterate was,
as we 5now, so"eone who had ne'er learnt to read, those with language
difficulties in the "odern sense are on the contrary people who had learnt
to read (and had e'en learnt !etter than !efore, coolly proposed the "ore
gifted official theorists and historians of pedagogy), !ut who had !y chance
i""ediately forgotten again.
$his surprising e4planation "ight ha'e !een "ore distur!ing than reassuring,
if, !y deli!erately "issing the point, it had not s5illfully sidestepped the first
conse2uence which would ha'e co"e to anyoneGs "ind in "ore scientific
eras. $hat is, the recognition that this new pheno"enon had itself to !e
e4plained and co"!ated, since it had ne'er !een o!ser'ed or e'en i"agined
anywhere !efore the recent progress of da"aged thought, when analytical
and practical decadence go hand in hand.
MB.
=ore than a century ago, ..*9. SardouGs ou'eau /ictionnaire des
Synony"es #rancais defined the nuances which "ust !e grasped !etween
fallacious, decepti'e, i"postrous, in'eigling, insidious, captious; and which
ta5en together constitute today a 5ind of palette of colors with which to
paint a portrait of the society of the spectacle. &t was !eyond the scope
of his ti"e, and his specialist e4perience, for Sardou to distinguish with
e2ual clarity the related, !ut 'ery different, "eanings of the perils nor"ally
127
e4pected to !e faced !y any group which practices su!'ersion, following, for
e4a"ple, this progression8 "isguided, pro'o5ed, infiltrated, "anipulated,
ta5en o'er, su!'erted. Certainly these i"portant nuances ha'e ne'er !een
appreciated !y the doctrinaires of Jar"ed struggle.G #allacious Kfallacieu4L,
fro" the 9atin fallaciosus, adept at or accusto"ed to deception, full of
deceit8 the definition of this ad+ecti'e is e2ui'alent to the superlati'e of
decepti'e Ktro"peurL. $hat which decei'es or leads into error in any way
is decepti'e8 that which is done in order to decei'e, a!use, lead into error
!y plan intended to decei'e with artifice and "isleading confidence "ost
calculated to a!use, is fallacious. /ecepti'e is a generic and 'ague word; all
for"s of uncertain signs and appearance are decepti'e8 fallacious denotes
duplicity, deceit, studied i"posture; sophistic speech, asse'eration or
reasoning is fallacious. $he word has affinities with i"postrous Ki"posteurL,
in'eigling KseducteurL, insidious Kinsidieu4L and captious Kcaptieu4L, !ut
without e2ui'alence. &"postrous denotes all for"s of false appearance,
or conspiracies to a!use or in+ure; for e4a"ple, hypocrisy, calu"ny, etc.
&n'eigling e4presses action calculated to ta5e possession of so"eone, to
lead the" astray !y artful and insinuating "eans. &nsidious only indicates
the act of placing traps and entrapping. Captious is restricted to the su!tle
act of ta5ing !y surprise and ta5ing in. #allacious enco"passes "ost of
these definitions.
MB&.
$he relati'ely new concept of disinfor"ation was recently i"ported fro"
)ussia, along with a nu"!er of other in'entions useful in the running of
128
"odern states. &t is openly e"ployed !y particular powers, or, conse2uently,
!y people who hold frag"ents of econo"ic or political authority, in
order to "aintain what is esta!lished; and always in a counter*offensi'e
role. 3hate'er can oppose a single official truth "ust necessarily !e
disinfor"ation e"anating fro" hostile or at least ri'al powers, and would
ha'e !een intentionally and "ale'olently falsified. /isinfor"ation would
not !e si"ple negation of a fact which suits the authorities, or the si"ple
affir"ation of a fact which does not suit the"8 that is called psychosis.
?nli5e the straightforward lie, disinfor"ation "ust ine'ita!ly contain a
degree of truth !ut one deli!erately "anipulated !y an artful ene"y. $hat
is what "a5es it so attracti'e to the defenders of the do"inant society.
$he power which spea5s of disinfor"ation does not !elie'e itself to !e
a!solutely faultless, !ut 5nows that it can attri!ute to any precise criticis"
the e4cessi'e insignificance which characteri,es disinfor"ation; with the
result that it will ne'er ha'e to ad"it to any particular fault. &n essence,
disinfor"ation would !e a tra'esty of the truth. 3hoe'er disse"inates it is
culpa!le, whoe'er !elie'es it is stupid. But who precisely would this artful
ene"y !e> &n this case, it cannot !e terroris", which is in no danger of
Jdisinfor"ingG anyone, since it is charged with ontologically representing
the grossest and least accepta!le error. $han5s to its ety"ology and to
present "e"ories of those li"ited confrontations which, around "idcentury,
!riefly opposed %ast and 3est, concentrated spectacle and diffuse
spectacle, the capitalis" of todayGs integrated spectacle still pretends to
!elie'e that the capitalis" of !ureaucratic totalitarianis" ** so"eti"es
e'en presented as the terroristsG !ase ca"p or inspiration ** re"ains its
funda"ental ene"y, despite the innu"era!le proofs of their profound
129
alliance and solidarity. But actually all esta!lished powers, despite certain
genuine local ri'alries, and without e'er wanting to spell it out, ne'er forget
what one of the rare Cer"an internationalists after the out!rea5 of the
#irst 3orld 3ar "anaged to recall (on the side of su!'ersion and without
any great i""ediate success)8 H$he "ain ene"y is within.I &n the end,
disinfor"ation is the e2ui'alent of what was represented in the nineteenthcentury
language of social war as Jdangerous passions.G &t is all that is
o!scure and threatens to oppose the unprecedented happiness which we
5now this society offers to those who trust it, a happiness which greatly
outweighs 'arious insignificant ris5s and disappoint"ents. .nd e'eryone
who sees this happiness in the spectacle agrees that we should not gru"!le
a!out its price; e'eryone else is a disinfor"er.
$he other ad'antage deri'ed fro" denouncing a particular instance
of disinfor"ation in this way is that it wards off any suspicion that the
spectacleGs glo!al language "ight contain the sa"e thing. 3ith the "ost
scientific assurance, the spectacle can identify the only place where
disinfor"ation could !e found8 in anything which can !e said that "ight
displease it.
&t is dou!tless !y "ista5e ** unless it !e a deli!erate decoy ** that a pro+ect
was recently set in "otion in #rance to place a 5ind of official la!el on
so"e parts of the "edia guaranteeing the" Jfree fro" disinfor"ation.G $his
wounded certain "edia professionals, who still !elie'e, or "ore "odestly
would still li5e it to !e !elie'ed, that until now they had not actually !een
su!+ect to censorship. But the concept of disinfor"ation "ust ne'er !e
used defensi'ely, still less as part of a static defense, !uilding a Creat 3all or
=aginot 9ine around an area supposedly out of !ounds to disinfor"ation.
13
$here "ust !e disinfor"ation, and it "ust !e so"ething fluid and
potentially u!i2uitous. 3here the language of the spectacle is not under
attac5 it would !e foolish to defend it, and the concept would wear out 'ery
fast indeed if one were to try to defend it against all the e'idence on points
which ought on the contrary to !e 5ept fro" pu!lic 'iew. =oreo'er the
authorities ha'e no real need to guarantee that any particular infor"ation
does not contain disinfor"ation. or ha'e they the "eans to do so8 they
are not respected to that e4tent, and would only draw down suspicion on
the infor"ation concerned. $he concept of disinfor"ation is only 'alid for
counter*attac5. &t "ust !e 5ept in reser'e, then rapidly thrown into the fray
to dri'e !ac5 any truth which has "anaged to get through.
&f occasionally a 5ind of unregulated disinfor"ation threatens to appear, in
the ser'ice of particular interests te"porarily in conflict, and threatens to !e
!elie'ed, getting out of control and thus clashing with the concerted wor5
of a less irresponsi!le disinfor"ation, there is no reason to fear that the
for"er in'ol'es other "anipulators who are "ore su!tle or "ore s5illed8 it
is si"ply !ecause disinfor"ation now spreads in a world where there is no
roo" for 'erification. $he confusionist concept of disinfor"ation is pushed
into the li"elight i""ediately to refute, !y its 'ery na"e, any criticis" that
has failed to !e eli"inated !y the di'erse agencies of the organi,ation of
silence. #or e4a"ple it could one day !e said, should this see" desira!le,
that this te4t was an atte"pt to disinfor" a!out the spectacle; or indeed,
since it is the sa"e thing, that it was a piece of disinfor"ation har"ful to
de"ocracy.
Contrary to its spectacular definition, the practice of disinfor"ation can
only ser'e the state here and now, under its direct co""and, or at the
131
initiati'e of those who uphold the sa"e 'alues. /isinfor"ation is actually
inherent in all e4isting infor"ation; and indeed is its "ain characteristic.
&t is only na"ed where passi'ity "ust !e "aintained !y inti"idation.
3here disinfor"ation is na"ed it does not e4ist. 3here it e4ists, it is not
na"ed. 3hen there were still conflicting ideologies, which clai"ed to !e
for or against so"e recogni,ed aspect of reality, there were fanatics, and
liars, !ut there were no Jdisinfor"ers.G 3hen respect for the spectacular
consensus, or at least a desire for spectacular 5udos prohi!its any honest
declaration of what so"eone is against, or e2ually what he wholeheartedly
appro'es; and when at the sa"e ti"e he needs to disguise a part of what
he is supposed to ac5nowledge !ecause for one reason or another it is
considered dangerous, then he e"ploys disinfor"ation, as if !y !lunder or
negligence, or !y pretended false reasoning. &n political acti'ity after 1966,
for e4a"ple, the inco"petent recuperators 5nown as Jpro*situs,G !eca"e
the first disinfor"ers !ecause they did their !est to hide all practical
"anifestations which confir"ed the criti2ue they clai"ed to ha'e adopted;
and, without the slightest e"!arrass"ent at wea5ening its e4pression, ne'er
referred to anything or anyone, in order to suggest that they the"sel'es had
actually disco'ered so"ething.
MB&&.
)e'ersing <egelGs fa"ous "a4i", & noted as long ago as 1967 that Hin a world
that has really !een turned upside down, truth is a "o"ent of falsehood.I
&n the inter'ening years, this principle has encroached upon each specific
do"ain, without e4ception. $hus in an era when conte"porary art can no
132
longer e4ist, it !eco"es difficult to +udge classical art. <ere as elsewhere,
ignorance is only created in order to !e e4ploited. .s the "eanings of
history and taste are lost, networ5s of falsification are organi,ed. &t is only
necessary to control the e4perts and auctioneers, which is easy enough,
to arrange e'erything, since in this 5ind of !usiness ** and at the end of
the day in e'ery other 5ind ** it is the sale which authenticates the 'alue.
.fterwards it is the collectors and "useu"s, particularly in ."erica, who,
gorged on falsehood, will ha'e an interest in upholding its good reputation,
+ust as the &nternational =onetary #und "aintains the fiction of a positi'e
'alue in the huge de!ts of do,ens of countries. 3hat is false creates taste,
and reinforces itself !y 5nowingly eli"inating any possi!le reference to the
authentic. .nd what is genuine is reconstructed as 2uic5ly as possi!le, to
rese"!le the false. Being the richest and the "ost "odern, the ."ericans
ha'e !een the "ain dupes of this traffic in false art. .nd they are e4actly
the sa"e people who pay for restoration wor5 at Bersailles or in the Sistine
Chapel. $his is why =ichelangeloGs frescoes will ac2uire the fresh, !right
colors of a cartoon strip, and the genuine furniture at Bersailles, the
spar5ling gilt which will "a5e the" rese"!le the fa5e 9ouis M&B suites
i"ported !y $e4ans at such great e4pense.
#euer!achGs +udg"ent on the fact that his ti"e preferred Hthe sign to the
thing signified, the copy to the original, fancy to reality,I has !een thoroughly
'indicated !y the century of the spectacle, and in se'eral spheres where the
nineteenth century preferred to 5eep its distance fro" what was already its
funda"ental nature8 industrial capitalis". $hus it was that the !ourgeoisie
had widely disse"inated the rigorous "entality of the "useu", the original
o!+ect, precise historical criticis", the authentic docu"ent. $oday, howe'er,
133
the tendency to replace the real with the artificial is u!i2uitous. &n this
regard, it is fortuitous that traffic pollution has necessitated the replace"ent
of the =arly <orses in place de la Concorde, or the )o"an statues in the
doorway of Saint*$rophi"e in .rles, !y plastic replicas. %'erything will !e
"ore !eautiful than !efore, for the touristsG ca"eras.
$he high point in this process has dou!tless !een reached !y the Chinese
!ureaucracyGs laugha!le fa5e of the 'ast terra*cotta industrial ar"y of the
#irst %"peror, which so "any 'isiting states"en ha'e !een ta5en to ad"ire
in situ. . clear de"onstration, since it was possi!le to fool the" so cruelly,
that in all their hordes of ad'isors, there is not one single indi'idual who
5nows a!out art history in China, or anywhere else ** JDour %4cellencyGs
co"puters ha'e no data on this su!+ect.G Such a confir"ation of the fact
that for the first ti"e in history it is possi!le to go'ern without the slightest
understanding of art or of what is authentic and what is i"possi!le, could
alone suffice to "a5e us suppose that the credulous fools who run the
econo"y and the ad"inistration will pro!a!ly lead the world to so"e great
catastrophe; if their actual practice had not already "ade that crystal clear.
MB&&&.
7ur society is !uilt on secrecy, fro" the JfrontG organi,ations which draw
an i"penetra!le screen o'er the concentrated wealth of their "e"!ers,
to the Jofficial secretsG which allow the state a 'ast field of operation free
fro" any legal constraint; fro" the often frightening secrets of shoddy
production hidden !y ad'ertising, to the pro+ections of an e4trapolated
future, in which do"ination alone reads off the li5ely progress of things
134
whose e4istence it denies, calculating the responses it will "ysteriously
"a5e. So"e o!ser'ations can !e "ade on these "atters. $here are e'er
"ore places in cities and in the countryside which re"ain inaccessi!le, that
is to say protected and shielded fro" pu!lic ga,e; which are out of !ounds
to the innocently curious, and well guarded against espionage. 3ithout
all !eing strictly "ilitary, they follow the "ilitary "odel in pre'enting any
prying incursion !y local people or passers*!y; or e'en !y the police, whose
functions ha'e long !een reduced to "ere sur'eillance and repression of
the "ost co""onplace for"s of delin2uency. $hus it was that when .ldo
=oro was a prisoner of Potere /ue he was held, not in a !uilding which
could not !e found, !ut in one which could not !e entered.
$here are e'er "ore people trained to act in secret; prepared and practiced
for that alone. $here are special units ar"ed with confidential archi'es,
that is to say, with secret data and analysis. $here are others ar"ed with
a range of techni2ues for the e4ploitation and "anipulation of these
secrets. .nd finally there are the Jacti'eG units, e2uipped with other "eans
to si"plify the pro!le"s in 2uestion. $he resources allocated to these
specialists in sur'eillance and influence continue to increase, while general
circu"stances fa'or the" "ore !y the year. 3hen, for e4a"ple, the new
conditions of integrated spectacular society ha'e dri'en its criti2ue into
genuine clandestinity, not !ecause it is in hiding !ut !ecause it is hidden !y
the ponderous stage*"anage"ent of di'ersionary thought, those who are
nonetheless responsi!le for its sur'eillance, and in the end for its denial,
can now e"ploy traditional "ethods for operations in clandestine "ilieus8
pro'ocation, infiltration, and 'arious for"s of eli"ination of authentic
criti2ue in fa'or of a false one which will ha'e !een created for this
135
purpose. 3hen the spectacleGs general i"posture is enriched with recourse
to a thousand indi'idual i"postures, uncertainty grows at e'ery turn. .n
une4plained cri"e can also !e called suicide, in prison as elsewhere; the
collapse of logic allows trials and in2uiries which soar into irrationality, and
which are fre2uently falsified right fro" the start through a!surd autopsies,
perfor"ed !y e4traordinary e4perts.
3e ha'e long !een accusto"ed to su""ary e4ecutions of all 5inds of
people. Anown terrorists, or those considered as such, are openly fought
with terrorist "ethods. =ossad can arrange the 5illing of .!ou @ihad, the
S.S can do the sa"e with &rish people, and the parallel police of C.91:
with Bas2ues. $hose whose 5illings are arranged !y supposed terrorists
are not chosen without reason; !ut it is generally i"possi!le to !e sure of
understanding these reasons. 7ne can !e aware that Bologna railway station
was !lown up to ensure that &taly continued to !e well go'erned; or of the
identity of the Jdeath s2uadsG in Bra,il; or that the =afia can !urn down a
hotel in the ?nited States to facilitate a rac5et. But how can we 5now what
purpose was ulti"ately ser'ed !y the J"ad 5illers of Bra!antG> &t is hard to
apply the principle Cui prodest> where so "any acti'e interests are so well
concealed. $he result is that under the rule of the integrated spectacle, we
li'e and die at the confluence of innu"era!le "ysteries.
=ediaNpolice ru"ors ac2uire instantly ** or at worst after three or four
repetitions ** the indisputa!le status of age*old historical e'idence. By the
legendary authority of the spectacle of the day, odd characters eli"inated
in silence can reappear as ficti'e sur'i'ors, whose return can always !e
con+ured up or co"puted, and pro'ed !y the "ere say*so of specialists.
$hey e4ist so"ewhere !etween the .cheron and the 9ethe, these dead
136
who" the spectacle has not properly !uried, supposedly slu"!ering while
awaiting the su""ons which will awa5e the" all8 ho"e is the pirate, ho"e
fro" the sea, and the terrorist ho"e fro" the hill; ho"e, too, the thief
who no longer needs to steal.
$hus is uncertainty organi,ed e'erywhere. 7ften do"ination will protect
itself !y false attac5s, whose "edia co'erage co'ers up the true operation.
Such was the case with the !i,arre assault on the Spanish Cortes !y $e+ero
and his ci'il guards in 1961, whose failure had to hide another "ore
"odern, that is to say, "ore disguised pronuncia"iento, which succeeded.
$he e2ually showy failure of the #rench secret ser'icesG sa!otage atte"pt
in ew Oealand in 1961 has so"eti"es !een seen as a stratage", perhaps
designed to di'ert attention fro" the nu"erous new uses of these secret
ser'ices, !y persuading people of their caricatural clu"siness !oth in their
choice of target and in their "ode of operation. &t has "ost certainly !een
al"ost uni'ersally accepted that the geological e4plorations for oil*!eds in
the su!soil of the city of Paris, so noisily conducted in the autu"n of 1966,
had no other serious purpose than to "easure the inha!itantsG current le'el
of stupefaction and su!"ission8 !y showing the" supposed research so
a!solutely de'oid of econo"ic reason.
So "ysterious has power !eco"e that after the affair of the illegal ar"s sales
to &ran !y the ?S presidency, one "ight wonder who was really running the
?nited States, the leading power in the so*called de"ocratic world. .nd
thus who the hell was running the de"ocratic world> =ore profoundly, in
this world which is officially so respectful of econo"ic necessities, no one
e'er 5nows the real cost of anything which is produced. &n fact the "a+or
part of the real cost is ne'er calculated; and the rest is 5ept secret.
137
M&M.
.t the !eginning of 1966, a certain Ceneral oriega suddenly !eca"e
world fa"ous. <e was the unofficial dictator of Pana"a, a country without
an ar"y, where he co""anded the ational Cuard. Pana"a is not really
a so'ereign state8 it was dug out for its canal, rather than the re'erse. &ts
currency is the dollar, and the ar"y which runs it is si"ilarly foreign.
oriega had thus de'oted his entire career ** precisely li5e KCeneralL
@aru,els5i in Poland ** to ser'ing the occupying power as its chief of
police. <e i"ported drugs into the ?nited States, since Pana"a was not
!ringing hi" sufficient re'enue, and e4ported his JPana"anianG capital to
Swit,erland. <e had wor5ed with the C&. against Cu!a and, to pro'ide
ade2uate co'er for his !usiness acti'ities, had also denounced so"e of his
ri'als in the i"port trade to the ?S authorities, o!sessed as they are with
this pro!le". $o the en'y of 3ashington, his chief security ad'isor was
the !est on the "ar5et8 =ichael <arari, a for"er officer with =ossad, the
&sraeli secret ser'ice. 3hen the ."ericans finally decided to get rid of this
character, so"e of their courts ha'ing carelessly conde"ned hi", oriega
proclai"ed that he was ready to defend hi"self for a thousand years **
against foreigners, and against his own re!ellious people; in the na"e of
anti*i"perialis" he 2uic5ly recei'ed pu!lic support fro" the "ore austere
!ureaucratic dictators in Cu!a and icaragua.
#ar fro" !eing a peculiarly Pana"anian pheno"enon, this Ceneral
oriega, who sells e'erything and fa5es e'erything, in a world which does
precisely the sa"e thing, was altogether a perfect representati'e of the
integrated spectacle, and of the successes it allows the assorted "anagers
138
of its internal and e4ternal politics8 a sort of states"an in a sort of state, a
sort of general, a capitalist. <e is the 'ery "odel of our "odern prince, and
of those destined to co"e to power and stay there, the "ost a!le rese"!le
hi" closely. &t is not Pana"a which produces such "ar'els, it is our ti"es.
MM.
#or any intelligence ser'ice, following Clausewit,Gs accurate theory of
war, 5nowledge "ust !eco"e power. #ro" this these ser'ices deri'e their
conte"porary prestige, their peculiarly poetic 2uality. 3hilst intelligence
itself has !een so thoroughly e4pelled fro" the spectacle, which prohi!its
action and says 'ery little a!out the actions of others, it see"s to ha'e
ta5en refuge with those who analy,e and secretly act on certain realities.
$he recent re'elations that =argaret $hatcher tried in 'ain to suppress,
and in fact confir"ed !y the atte"pt, ha'e shown that in Britain these
ser'ices ha'e already !een capa!le of !ringing down a pri"e "inister
whose politics they dee"ed dangerous. $he general conte"pt created !y
the spectacle thus, for new reasons, restored the fascination of what in
AiplingGs day was called Jthe great ga"e.G J$he conspiracy theory of historyG
was in the nineteenth century a reactionary and ridiculous !elief, at a ti"e
when so "any powerful social "o'e"ents were stirring up the "asses.
$odayGs pseudo*re!els are well aware of this, than5s to hearsay or a few
!oo5s, and !elie'e that it re"ains true for eternity. $hey refuse to recogni,e
the real pra4is of their ti"e; it is too sad for their cold hopes. $he state
notes this fact, and plays on it.
3hen al"ost e'ery aspect of international political life and e'er "ore
139
i"portant aspects of internal politics are conducted and displayed in the style
of the secret ser'ices, with decoys, disinfor"ation and dou!le e4planations
(one "ay conceal another, or "ay only see" to), the spectacle confines
itself to re'ealing a weariso"e world of necessary inco"prehensi!ility.
$his tedious series of lifeless, inconclusi'e cri"e no'els has all the dra"atic
interest of a realistically staged fight !etween !lac5s, at night, in a tunnel.
3hen tele'ision has shown a fine picture and e4plained it with a !ra,en
lie, idiots !elie'e that e'erything is clear. $he de"i*elite is content to 5now
that al"ost e'erything is o!scure, a"!i'alent, JconstructedG !y un5nown
codes. . "ore e4clusi'e elite would li5e to 5now what is true, hard as it
is to distinguish in each particular case, despite all their access to special
5nowledge and confidences. 3hich is why they would li5e to get to 5now
the "ethod of truth, though their lo'e usually re"ains unre2uited.
MM&.
Secrecy do"inates this world, and first and fore"ost as the secret of
do"ination. .ccording to the spectacle, secrecy would only !e a necessary
e4ception to the rule of freely a'aila!le, a!undant infor"ation, +ust as
do"ination in the integrated spectacleGs Jfree worldG would !e restricted
to a "ere e4ecuti'e !ody in the ser'ice of de"ocracy. But no one really
!elie'es the spectacle. <ow then do spectators accept the e4istence of
secrecy which alone rules out any chance of their running a world of
whose principal realities they 5now nothing, in the unli5ely e'ent that
they were to !e as5ed how to set a!out it> $he fact is that al"ost no
one sees secrecy in its inaccessi!le purity and its functional uni'ersality.
14
%'eryone accepts that there are ine'ita!ly little areas of secrecy reser'ed
for specialists; as regards things in general, "any !elie'e they are in on the
secret. &n his /iscours sur la ser'itude 'olontaire, 9a Boetie showed how
a tyrantGs power will !e considera!ly reinforced !y the concentric circles
of indi'iduals who !elie'e, rightly or wrongly, that it is in their interests
to support it. &n the sa"e way "any politicians and "edia professionals
who are flattered not to !e suspected of !eing irresponsi!le, learn a lot
through their connections and confidences. So"eone who is happy to !e
gi'en confidential infor"ation is hardly li5ely to critici,e it; nor to notice
that in all that is confided to hi", the principal part of reality is in'aria!ly
hidden. $han5s to the !ene'olent protection of his decei'ers, he sees a
few "ore of the cards, false though they "ay !e; he ne'er learns the rules
of the ga"e. $hus he i""ediately identifies with the "anipulators and
scorns an ignorance which in fact he shares. #or the tid!its of infor"ation
tossed to the fa"iliars of a lying tyranny are usually poisoned with lies,
"anipulated and unchec5a!le. Det they gratify those who get the", for they
feel the"sel'es superior to those who 5now nothing. $heir only role is to
"a5e do"ination "ore respecta!le, ne'er to "a5e it co"prehensi!le. $hey
are the pri'ilege of front*row spectators who are stupid enough to !elie'e
they can understand so"ething, not !y "a5ing use of what is hidden fro"
the", !ut !y !elie'ing what is re'ealedE
/o"ination has at least sufficient lucidity to e4pect that its free and
unhindered reign will 'ery shortly lead to a significant nu"!er of "a+or
catastrophes, !oth ecological (che"ical, for e4a"ple) and econo"ic (in
!an5ing, for e4a"ple). &t has for so"e ti"e !een ensuring it is in a position
to deal with these e4ceptional "isfortunes !y other "eans than its usual
141
gentle use of disinfor"ation.
MM&&.
.s to the rising nu"!er of assassinations o'er the last two decades (Aennedy,
.ldo =oro, 7laf Pal"e, "inisters and !an5ers, a pope or two, so"e others
who were worth "ore than all of the") which ha'e re"ained co"pletely
unsol'ed ** for, while the odd supernu"erary has !een sacrificed, there has
ne'er !een any 2uestion of apprehending those who hold the purse strings
** their serial character shows a co""on hall"ar58 the !latant, and 'aria!le,
lies of official state"ents. $he syndro"e of this newly esta!lished social
disease has 2uic5ly spread, as if, following the first docu"ented cases, it
"o'ed down fro" the su""its of the state (the traditional sphere for such
cri"es) and at the sa"e ti"e "o'ed up fro" the lower depths, the other
traditional locale fortraffic5ing and protection rac5ets, where this 5ind of
war has always gone on, !etween professionals.
$hese acti'ities tend to "eet up in the "iddle of social affairs, a place
which the state was prepared to fre2uent and which the =afia was pleased
to reach; thus a 5ind of confluence !egins. $here has !een no shortage
of atte"pts to e4plain these new "ysteries in ter"s of accidents8 police
inco"petence, stupid "agistrates, unti"ely press re'elations, crisis of
growth in the secret ser'ices, "ale'olent witnesses, or police spies suddenly
deciding to go on stri5e. But %dgar .llan Poe had already disco'ered the
real path to truth, in a well*5nown argu"ent in J$he =urders in the )ue
=orgueG8 H&t appears to "e that this "ystery is considered insolu!le, for
the 'ery reason which should cause it to !e regarded as easy of solution ** &
142
"ean for the outre character of its features.... &n in'estigations such as we
are now pursuing, it should not !e so "uch as5ed Jwhat has occurred,G as
Jwhat has occurred that has ne'er occurred !efore.GI
MM&&&
&n @anuary 1966 the Colo"!ian drug =afia issued a Co""uni2ue ai"ed
at correcting pu!lic opinion a!out its supposed e4istence. ow the first
re2uire"ent of any =afia, where'er it "ay !e, is naturally to pro'e that
it does not e4ist, or that it has !een the 'icti" of unscientific calu"nies;
and that is the first thing it has in co""on with capitalis". But in these
particular circu"stances, this =afia was so irritated at !eing the only one
placed under the spotlight that it went so far as to gi'e details of the other
groupings who were trying to co'er the"sel'es !y illegiti"ately using it
as a scapegoat. &t declared8 J3e oursel'es donGt !elong to the =afia of
politicians and !ureaucrats, !an5ers, financiers or "illionaires, nor to the
=afia of fraudulent contracts, "onopolies or oil, nor to the "edia =afia.G
3e can dou!tless assu"e that the authors of this state"ent ha'e, li5e all
the rest, an interest in di'erting their own acti'ities into that 'ast ri'er of
trou!led water whose course irrigates the whole of present society, a ri'er
of cri"e and "ore !anal illegalities. But it is also correct to assu"e that here
we ha'e people who !y their 'ery profession 5now !etter than "ost what
they are tal5ing a!out. $he =afia flourishes in the soil of conte"porary
society. &ts e4pansion is as rapid as that of all the other products of the
la!or !y which integrated spectacular society shapes its world. $he =afia
grows along with the swift de'elop"ent of infor"ation technology and
143
industrial food processing, along with ur!an rede'elop"ent and shantytowns,
secret ser'ices and illiteracy.
MM&B.
3hen it was first !rought to the ?nited States !y "igrant Sicilian wor5ers,
the =afia was nothing !ut an uprooted archais"; +ust li5e the gang wars
!etween Chinese secret societies which appeared at the sa"e ti"e on
the 3est Coast. Born out of o!scurantis" and po'erty, the =afia at that
ti"e was not e'en a!le to put down roots in orthern &taly. &t see"ed
conde"ned to 'anish with the progress of the "odern state. #or it was a
for" of organi,ed cri"e which could only prosper through the JprotectionG
of !ac5ward "inorities, outside the ur!an world, where the laws of the
!ourgeoisie and a rational police force could not penetrate. &n its defense,
the =afia could only eli"inate witnesses, to neutrali,e the police and
+udiciary, and to "aintain necessary secrecy in its sphere of acti'ity. But
su!se2uently it found fresh scope in the new o!scurantis" first of diffuse
spectacular society, then of its integrated for"8 with the total 'ictory of
secrecy, the general resignation of the populace, the co"plete loss of logic,
the uni'ersal progress of 'enality and cowardice, all the conditions were in
place for it to !eco"e a "odern, and offensi'e, power.
Prohi!ition in ."erica (one of the finest e4a"ples this century of
the stateGs pretension to !e a!le to e4ercise authoritarian control o'er
e'erything, and of the results which ensue) handed o'er the trade in alcohol
to organi,ed cri"e for "ore than a decade. #ro" there the =afia, with its
new wealth and e4perience, "o'ed into electoral politics, co""erce, the
144
de'elop"ent of the "ar5et in professional 5illers, and certain aspects of
international politics. /uring the Second 3orld 3ar it recei'ed fa'ors fro"
the ?S go'ern"ent, to help with the in'asion of Sicily. 9egali,ed alcohol
was replaced !y drugs, now the leading co""odity in illegal consu"ption.
e4t the =afia !eca"e closely in'ol'ed in property dealing, in !an5ing
and in high*le'el politics and affairs of state, and then in the spectacular
industries8 tele'ision, fil"s and pu!lishing. .nd already, in the ?nited States
at least, it is in'ol'ed in the "usic industry, as in e'ery other acti'ity where
pro"otion depends on a relati'ely concentrated group of people. &t is easy
to apply pressure to the", with !ri!es and inti"idation, since there is no
shortage of capital or of untoucha!le, anony"ous hit"en.
By corrupting the disc*+oc5eys, one can choose what will succeed, fro"
e2ually wretched co""odities. But it is undou!tedly in &taly that the
=afia has ac2uired the greatest strength, in the wa5e of its e4perience
and con2uests in ."erica. Since the period of its historic co"pro"ise
with the parallel go'ern"ent, it has !een a!le to 5ill "agistrates and police
chiefs with i"punity ** a practice it inaugurated through its participation in
the displays of political Jterroris".G $he si"ilar e'olution of the =afiaG s
@apanese e2ui'alent, in relati'ely independent conditions, well illustrates the
unity of the epoch.
&t is always a "ista5e to try to e4plain so"ething !y opposing =afia and
state8 they are ne'er ri'als. $heory easily 'erifies what all the ru"ors in
practical life ha'e all too easily shown. $he =afia is not an outsider in this
world; it is perfectly at ho"e. &ndeed, in the integrated spectacle it stands as
the "odel of all ad'anced co""ercial enterprises.
145
MMB.
3ith the new conditions which now predo"inate in a society crushed under
the spectacleGs iron heel, we 5now, for e4a"ple, that a political assassination
can !e presented in another light, can in a sense !e screened. %'erywhere
the "ad are "ore nu"erous than !efore, !ut what is infinitely "ore useful
is that they can !e tal5ed a!out "adly. .nd it is not so"e 5ind of reign of
terror which forces such e4planations on the "edia. 7n the contrary, it is
the peaceful e4istence of such e4planations which should cause terror.
3hen in 1910, with war on the hori,on, Billain assassinated @aures, no one
dou!ted that Billain, though certainly a so"ewhat un!alanced "an, had
!elie'ed he had to 5ill @aures, !ecause in the eyes of the e4tre"ists of the
patriotic right who had deeply influenced hi", @aures see"ed certain to
ha'e a detri"ental effect on the countryGs defense. $hese e4tre"ists had
"erely underesti"ated the tre"endous strength of patriotic co""it"ent
within the Socialist Party, which would i""ediately lead the" into the
union sacree, whether or not @aures was assassinated or allowed to hold
to his internationalist position in re+ecting war. &f such an e'ent happened
today, +ournalistsNpolice and pundits on Jsocial issuesG and Jterroris"G would
2uic5ly e4plain that Billain was well 5nown for ha'ing planned se'eral
atte"pted "urders, whose intended 'icti"s were always "en who, despite
the 'ariety of their political opinions, all !y chance loo5ed and dressed
rather li5e @aures. Psychiatrists would confir" this, and the "edia, "erely
confir"ing in their turn what the psychiatrists had said, would thus confir"
their own co"petence and i"partiality as uni2uely authoritati'e e4perts.
$he official police in'estigation would i""ediately co"e up with se'eral
146
reputa!le people ready to !ear witness to the fact that this sa"e Billain,
considering he had !een rudely ser'ed at the JChope du Croissant,G had
in their presence loudly threatened to ta5e re'enge on its proprietor !y
pu!licly "urdering on the pre"ises one of his !est custo"ers.
$his is not to say that, in the past, truth was re'ealed often or uic5ly, for
Billain was e'entually ac2uitted !y the #rench courts. <e was not shot until
19-6, at the start of the Spanish re'olution, ha'ing !een i"prudent enough
to "o'e to the Balearic &slands.
MMB&.
$he u!i2uitous growth of secret societies and networ5s of influence
answers the i"perati'e de"and of the new conditions for profita!le
"anage"ent of econo"ic affairs, at a ti"e when the state holds a hege"onic
role in the direction of production and when de"and for all co""odities
depends strictly on the centrali,ation achie'ed !y spectacular infor"ationN
pro"otion, to which for"s of distri!ution "ust also adapt. &t is therefore
only a natural product of the concentration of capital, production and
distri!ution. 3hate'er does not grow "ust disappear; and no !usiness
can grow without adopting the 'alues, techni2ues and "ethods of todayGs
industry, spectacle and state. &n the final analysis, it is the particular for"
of de'elop"ent chosen !y the econo"y of our epoch which dictates the
widespread creation of new personal !onds of dependency and protection.
&t is precisely here that we can see the profound truth of the Sicilian =afiaGs
"a4i", so well appreciated throughout &taly8 H3hen youG'e got "oney and
friends, you can laugh at the law.I &n the integrated spectacle, the laws are
147
asleep; !ecause they were not "ade for the new production techni2ues,
and !ecause they are e'aded in distri!ution !y new types of agree"ent.
3hat the pu!lic thin5s, or prefers, is of no i"portance. $his is what is
hidden !y the spectacle of all these opinion polls, elections, "oderni,ing
restructurings. o "atter who the winners are, the faithful custo"ers will
get the worst of it, !ecause that is e4actly what has !een produced for the".
$he widespread tal5 of a Jlegal stateG only dates fro" the "o"ent when the
"odern, so*called de"ocratic state generally ceased to !e one. $he fact that
the e4pression was only populari,ed shortly after 197: and, appropriately,
in &taly is far fro" accidental. &n "any fields, laws are e'en "ade precisely
so that they "ay !e e'aded, !y those who ha'e the "eans to do so. &llegality
in so"e circu"stances ** for e4a"ple, around the world trade in all sorts of
weaponry, especially the "ost technologically sophisticated products ** is
si"ply a 5ind of !ac5*up for the econo"ic operation, which will !e all the
"ore profita!le !ecause of it. $oday "any !usiness deals are necessarily as
dishonest as the century, and not li5e those once "ade within a strictly
li"ited range !y people who had chosen the paths of dishonesty.
3ith the growth of pro"otionNcontrol networ5s to "ar5 out and "aintain
e4ploita!le sectors of the "ar5et, there is also an increase in the nu"!er of
personal ser'ices which "ust !e pro'ided to those in the 5now, who ha'e
willingly pro'ided their help; and these are not always the police or guardians
of the stateGs interests and security. #unctional co"plicities operate across
ti"e and distance, for their networ5s co""and all the "eans to i"pose
those senti"ents of gratitude and fidelity which were unfortunately so rare
in the free acti'ity of the !ourgeois epoch. 7ne always learns so"ething
fro" oneGs ad'ersary. 3e should not dou!t that states"en, too, ca"e to read
148
the young 9u5acsG re"ar5s on the concepts of legality and illegality, at the
ti"e when they had to deal with the !rief passage of a new generation of
negati'ity ** as <o"er said, H=en in their generations are li5e the lea'es of
the trees.I Since then states"en, li5e us, ha'e ceased to trou!le the"sel'es
with any 5ind of ideology on the 2uestion; and indeed the practices of
spectacular society no longer encourage ideological illusions of this 5ind.
.nd, finally, it could !e said of all of us that what has stopped us fro"
de'oting oursel'es to one particular illegal acti'ity is the fact that we ha'e
had se'eral.
MMB&&.
&n !oo5 B&&&, chapter 1 of $he Peloponnesian 3ar, $hucydides wrote
so"ething a!out the operations of another oligarchic conspiracy which
closely relates to the situation in which we find oursel'es8 He'ertheless the
.sse"!ly and the Council chosen !y lot still continued to hold "eetings.
<owe'er, they too5 no decisions that were not appro'ed !y the party of
the re'olution; in fact all the spea5ers were fro" this party, and what they
were going to say had !een considered !y the party !eforehand. People
were afraid when they saw their nu"!ers, and no one now dared to spea5
in opposition to the". &f anyone did 'enture to do so, so"e appropriate
"ethod was soon found for ha'ing hi" 5illed, and no one tried to
in'estigate such cri"es or ta5e action against those suspected of the".
&nstead the people 5ept 2uiet, and were in such a state of terror that they
thought the"sel'es luc5y enough to !e left un"olested e'en if they had said
nothing at all. $hey i"agined that the re'olutionary party was "uch !igger
149
than it really was, and they lost all confidence in the"sel'es, !eing una!le
to find out the facts !ecause of the si,e of the city and !ecause they had
insufficient 5nowledge of each other. #or the sa"e reason it was i"possi!le
for anyone who felt hi"self ill*treated to co"plain of it to so"eone else
so as to ta5e "easures in his own defense; he would either ha'e had to
spea5 to so"eone he did not 5now or to so"eone he 5new !ut could not
rely upon. $hroughout the de"ocratic party, people approached each other
suspiciously, e'eryone thin5ing that the ne4t "an had so"ething to do with
what was going on. .nd there were in fact a"ong the re'olutionaries so"e
people who" no one could e'er ha'e i"agined would ha'e +oined in an
oligarchy. &t was these who were "ainly responsi!le for "a5ing the general
"ass of people so "istrustful of each other and who were of the greatest
help in 5eeping the "inority safe, since they "ade "utual suspicion an
esta!lished thing in the popular asse"!lies.I
&f history should return to us after this eclipse, so"ething which depends
on factors still in play and thus on an outco"e which no one can definitely
e4clude, these Co""ents "ay one day ser'e in the writing of a history
of the spectacle; without any dou!t the "ost i"portant e'ent to ha'e
occurred this century, and the one for which the fewest e4planations ha'e
!een 'entured. &n other circu"stances, & thin5 & could ha'e considered
"yself altogether satisfied with "y first wor5 on this su!+ect, and left others
to consider future de'elop"ents. But in the present situation, it see"ed
unli5ely that anyone else would do it.
MMB&&&.
15
etwor5s of pro"otionNcontrol slide i"percepti!ly into networ5s of
sur'eillanceNdisinfor"ation. #or"erly one only conspired against an
esta!lished order. $oday, conspiring in its fa'or is a new and flourishing
profession. ?nder spectacular do"ination, people conspire to "aintain it,
and to guarantee what it alone would call its well*!eing. $his conspiracy is a
part of its 'ery functioning. Pro'isions for a 5ind of pre'enti'e ci'il war are
already !eing "ade, adapted to 'ariously calculated future pro+ections. $hese
are the Jspecial s2uadsG responsi!le for local inter'entions according to the
needs of the integrated spectacle. $hus, for the worst scenarios, a tactic has
!een planned under the na"e J$hree Cultures,G a witty reference to a s2uare
in =e4ico City in 7cto!er 1966 ** though this ti"e the glo'es would !e
off and the tactic applied !efore the re'olt occurred.1- Such e4tre"e cases
apart, to !e a useful tool of go'ern"ent,une4plained assassinations need
only !e widely influential or relati'ely fre2uent, !ecause si"ply 5nowing
that they are possi!le co"plicates calculations in "any different fields. or
is there any need to !e intelligently selecti'e, ad ho"ine".
$he entirely rando" application of the procedure "ay well !e "ore
producti'e. $he co"position of certain frag"ents of a social criti2ue of
rearing has also !een arranged, so"ething which is no longer entrusted to
acade"ics or "edia professionals, who" it is now prefera!le to 5eep apart
fro" e4cessi'ely traditional lies in this de!ate8 a new criti2ue is re2uired,
ad'anced and e4ploited in a new way, controlled !y another, !etter trained,
sort of professional. &n a relati'ely confidential "anner, lucid te4ts are
!eginning to appear, anony"ously, or signed !y un5nown authors ** a tactic
helped !y e'eryoneGs concentration on the clowns of the spectacle, which
in turn "a5es un5nowns +ustly see" the "ost ad"ira!le ** te4ts not only on
151
su!+ects ne'er touched on in the spectacle !ut also containing argu"ents
whose forte is "ade "ore stri5ing !y a calcula!le originality deri'ing fro"
the fact that howe'er e'ident, they are ne'er used. $his practice "ay ser'e
as at least a first stage in initiation to recruit "ore alert intellects, who will
later !e told "ore a!out the possi!le conse2uences, should they see"
suita!le. 3hat for so"e will !e the first step in a career will !e for others
with lower grades, the first step into the trap prepared for the". &n so"e
cases, with issues that threaten to !eco"e contro'ersial, another pseudocriti2ue
can !e created; and !etween the two opinions which will thus !e
put forward ** !oth outside the i"po'erished con'entions of the spectacle
** unsophisticated +udg"ent can oscillate indefinitely, while discussion
around the" can !e renewed whene'er necessary. =ost often this concerns
a general discussion of what is hidden !y the "edia, and this discussion
can !e strongly critical, and on so"e points 2uite e'idently intelligent, yet
always curiously decentered. $opics and words ha'e !een artificially chosen,
with the aid of co"puters progra""ed in critical thought. $hese te4ts
always contain certain gaps, which are 2uite hard to spot !ut nonetheless
re"ar5a!le8 the 'anishing point of perspecti'e is always a!nor"ally a!sent.
$hey rese"!le those facsi"iles of fa"ous weapons, which only lac5 the
firing*pin. $his is ine'ita!ly a lateral criti2ue, which percei'es "any things
with considera!le candor and accuracy, !ut places itself to one side. ot
!ecause it affects so"e sort of i"partiality, for on the contrary it "ust see"
to find "uch fault, yet without e'er apparently feeling the need to re'eal its
cause, to state, e'en i"plicitly, where it is co"ing fro" and where it wants
to go.
$o this 5ind of counter*+ournalistic false criti2ue can !e added the organi,ed
152
practice of ru"or which we 5now to !e originally a sort of uncontrolla!le
!y*product of spectacular infor"ation, since e'eryone, howe'er 'aguely,
percei'es so"ething "isleading a!out the latter and trust it as little as it
deser'es. )u"or !egan as so"ething superstitious, nai'e, self*deluding.
=ore recently, howe'er, sur'eillance has !egun introducing into the
population people capa!le of starting ru"ors which suit it at the 'ery first
signal. &t has !een decided here to apply in practice the o!ser'ations of
a theory for"ulated so"e thirty years ago, whose origins lie in ."erican
sociology of ad'ertising ** the theory of indi'iduals 5nown as Jpace"a5ers,G
that is, those who" others in their "ilieu co"e to follow and i"itate ** !ut
this ti"e "o'ing fro" spontaneity to control. Budgetary, or e4tra!udgetary,
"eans ha'e also !een released to fund nu"erous au4iliaries; !eside the
for"er specialists of the recent past, acade"ics and "edia professionals,
sociologists and police. $o !elie'e in the continuing "echanical application
of past "odels leads to +ust as "any errors as the general ignorance of the
past. H)o"e is no longer in )o"e,I and the =afia are no longer thie'es.10
.nd the sur'eillance and disinfor"ation ser'ices are as far re"o'ed fro"
the police and infor"ers of for"er ti"es ** for e4a"ple, fro" the roussins
and "ouchards of the Second %"pire ** as the present special ser'ices in
all countries are fro" the officers of the ar"y general staff Gs /eu4ie"e
Bureau in 1910.
Since art is dead, it has e'idently !eco"e e4tre"ely easy to disguise police
as artists. 3hen the latest i"itations of a recuperated neo*dadais" are
allowed to pontificate proudly in the "edia, and thus also to tin5er with the
decor of official palaces, li5e court @esters to the 5ings of +un5, it is e'ident
that !y the sa"e process a cultural co'er is guaranteed for e'ery agent or
153
au4iliary of the stateGs networ5s of persuasion. %"pty pseudo*"useu"s, or
pseudo*research centers on the wor5 of none4istent personalities, can !e
opened +ust as fast as reputations are "ade for +ournalist*cops, historiancops,
or no'elist*cops. o dou!t .rthur Cra'an foresaw this world when
he wrote in =aintenant8 HSoon we will only see artists in the streets, and
it will ta5e no end of effort to find a single "an.I $his is indeed the sense
of the re'i'ed for" of an old 2uip of Parisian loafers8 H<ello there artistsE
$oo !ad if &G'e got it wrong.I11
$hings ha'ing !eco"e what they are, we can now witness the use of
collecti'e authorship !y the "ost "odern pu!lishing houses, that is to say,
the ones with the !est co""ercial distri!ution. Since their pseudony"s
are only authenticated !y the newspapers, they can swap the" around,
colla!orate, replace each other, ta5e on new artificial !rains. $heir tas5
is to e4press the ideas and lifestyles of the epoch, not !ecause of their
personalities, !ut !ecause they are ordered to. $hose who !elie'e that they
are truly independent, indi'idual literary entrepreneurs can 5nowingly 'ouch
for the fact that /ucasse has had a row with the Co"te de 9autrea"ont,
that /u"as isnGt =a2uet, that we "ust ne'er confuse %rc5"ann with
Chatrian; that Censier and /au!enton are no longer on spea5ing ter"s.
&t "ight !e !est to say that this type of "odern author was a follower of
)i"!aud, at least in so far as H& is so"eone else.I
$he whole history of spectacular society called for the secret ser'ices to
play the pi'otal role; for it is in the" that the features and force of such a
society are concentrated to the highest degree. =oreo'er they are always
also the ar!iters of that societyGs general interests, despite their "odest title
of Jser'ices.G $here is no corruption here, for they faithfully e4press the
154
co""on "orals of the spectacular century. $hus do watchers and watched
sail forth on a !oundless ocean. $he spectacle has !rought the secret to
'ictory, and "ust !e "ore and "ore controlled !y specialists in secrecy
who are certainly not only officials who ha'e to different degrees "anaged
to free the"sel'es fro" state control; who are not only officials.
MM&M.
. general wor5ing rule of the integrated spectacle, at least for those who
"anage its affairs, is that, in this fra"ewor5, e'erything which can !e done,
"ust !e done. $his "eans that e'ery new instru"ent "ust !e e"ployed,
whate'er the cost. ew "achinery e'erywhere !eco"es the goal and the
dri'ing force of the syste", and is the only thing which can significantly
"odify its progress, e'ery ti"e its use is i"posed without further reflection.
SocietyGs owners indeed want a!o'e all to 5eep a certain Jsocial relation
!etween people,G !ut they "ust also "aintain continual technological
inno'ation; for that was one of the o!ligations that ca"e with their
inheritance. $his law "ust also thus apply to the ser'ices which safeguard
do"ination. 3hen an instru"ent has !een perfected, it "ust !e used, and
its use will reinforce the 'ery conditions that fa'or this use. $hus it is that
e"ergency procedures !eco"e standard.
&n a certain sense, the coherence of spectacular society pro'es
re'olutionaries right, since it is e'ident that one cannot refor" the "ost
trifling detail without ta5ing the whole thing apart. But at the sa"e ti"e
this coherence has eli"inated e'ery organi,ed re'olutionary tendency !y
eli"inating those social terrains where it had "ore or less effecti'ely !een
155
a!le to find e4pression8 fro" trade unions to newspapers, towns to !oo5s.
&n a single "o'e"ent, it has !een possi!le to illu"inate the inco"petence
and thoughtlessness of which this tendency was 2uite naturally the !earer.
.nd on an indi'idual le'el, the reigning coherence is 2uite capa!le of
eli"inating, or !uying off such e4ceptions as "ay arise.
MMM.
Sur'eillance would !e "uch "ore dangerous had it not !een led !y its
a"!ition for a!solute control of e'erything to a point where it encountered
difficulties created !y its own progress. $here is a contradiction !etween
the "ass of infor"ation collected on a growing nu"!er of indi'iduals, and
the ti"e and intelligence a'aila!le to analy,e it, not to "ention its actual
interest. $he 2uantity of data de"ands constant su""ari,ing8 "uch of
it will !e lost, and what re"ains is still too long to !e read. =anage"ent
of sur'eillance and "anipulation is uncoordinated. &ndeed there is a
widespread struggle for a share of the profits, and thus also for fa'oring
the de'elop"ent of this or that potential in the e4isting society, to the
detri"ent of the other potentials, which nonetheless, so long as they are all
tarred with the sa"e !rush, are considered e2ually respecta!le.
$his struggle is also a ga"e. %ach controller co"es to o'er*'alue his agents,
as well as his opponents. %ach country, not to "ention the nu"erous
supranational alliances, currently possesses an indefinite nu"!er of police
and counter*espionage ser'ices, along with secret ser'ices, !oth state and
para*state. $here are also "any pri'ate co"panies dealing in sur'eillance,
security and in'estigation. $he large "ultinationals naturally ha'e their own
156
ser'ices; !ut so do nationali,ed co"panies, e'en those of "odest scale,
which will still pursue independent policies at a national and so"eti"es
an international le'el. . nuclear power group will fight against an oil
group, e'en though !oth are owned !y the sa"e state and what is "ore
are dialectically united !y their interest in "aintaining high oil prices on
the world "ar5et. %ach particular industryGs security ser'ice co"!ats the
threat of sa!otage, while organi,ing it, when necessary, against their ri'als8
a co"pany with i"portant interests in undersea tunnels will !e fa'ora!ly
disposed to the ha,ards of ferries and "ay !ri!e newspapers in financial
trou!le to ensure they spot these ha,ards without delay and without too
"uch reflection; a co"pany co"peting with Sando, will !e indifferent
to underground springs in the )hine 'alley. Secrets are su!+ect to secret
sur'eillance. $hus each of these organi,ations, all su!tly united around the
e4ecuti'es of raison dGetat, aspires to its own pri'ate hege"ony of "eaning.
#or "eaning has !een lost along with an identifia!le center.
Coing fro" success to success, until 1966 "odern society was con'inced it
was lo'ed. &t has since had to a!andon these drea"s; it prefers to !e feared.
&t 5nows full well that Hits innocent air has gone fore'er.I
So it is that thousands of plots in fa'or of the esta!lished order tangle
and clash al"ost e'erywhere, as the o'erlap of secret networ5s and secret
issues or acti'ities grows e'er "ore dense along with their rapid integration
into e'ery sector of econo"ics, politics and culture. &n all areas of social
life, the degree of inter"ingling in sur'eillance, disinfor"ation and security
acti'ities gets greater and greater. $he plot ha'ing thic5ened to the point
where it is al"ost out in the open, each part of it now starts to interfere
with, or worry, the others, for all these professional conspirators are spying
157
on each other without really 5nowing why, are colliding !y chance yet not
identifying each other with any certainty. 3ho is o!ser'ing who"> 7n
whose !ehalf, apparently> .nd actually> $he real influences re"ain hidden,
and the ulti"ate ai"s can !arely !e suspected and al"ost ne'er understood.
So that while no one can !e sure he is not !eing tric5ed or "anipulated, it
is rare for the string*puller to 5now he has succeeded. .nd in any case, to
!e on the winning side of "anipulation does not "eanthat one has chosen
the right strategic perspecti'e. $actical successes can thus lead great powers
down dangerous roads.
&n the sa"e networ5 and apparently pursuing si"ilar goals, those who are
only a part of the networ5 are necessarily ignorant of the hypotheses and
conclusions of the other parts, and a!o'e all of their controlling nucleus.
$he reasona!ly well 5nown fact that all infor"ation on whate'er su!+ect
under o!ser'ation "ay well !e entirely i"aginary, or seriously falsified,
or 'ery inade2uately interpreted, co"plicates and under"ines to a great
degree the calculations of the in2uisitors. #or what is sufficient to conde"n
so"eone is far less sure when it co"es to recogni,ing or using hi".
Sincesources of infor"ation are in co"petition, so are falsifications.
&t is in these circu"stances that we can spea5 of do"inationGs falling rate of
profit, as it spreads to al"ost the whole of social space and conse2uently
increases !oth its personnel and its "eans. #or now, each "eans aspires
and la!ors to !eco"e an end. Sur'eillance spies on and plots against itself.
&ts principal present contradiction, finally, is that it is spying on, infiltrating
and pressuri,ing an a!sent entity8 that which is supposed to !e trying to
su!'ert the social order. But where can it Ksu!'ersionL actually !e seen at
wor5> Certainly conditions ha'e ne'er !een so seriously re'olutionary, !ut
158
it is only go'ern"ents who thin5 so. egation has !een so thoroughly
depri'ed of its thought that it was dispersed long ago. Because of this, it
re"ains only a 'ague, yet highly distur!ing threat, and sur'eillance in its
turn has !een depri'ed of its preferred field of acti'ity. Sur'eillance and
inter'ention are thus rightly led !y the present e4igencies, which deter"ine
their ter"s of engage"ent, to operate on the 'ery terrain of this threat in
order to co"!at it in ad'ance. $his is why sur'eillance has an interest in
organi,ing poles of negation itself, which it can instruct with "ore than the
discredited "eans of the spectacle, so as to "anipulate, not terrorists this
ti"e, !ut theories.
MMM&.
Baltasar Cracian, that great authority on historical ti"e, tells us with considera!le
pertinency in $he Courtier8 HBe it words or action, all "ust !e "easured !y ti"e. 3e
"ust choose when we are a!le; for ti"e and tide wait on no "an.I But 7"ar Ahayya"
was less of an opti"ist. H3e are the puppets and the fir"a"ent is the puppet*"aster,
N&n actual fact and not as a "etaphor, N#or a ti"e we acted on this stage, N3e went
!ac5 one !y one into the !o4 of o!li'ion.I
MMM&&.
$he #rench )e'olution !rought great changes in the art of war. &t was fro"
that e4perience that Clausewit, could draw the distinction !etween tactics,
as the use of forces in !attle to o!tain 'ictory, and strategy, as the use
of 'ictories in !attle to attain the goals of a war. %urope was su!+ugated,
2uic5ly and lastingly, !y the results. But the theory was not pro'en till later,
159
and was de'eloped une'enly. #irst to !e appreciated were the positi'e
features directly !rought a!out !y a profound social transfor"ation8 the
enthusias" and "o!ility of a greatly enlarged ar"y which li'ed off the
land and was relati'ely independent of stores and supply trains. Such useful
ele"ents were soon counter!alanced !y the appearance on the ene"y side
of si"ilar ele"ents8 in Spain, the #rench ar"ies encountered an e2ual
popular enthusias"; in the 'ast spaces of )ussia, a land they could not li'e
off; after the rising in Cer"any, nu"erically far superior forces. <owe'er,
the effect of a total !rea5 in the new #rench tactics, which was the si"ple
!asis on which Bonaparte founded his strategy ** the latter consisting of
using 'ictories in ad'ance, as if ac2uired on credit; to understand "aneu'ers
in all their di'erse 'ariants fro" the start as conse2uences of a 'ictory
which while not yet o!tained ** would certainly !e at the first onslaught
deri'ed also fro" the forced a!andon"ent of false ideas.
$he new tactics de"anded an a!rupt !rea5 fro" false ideas, and at the
sa"e ti"e, !y the conco"itant play of the other inno'ations outlined
a!o'e, found the "eans to achie'e such a !rea5.
$he newly "ustered #rench soldiers were incapa!le of fighting in line, that
is, of 5eeping ran5s and firing on co""and. $hey would thus !e deployed
in e4tended order, firing at will as they ad'anced on the ene"y. ow in
fact independent fire was shown to !e the only effecti'e 5ind, a genuinely
destructi'e use of "us5etry which pro'ed the "ost decisi'e factor in "ilitary
engage"ents of the period. Det "ilitary thin5ing had uni'ersally re+ected
this conclusion in the century that was ending, and indeed de!ate on the
issue continued through "ost of the new century, despite constant practical
de"onstration in !attle, and the ceaseless progress in range and rate of fire.
16
Si"ilarly, the esta!lish"ent of spectacular do"ination is such a profound
social transfor"ation that it has radically altered the art of go'ern"ent.
$his si"plification, which has 2uic5ly !orne such fruit in practice, has yet
to !e fully co"prehended in theory. 7ld pre+udices e'erywhere !elied,
precautions now useless, and e'en the residues of scruples fro" an earlier
age, still clog up the thin5ing of 2uite a nu"!er of rulers, pre'enting the"
fro" recogni,ing so"ething which practice de"onstrates and pro'es Kto
!e trueL e'ery single day. ot only are the su!+ected led to !elie'e that
to all intents and purposes they are still li'ing in a world which in fact
has !een eli"inated, !ut the rulers the"sel'es so"eti"es suffer fro" the
a!surd !elief that in so"e respects they do too. $hey co"e to !elie'e in a
part of what they ha'e suppressed, as if it re"ained a reality and had still
to !e included in their calculations. $his !ac5wardness will not last long.
$hose who ha'e achie'ed so "uch so easily "ust necessarily go further. &t
hould not !e thought that those who ha'e !een too slow to appreciate the
plia!ility of the new rules of their ga"e and its for" of !ar!aric grandeur,
will last fore'er li5e so"e archais" in pro4i"ity to real power. &t is certainly
not the spectacleGs destiny to end up as enlightened despotis".
3e "ust conclude that a changeo'er is i""inent and inelucta!le in the
co*opted cast who ser'e the interests of do"ination, and a!o'e all "anage
the protection of that do"ination. &n such an affair, inno'ation will surely
not !e displayed on the spectacleGs stage. &t appears instead li5e lightning,
which we 5now only when it stri5es. $his changeo'er, which will conclude
decisi'ely the wor5 of these spectacular ti"es, will occur discreetly, and
conspiratorially, e'en though it concerns those within the inner circles of
power. &t will select those who will share the central e4igency that they
161
clearly see what o!stacles they ha'e o'erco"e, and of what they are capa!le.
MMM&&&.
$he sa"e Sardou also wrote8
Bainly relates to the su!+ect, in 'ain to the o!+ect, uselessly si"ply "eans with no use
for anyone. 7ne has wor5ed 'ainly when one has done so without success, so that one
has wasted oneGs ti"e and effort; one has wor5ed in 'ain when one has done so
without
achie'ing the intended result, !ecause of the defecti'eness of the wor5. &f & cannot
succeed
in co"pleting a piece of wor5, & a" wor5ing 'ainly, & a" uselessly wasting "y ti"e and
effort. &f the wor5 & ha'e done does not ha'e the result & was e4pecting, if & ha'e
not
attained "y goal, & ha'e wor5ed in 'ain; that is to say, & ha'e done so"ething
useless.... &t
is also said that so"eone has wor5ed 'ainly when he has not !een rewarded for his
wor5,
or when this wor5 has not !een appro'ed; for in this case the wor5er has wasted his
ti"e
and effort, without this pre+udicing in any way the 'alue of his wor5,
which indeed "ay !e 'ery good.
* Cuy /e!ord, Paris, #e!ruary*.pril 1966.
162