💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › david-watson-civilization-in-bulk.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 09:24:56. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

➡️ Next capture (2024-06-20)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Civilization in Bulk
Author: David Watson
Date: 1991
Language: en
Topics: anti-civ, anti-work, Fredy Perlman
Source: Retrieved on July 26, 2009 from http://www.insurgentdesire.org.uk/civilizationinbulk.htm
Notes: Footnotes available from Fifth Estate Summer 1991, pp. 40–4

David Watson

Civilization in Bulk

Having had the privilege of living for a time among stone age peoples of

Brazil, a very civilized European of considerable erudition wrote

afterwards, “Civilization is no longer a fragile flower, to be carefully

preserved and reared with great difficulty here and there in sheltered

corners. All that is over: humanity has taken to monoculture, once and

for all, and is preparing to produce civilization in bulk, as if it were

sugar-beet. The same dish will be served to us every day.”

Those words were written in 1955. Now that civilization is engulfing the

entire planet, the image of the fragile flower has largely wilted. Some

of civilization’s inmates are remembering that the image was always a

lie; other ways of seeing the world are being rediscovered.

Counter-traditions are being reexamined, escape routes devised, weapons

fashioned. To put it another way, a spectre haunts the heavy equipment

as it chugs deeper into the morass it has made: the spectre of the

primal world.

Devising escapes and weapons is no simple task: false starts and poor

materials. The old paths are paved and the materials that come from the

enemy’s arsenal tend to explode in our hands. Memory and desire have

been suppressed and deformed; we have all been inculcated in the

Official History. Its name is Progress, and the Dream of Progress

continues to fuel global civilization’s expansion everywhere, converting

human beings into mechanized, self-obliterating puppets, nature into

dead statuary.

The Official History can be found in every child’s official history

text: Before the genesis (which is to say, before civilization), there

was nothing but a vast, oceanic chaos, dark and terrible, brutish and

nomadic, a bloody struggle for existence. Eventually, through great

effort by a handful of men, some anonymous, some celebrated, humanity

emerged from the slime, from trees, caves, tents and endless wanderings

in a sparse and perilous desert to accomplish fantastic improvements in

life. Such improvements came through mastery of animals, plants and

minerals; the exploitation of hitherto neglected Resources; the fineries

of high culture and religion; and the miracles of technics in the

service of centralized authority.

This awe-inspiring panoply of marvels took shape under the aegis of the

city-state and behind its fortified walls. Through millenia,

civilization struggled to survive amid a storm of barbarism, resisting

being swallowed by the howling wilderness. Then another “Great Leap

Forward” occurred among certain elect and anointed kingdoms of what came

to be called “the West,” and the modern world was born: the

enlightenment of scientific reason ushered in exploration and discovery

of the wilderness, internal (psychic) and external (geographic). In the

kingdom’s official murals, the Discoverers appear at one end, standing

proudly on their ships, telescopes and sextants in their hands; at the

other end waits the world, a sleeping beauty ready to awake and join her

powerful husband in the marriage bed of nature and reason.

Finally come the offspring of this revolution: invention, mechanization,

industrialization, and ultimately scientific, social and political

maturity, a mass democratic society and mass-produced abundance.

Certainly, a few bugs remain to be worked out — ubiquitous

contamination, runaway technology, starvation and war (mostly at the

uncivilized “peripheries”), but civilization cherishes its challenges,

and expects all such aberrations to be brought under control,

rationalized through technique, redesigned to “serve human needs,”

forever and ever, amen. History is a gleaming locomotive running on

rails — albeit around precarious curves and through some foreboding

tunnels — to the Promised Land. And whatever the dangers, there can be

no turning back.

A False Turn

But now that several generations have been raised on monoculture’s

gruel, civilization is coming to be regarded not as a promise yet to be

fulfilled so much as a maladaption of the species, a false turn or a

kind of fever threatening the planetary web of life. As one of History’s

gentle rebels once remarked, “We do not ride upon the railroad; it rides

upon us.” The current crisis, occurring on every level, from the

ecospheric to the social to the personal, has become too manifest, too

grievous, to ignore. The spectre haunting modern civilization, once only

a sense of loss, now has open partisans who have undertaken the

theoretical and practical critique of civilization.

So we begin by reexamining our list of chapters not from the point of

view of the conquerors but the conquered: the slaves crushed under

temple construction sites or gassed in the trenches, the dredged and

shackled rivers, the flattened forests, the beings pinned to laboratory

tables. What voice can better speak for them than the primal? Such a

critique of “the modern world through Pleistocene eyes,” such a

“geological kind of perspective,” as the indigenous authors of the 1977

Haudenosaunee (Iroquois) document, A Basic Call to Consciousness, put

it, immediately explodes the conquerors Big Lie about “underdevelopment”

and the “brutality” of primal society, their vilification of prehistory.

The lie has most recently been eroded not only by greater access to the

views of primal peoples and their native descendants who are presently

fighting for survival, but by a more critical, non-eurocentric

anthropology willing to challenge its own history, premises and

privilege. Primal society, with its myriad variations, is the common

heritage of all peoples. From it, we can infer how human beings lived

some 99 percent of our existence as a species. (And even a large part of

that last one percent consists of the experience of tribal and other

vernacular communities that resist conquest and control in creative, if

idiosyncratic ways.)

Looking with new/old eyes on the primal world, we see a web of

autonomous societies, splendidly diverse but sharing certain

characteristics. Primal society has been called “the original affluent

society,” affluent because its needs are few, all its desires are easily

met. Its tool kit is elegant and lightweight, its outlook linguistically

complex and conceptually profound yet simple and accessible to all. Its

culture is expansive and ecstatic. It is propertyless and communal,

egalitarian and cooperative. Like nature, it is essentially leaderless:

neither patriarchal nor matriarchal, it is anarchic, which is to say

that no archon or ruler has built and occupied center stage. It is,

rather, an organic constellation of persons, each unique.

A Society Free of Work

It is also a society free of work; it has no economy or production per

se, except for gift exchange and a kind of ritual play that also happen

to create subsistence (though it is a society capable of experiencing

occasional hunger without losing its spiritual bearings, even sometimes

choosing hunger to enhance interrelatedness, to play or to see visions).

The Haudenosaunee, for example, write that “[we] do not have specific

economic institutions, nor do we have specifically distinct political

institutions.” Furthermore, the subsistence activities of Haudenosaunee

society, “by our cultural definition, [are] not an economy at all.”

Hence, primal society’s plenitude resides in its many symbolic,

personal, and natural relationships, not in artifacts. It is a dancing

society, a singing society, a celebrating society, a dreaming society.

Its philosophy and practice of what is called animisma mythopoetic

articulation of the organic unity of life discovered only recently by

the West’s ecologists — protects the land by treating its multiplicity

of forms as sacred beings, each with its own integrity and subjectivity.

Primal society affirms community with all of the natural and social

world.

Somehow this primal world, a world (as Lewis Mumford has observed) more

or less corresponding to the ancient vision of the Golden Age, unravels

as the institutions of kingship and class society emerge. How it

happened remains unclear to us today. Perhaps we will never fully

understand the mystery of that original mutation from egalitarian to

state society. Certainly, no standard explanations are adequate. “That

radical discontinuity,” in the words of Pierre Clastres, “that

mysterious emergence — irreversible, fatal to primitive societies — of

the thing we know by the name of the State,” how does it occur?

Primal society maintained its equilibrium and its egalitarianism because

it refused power, refused property. Kingship could not have emerged from

the chief because the chief had no power over others. Clastres insists:

“Primitive society is the place where separate power is refused, because

the society itself, and not the chief, is the real locus of power.”

It is possible that we could approach this dissolution of original

community appropriately only by way of mythic language like the Old Ones

would have used. After all, only a poetic story could vividly express

such a tragic loss of equilibrium. The latent potentiality for power and

technique to emerge as separate domains had been previously kept at bay

by the gift cycle, “techniques of the sacred” and the high level of

individuation of society’s members.

Primal peoples, according to Clastres, “had a very early premonition

that power’s transcendence conceals a mortal risk for the group, that

the principle of an authority which is external and the creator of its

own legality is a challenge to culture itself. It is the intuition of

this threat that determined the depth of their political philosophy.

For, on discovering the great affinity of power and nature, as the

twofold limitation on the domain of culture, Indian societies were able

to create a means for neutralizing the virulence of political

authority.”

This, in effect, is the same process by which primal peoples neutralized

the potential virulence of technique: they minimized the relative weight

of instrumental or practical techniques and expanded the importance of

techniques of seeing: ecstatic techniques. The shaman is, in Jerome

Rotherberg’s words, a “technician” of ecstasy, a “protopoet” whose

“technique hinges on the creation of special linguistic circumstances,

i.e., of song and invocation.” Technology, like power, is in such a way

refused by the dynamic of primal social relations. But when technique

and power emerge as separate functions rather than as strands

inextricably woven into the fabric of society, everything starts to come

apart. “The unintended excressence that grows out of human communities

and then liquidates them,” as Fredy Perlman called it, makes its

appearance. A sorcery run amok, a golem-like thingness that outlives its

fabricators: somehow the gift cycle is ruptured; the hoop, the circle,

broken.

The community, as Clastres puts it, “has ceased to exorcise the thing

that will be its ruin: power and respect for power.” A kind of

revolution, or counter-revolution, takes place: “When, in primitive

society, the economic dynamic lends itself to definition as a distinct

and autonomous domain, when the activity of production becomes

alienated, accountable labor, levied by men who will enjoy the fruits of

that labor, what has come to pass is that society has been divided into

rulers and ruled, masters and subjects. The political relation of power

precedes and founds the economic relation of exploitation. Alienation is

political before it is economic; power precedes labor; the economic

derives from the political; the emergence of the State determines the

advent of classes.”

The emergence of authority, production and technology are all moments

within the same process. Previously, power resided in no separate

sphere, but rather within the circle — a circle that included the human

community and nature (nonhuman kin). “Production” and the “economic”

were undivided as well; they were embedded in the circle through gift

sharing which transcends and neutralizes the artifactuality or

“thingness” of the objects passing from person to person. (Animals,

plants and natural objects being persons, even kin, subsistence is

therefore neither work nor production, but rather gift, drama,

reverence, reverie.) Technique also had to be embedded in relations

between kin, and thus open, participatory, and accessible to all; or it

was entirely personal, singular, visionary, unique and untransferable.

Equilibrium Exploded

The “great affinity of power and nature,” as Clastres puts it, explains

the deep cleft between them when power divides and polarizes the

community. For the primal community, to follow Mircea Eliade’s

reasoning, “The world is at once ‘open’ and mysterious. ‘Nature’ at once

unveils and ‘camouflages’ the ‘supernatural’ [which] constitutes the

basic and unfathomable mystery of the World.” Mythic consciousness

apprehends and intervenes in the world, participates in it, but this

does not necessitate a relation of domination; it “does not mean that

one has transformed [cosmic realities] into ‘objects of knowledge.’

These realities still keep their original ontological condition.”

The trauma of disequilibrium exploded what contemporary pagan feminists

have called “power within” and generated “power over.” What were once

mutualities became hierarchies. In this transformation, gift exchange

disappears; gift exchange with nature disappears with it. What was

shared is now hoarded: the mystery to which one once surrendered now

becomes a territory to be conquered. All stories of the origins become

histories of the origins of the Master. The origin of the World is

retold as the origin of the State.

Woman, who through the birth process exemplifies all of nature and who

maintains life processes through her daily activities of nurturance of

plants, animals and children, is suppressed by the new transformer-hero.

Male power, attempting to rival the fecundity of woman, simulates birth

and nature’s fecundity through the manufacture of artifacts and

monuments. The womb — a primordial container, a basket or bowl — is

reconstituted by power into the city walls.

“Thus,” as Frederick W. Turner puts it in Beyond Geography: The Western

Spirit Against the Wilderness, the “rise to civilization’ might be seen

not so much as the triumph of a progressive portion of the race over its

lowly, nature-bound origins as a severe, aggressive volte-face against

all unimproved nature, the echoes of which would still be sounding

millennia later when civilized men once again encountered the challenges

of the wilderness beyond their city walls.”

No explanation and no speculation can encompass the series of events

that burst community and generated class society and the state. But the

result is relatively clear: the institutionalization of hierarchic

elites and the drudgery of the dispossessed to support them, monoculture

to feed their armed gangs, the organization of society into work

battalions, hoarding, taxation and economic relations, and the reduction

of the organic community to lifeless resources to be mined and

manipulated by the archon and his institutions.

The “chief features” of this new state society, writes Mumford,

“constant in varying proportions throughout history, are the

centralization of political power, the separation of classes, the

lifetime division of labor, the mechanization of production, the

magnification of military power, the economic exploitation of the weak,

and the universal introduction of slavery and forced labor for both

industrial and military purposes.” In other words, a megamachine made up

of two major arms, a labor machine and a military machine.

The crystallization of a fluid, organic community into a

pseudo-community, a giant machine, was in fact the first machine, the

standard definition of which, Mumford notes, is “a combination of

resistant parts, each specialized in function, operating under human

control, to utilize energy and perform work.” Thus, he argues, “The two

poles of civilization then, are mechanically-organized work and

mechanically-organized destruction and extermination. Roughly the same

forces and the same methods of operation [are] applicable to both

areas.” In Mumford’s view, the greatest legacy of this system has been

“the myth of the machine” — the belief that it is both irresistible and

ultimately beneficial. This mechanization of human beings, he writes,

“had long preceded the mechanization of their working instruments. But

once conceived, this new mechanism spread rapidly, not just by being

imitated in self-defense, but by being forcefully imposed.”

One can see the differences here between the kind of technics embedded

in an egalitarian society and technics-as-power or technology. As

Mumford argues, people “of ordinary capacity, relying on muscle power

and traditional skills alone, were capable of performing a wide variety

of tasks, including pottery and manufacture and weaving, without any

external direction or scientific guidance, beyond that available in the

tradition of the local community. Not so with the megamachine. Only

kings, aided by the discipline of astronomical science and supported by

the sanctions of religion, had the capacity of assembling and directing

the megamachine. This was an invisible structure composed of living, but

rigid, human parts, each assigned to his special office, role, and task,

to make possible the immense work-output and grand designs of this great

collective organization.”

Civilization as Gulag

In his intuitive history of the megamachine, Fredy Perlman describes how

a Sumerian “Ensi” or overseer, lacking the rationalizations of the

ideology of Progress which are routinely used to vaccinate us against

our wildness, might see the newly issued colossus:

“He might think of it as a worm, a giant worm, not a living worm but a

carcass of a worm, a monstrous cadaver, its body consisting of numerous

segments, its skin pimpled with spears and wheels and other

technological implements. He knows from his own experience that the

entire carcass is brought to artificial life by the motions of the human

beings trapped inside, the zeks who operate the springs and wheels, just

as he knows that the cadaverous head is operated by a mere zek, the head

zek.”

It is no accident that Fredy chose the word zek, a word meaning gulag

prisoner that he found in Solzhenitsyn’s work. It was not only to

emphasize that civilization has been a labor camp from its origins, but

to illuminate the parallels between the ancient embryonic forms and the

modern global work machine presently suffocating the earth. While the

differences in magnitude and historical development are great enough to

account for significant contrasts, essential elements shared by both

systems — elements outlined above — position both civilizations in a

polarity with primal community. At one extreme stands organic community:

an organism, in the form of a circle, a web woven into the fabric of

nature. At the other is civilization: no longer an organism but organic

fragments reconstituted as a machine, an organization; no longer a

circle but a rigid pyramid of crushing hierarchies; not a web but a grid

expanding the territory of the inorganic.

According to official history, this grid is the natural outcome of an

inevitable evolution. Thus natural history is not a multiverse of

potentialities but rather a linear progression from Prometheus’ theft of

fire to the International Monetary Fund. A million and more years of

species life experienced in organic communities are dismissed as a kind

of waiting period in anticipation of the few thousand years of imperial

grandeur to follow. The remaining primal societies, even now being

dragged by the hair into civilization’s orbit along its blood-drenched

frontier, are dismissed as living fossils (“lacking in evolutionary

promise,” as one philosopher characterized them), awaiting their

glorious inscription into the wondrous machine.

Thus, as Fredy Perlman argued, imperialism is far from being the last

stage of civilization but is embedded in the earliest stages of the

state and class society. So there is always a brutal frontier where

there is empire and always empire where there is civilization. The

instability and rapidity of change as well as the violence and

destructiveness of the change both belie empire’s claim to natural

legitimacy, suggesting once more an evolutionary wrong turn, a

profoundly widening disequilibrium.

The frontier expands along two intersecting axes, centrifugal and

centripetal. In the words of Stanley Diamond, “Civilization originates

in conquest abroad and repression at home. Each is an aspect of the

other.” Thus outwardly, empire is expressed geographically (northern

Canada, Malaysia, the Amazon, etc.; the ocean bottoms, even outer space)

and biospherically (disruption of weather and climate, vast chemical

experiments on the air and water, elimination and simplification of

ecosystems, genetic manipulation).

But the process is replicated internally on the human spirit: every zek

finds an empire in miniature “wired” to the very nervous system.

So, too, is repression naturalized, the permanent crisis in character

and the authoritarian plague legitimated. It starts with frightened

obedience to the archon or patriarch, then moves by way of projection to

a violent, numbed refusal of the living subjectivity and integrity of

the other — whether found in nature, in woman, or in conquered peoples.

At one end of the hierarchic pyramid stands unmitigated power; at the

other, submission mingles with isolation, fragmentation and rage. All is

justified, by the ideology of Progress — conquest and subjugation of

peoples, ruin of lands and sacrifice zones for the empire,

self-repression, mass addiction to imperial spoils, the materialization

of culture. Ideology keeps the work and war machines operating.

Ultimately, this vortex brings about the complete objectification of

nature. Every relationship is increasingly instrumentalized and

technicized. Mechanization and industrialization have rapidly

transformed the planet, exploding ecosystems and human communities with

monoculture, industrial degradation and mass markets. The world now

corresponds more closely to the prophetic warnings of primal peoples

than to the hollow advertising claims of the industrial system: the

plants disappearing and the animals dying, the soils denuded along with

the human spirit, vast oceans poisoned, the very rain turned corrosive

and deadly, human communities at war with one another over diminishing

spoils — and all poised on the brink of an even greater annihilation at

the push of a few buttons within reach of stunted, half-dead head-zeks

in fortified bunkers. Civilization’s railroad leads not only to ecocide,

but to evolutionary suicide. Every empire lurches toward the oblivion it

fabricates and will eventually be covered with sand. Can a world worth

inhabiting survive the ruin that will be left?