Imperialism post-ex-ante
Avenir Institute. “Imperialism post-ex-ante”, lecture-performance/installation, Sao Paulo (BR), 2017
The lecture-performance took place at the opening of the exhibition of Avenir Institute “Against the Future” on February 16, 2017. The exhibition is a result of the residency of co-founders of the Institute, Denis Maksimov and Timo Tuominen, at Atelier Fidalga (Residência Paulo Reis) in February-March 2017.
video of the lecture-performance
text, published by Avenir Institute in the aftermath of the lecture
Paper, stone, scissors: from dialectical simulacra to reification of subjectivity
lecture-performance / lecture: Denis Maksimov / performance “Bird, stone, water” : Adrijana Gvozdenovic, costumes by Aurora Zachayuss / FAAP residency, open studio day, April 2016, Sao Paulo
The original ideas and dialectical method of thinking in politics, culture and social existence remains central in the societies. Some of them lived through political experiments, which we aimed on the materialization of the idea of the society a posteriori the period of class struggle. Communist and socialist regimes of the Eastern Europe possess bitter memory of failed attempts to imagine the society after overcoming the dialectics of master and slave. The scattered societies of former Soviet Union and Yugoslavia are prime examples of this kind of failure. South America hasn’t experienced a bitter taste of false hopes for conceptual alternative to meta-ideology of market capitalism and institutionalized political and material inequality. The ideas and potentiality of fundamental change, disruption and tectonic shift from the currents of ‘everlasting present’ within the paradigm of liberal democracy and market capitalism are therefore strong.
In both cases meta-ideology of contemporary capitalistic form of structuring the society politically, economically and culturally are prevailing.
Representational democracy holds the status of the ideal and fair political order for redistribution of power.
Global market capitalism defines individual values, private property and material resources distribution, makes rich richer and thanks to technological progress soon almost immortal, while poor are increasing in proportional number.
Cultural industry embeds legitimacy of the order by creating complex intertwined multiplicity of simulacra for satisfaction of needs and demands for fairer alternative; turning as well art into the instrument of delusion and alienation.
All three are creepily widening the gap of inequality therefore continuously fertilizing the soil of potential for paradigmatic collapse of legitimacy of the whole system. It holds on fear of unknown complexity: if the system is indeed to collapse momentarily, the logical assumption of the consequences is to presume our return into the new Dark Ages. This institutionalized by cultural industry fear is increasing survivability of rotten, obviously unfair and ineffective system of operation of political, economic and cultural production.
The current meta-ideological order strive to mask itself as the final and the eternally better model of societal organization and above-mentioned weight of political history aids it in this task of presenting itself to increasing frustrated members of the society. Demystification of its status therefore is an urgent task for activation of the discussion about reification of fairer alternative. Instead of self-supporting structure of imaginary dialectics of contemporary capitalism, where representational democracy, global neoliberal capitalism and cultural industry work hand-in-hand, realization of all of them in group as one ‘thesis’ should trigger and accelerate formation of anti-thesis, that might provide the necessary synthesis for fairer form of the future. That is the loud moment that is necessary for attempting to escape the looping circles of dialectical thinking.
I are, (s)he am, they is.
The gaze of the Other is always evil, as it inexplicably defines the subject of observation and therefore limits the freedom of our self-identification. Reification of subjectivity in social, political and cultural life means escaping from the position of searching finite dictations of meanings from the position of power. Fluidity and dynamics of self and other identification neutralizes possibility to mask individual desire to dominate behind public interests.
How do we get there? Starting from abandoning the language of ‘normal’ in relation to social life, ‘absolute’ in relation to political order and ‘superior’ in addressing the culture is a major step. Naming is the ultimate power: freeing the discourse from the act of ultimate definition conceptually is an example of how critical theory looks like in action. There is nothing beyond language: as soon as it defined by closed structures, dialectical forms such as man/woman, democracy/dictatorship, high culture/barbarity, which construct the backbone of how the mapping of visible is constructed, the reification of post-dialectical thinking is blocked.
the world as it’s seen by (the EU): a contextualisation of geopolitics from the certain perspective
lecture performance & installation was presented by Denis Maksimov in December 2015 in Marres House for Contemporary Culture (Maastricht, NL) and in February 2016 in de Brakke Grond Cultural Center (Amsterdam, NL)
The end of the Second World War (WWII) signified the beginning of the new
era for the Europe and the world. Just over 60 years ago the continent was
laying in ruins - material, ideological and moral. Our grandparents worked
hard to rebuild the beauty of our cities. It was the age of profound reflection
and outstanding, unprecedented changes in our societies. Slowly and steadily,
we consciously decided to abandon the ‘realpolitik’ and nationalism in favour
of multiculturalism and integration.
It is not easy path in the geopolitical environment. Yalta agreements on the post-War world order were designed by the winners with the United Nations as the mediating institution in it’s centre. We hoped it will work much better than in did in the end. The Cold War turned Europe into ideological chessboard, the battlefield of capitalism and socialism. It’s hard to assess how much resources were wasted in this seemingly endless battle.
The collapse of the Soviet Union economic model brought us into the current age of the ultra-capitalism. The supremacy of the United States over the economic and cultural discourse brought us consumer-driven materialism, that we have never wanted to absolutise. But as Europe was rebuilt with American credits, we had no choice. Since then we have been trying to balance the cultural supremacy of Hollywood and financial domination of the Wall Street, offer alternatives for more balanced model of the global political order. We recognise: we were not that successful so far. Our decision was to lead by example: to demonstrate to the whole world, that economically driven process of comprehensive integration between so many and so different cultures, speaking dozens of languages countries is not only possible, but demonstrates the way forward. Not only for Europe - for the humanity, which faced difficult task of co-habitation. We have launched the most successful and outstanding project of multidimensional integration that humanity had ever seen: the European Union. We placed the principles of universalism and humanism in it’s core. So many wished we would fail, both internally and externally. So many still actively scheme and plot against our success, try to ridicule our achievements. They want us to feel alienated, ostracised and totally alone - but we are certain that our strategy of leading by example will crash all these doubts about us in light of our outstanding achievements, that first and foremost are driven by humane curiosity and desire to unveil our potential for self-realisation.
After the lessons of the the WWII, we pushed for diplomatic, conciliatory approach in every matter that requires collective decision. We have been called and insulted as ‘soft boners’, ’indecisive cowards’ (not only by ill- wishers, but by those who consider us their partners as well) for our conviction against any sort of aggression, that might have the slightest possibility of sparkling conflict. Maybe we are too slow, but we prefer to be rather accurate and avoid making mistakes with possibility of terrible consequences. We had survived through 1914-1918 and 1941-1945, we know what eagle-headedness and testosterone-driven emotions can cost to a society.
We haven’t forgotten our history and faults. We fully recognise our colonial history, we feel ashamed for it and as anyone who did something nasty in the past naturally try to avoid talking too much about the subject. Don’t judge us too hard for this: we don’t avoid the subject, but you surely can imagine yourself the complexity of the issue in our memory. It is widely researched, analysed and discussed in our societies at all the levels: from popular media to academia. And it will be continued until we will come up with the certain plan of compensating the damage we did, as we have been trying with the humanitarian and development aid.
It is not easy for us internally as well. We pay very high price for sticking to the core values of the Enlightenment and prepared to sacrifice even more if it’s needed. The barbarianism is not objectified or impersonated by someone specific - it actually exists in every one of us. ‘Jihad’ in Islam, despite what interpretation you might hear from Marine le Pen or Geert Wilders and similar individuals (who are entitled for their own opinion, but not for their own facts), doesn’t mean desire to kill ‘non-believers’. ‘Jihad’ means fighting your own demons and cleansing your mind and soul from disastrous darkness. This is something we might as well learn from the new cultures, that we are happy to accommodate in the extended family of based on the post-nationalist, multicultural values.
We might end up being martyrs of the civilisational decay, like the late Rome or the Ancient Greece just before the Roman conquest. We still need to figure out what do with the crises of the concept of inheritance and private property, as inequality will only rise if we won’t do something about it on the very fundamental level. We still hope that Hegel wasn’t absolutely right about history always repeating itself in vicious circles. We are committed to do anything in our power to avoid the repetition of horrific mistakes (that we have ourselves made repeatedly before) by us and all the other actors on the geopolitical field.
the world as it’s seen by (Russia): a contextualisation of geopolitics from the certain perspective
lecture performance & installation was presented by Denis Maksimov in December 2015 in Marres House for Contemporary Culture (Maastricht, NL) and in February 2016 in de Brakke Grond Cultural Center (Amsterdam, NL)
The Soviet Union collapsed a quarter of a century ago. It marked the biggest
geopolitical catastrophe in history: the balance of powers, that was driving
progress ahead, was demolished. Since then we live in the world where only
one, ultra-capitalistic superpower is dictating the way we consume food,
entertainment, information, and everything else. The plurality of choice, which
was assured before by the ideological dichotomy between socialism and
capitalism, disappeared. This was the biggest geopolitical and ideological
catastrophe of the 20 century and the consequences are still to manifest
themselves in the upcoming horrors of uncertainly, instability and chaos of
international relations.
We tried to integrate into this new reality. We accepted our defeat in the Cold War. We wholeheartedly offered cooperation - converted our political system into West-oriented democracy, allowed capitalism to take over the planned economy, welcomed Western-led international community to enjoy the riches of Russia.
What did we get back?
Neo-colonialist political and economic notations. Expanding NATO, despite your promises to keep it within the same borders. Selfish support of local corruption practices for the sake of short-term revenues by your ‘transnational’ corporations. Instead of helping us to grow new generation of responsible leaders, you have contributed and nurtured oligarchs and cronies, with whom you enjoy nowadays making selfies at couture shows, ‘Art Basel’s and Biennales.
Russia assumed on it’s shoulders sovereign debt of the whole Soviet Union, for the infrastructure that was built in all the corners of the vast territory during more than half a century. Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Ukraine and other newly established ‘nations’ left the Union ‘clean’ of financial obligations and debts because of it. They got their ‘golden tickets’ out, while Russia assumed all the blame and responsibility for economic mismanagement of the Union, which was a common enterprise.
We were promised that NATO will slowly transform into something else than instrument of providing nationalistic, missionary, neo-colonial agenda of the United States. That it will become international organisation focused on peace keeping. Instead of it, already for 20 years we see construction of new military bases around our borders and on the territory of former parts of the Soviet Union and Russian Empire. Instead of peace-keeping, we perceive walling us off. It all happens quietly, with your firm European smile - the same ‘good manners’ were used by you during the centuries of slavery and colonisation of the other parts of our planet. Your snobbism makes us sick. We are shamed by the West for our model of democracy. But think for a second - does your Western model of democracy, as universal as you think about it, works anywhere, even in your hemisphere? Africa is a complete mess precisely because you brought there institutions that are alien to everything that existed there before. France supported dictators in Gabon, Belgium murdered Patrice Lumumba, the UK systemically messed up the Middle East turning it into the geopolitical hellhole. The list is very, very long.
Your own youths are sick of inequality in capital and power redistribution. They are sick of your usurping elites, hopelessness for the future and postmodern disorientation in moral and ideological values. Our goal is not to replicate your ‘democracy’, but to build solid infrastructure of survival and further development of our own civilisation, not a cheap copy of your failed project.
We were cornered by you and left with no choice but to play the card of ‘national revival’, to build retrograde walls, because the partnership game you played with us appeared no more than a trick of coloniser, analogy of ‘beads’ provided to indigenous population for lands in America and Africa for their rich lands. And this is your ‘thank you’ for tens of millions of lives we’ve sacrificed to stop advancement of Napoleon and later Hitler?
Take the issue of the war in Ukraine. It was very corrupt place from the beginning: political infrastructure there is just rotten from the bottom to the very top. Instead of being focused on how to help it to develop and climb out of the systemic crisis, you are focused on taking it out of the ‘Russian sphere of influence’. For years, you actively supported antagonisation of the Ukrainian society towards Russia. When we offered three-partial integration of the economies of Russia, Ukraine and the EU - it was you who declined three-party negotiations prospects, saying that you will deal with each of the partners ‘individually’, therefore disrespecting decades of economic ties that were built between Russia and Ukraine at the times when we shared the same borders.
You say it’s we are who are reviving the geopolitics and act in the methods of 19th century ‘realpolitik’? But ask yourself, who was muddling cultural ties between Russia and it’s immediate neighbours, which we share with centuries long common history? If you were so keen on and open for cooperation with Russia in the first place, what made you so motivated to develop strategy of weakening strategic positioning of Russia in the Eurasian region?
Your irresponsible, unwise and selfish actions are the reason why we now look at Asia with a glimpse of hope of building constructive relations, based on mutual interests, benefit and honesty.
You perfectly know, that like in cosmology there is a dichotomy between Universe and Multiverse, in politics, which is to some extent is cosmology of human mind, also can be seen from multidimensional perspective. Look at ‘democratic’ India and complete devastating mess in there. If you allow Burma’s voters now to exercise their right to freely vote about the rights of Muslim minority, they will massacre all of them. Singapore wouldn’t have been that success story if it followed your ‘democratic patterns’. You own societies are falling into the orbit of almost fascist political groups - Marine le Pen in France, Donald Trump in the United States, and that’s only the beginning. Your short-term oriented, materialistic ’ochlocracy’ is still to unveil all the devastating consequences for your society. Maybe there is still time to re-evaluate your short-sighted, universalist, colonial approach to the world? Maybe you will finally understand, that we don’t live anymore in the world of totalitarian monopoly of your picture of the world and finally will demonstrate some respect to diversity of opinions?
We don’t fundamentally argue against your concept of the Enlightenment, but we ask for moderation and respect of other cultures. Your snobbish, non- constructive pretence drives our society towards ultra-conservatism as the only alternative, that is strong enough to battle your creepy monopoly over cultural discourse. Do you really think we enjoy it ourselves?
We still call you ‘partners’. We are open for dialogue. We are not part of the barbaric tribes that undermine ‘the light’ you bring in the world, as you media actively depicts us. We understand, that cooperation (even if not already desirable), is inevitable and vital for both of us in the light of current political changes. But if you continue to act like your position and understanding of the world around us is the only one possible interpretation of reality, we are afraid our orbits will continue to dangerously drift away.
The Anatomy of a Modern Leviathan
poster is designed by Vaast Colson
The idea of a state as meta-human was described by Thomas Hobbes in the classic book of political philosophy, where the concept of a social contract theory between ‘Leviathan’ and citizens is outlined. Artistic strategy of taking metaphor literally and developing narratives from it is a point of departure for this lecture-performance. We still understand little about our bodies. The same is true for political processes. When you get health issues everyone around you either gives 'common advice’ on treatment or recommend you to see the doctor (what most of us try to escape usually). What is the political system 'illnesses’, 'hospital’, 'treatments’? Denis Maksimov drew (literally and figuratively) comparative parallels between the nature of Westphalian-modelled nation state, modern political systems and common knowledge about anatomy of the human body. The lecture-performance is a conceptual triptych, consisting of the physical nature of Leviathan, comparative politics and comparative medicine, the most common deviations and illnesses.
Denis Maksimov was invited to stage lecture-performance by Vaast Colson. It was staged in Stadslimiet art space in Antwerp, Belgium, on January 9, 2015.