Something Taken as An Event
The speech today introduces late M. Foucault's idea related to the Islamic Revolution. The speaker just makes an introduction about the general historical facts of Islamic Revolution and Foucault's desire to do the research on such Revolution happened in Iran. To be honest, I am not much familiar with Islamic Revolution. And this is a good opportunity to get to access to such issue in the current movements happened in the world. The speaker mentions that Foucault was quiet intrigued by Islamic Revolution at that time since the Islamic Revolution opened up a new page and even broke new ground under the power of the constitutional monarchy. Nevertheless, it is not based upon the origin of institution of Egypt and the Muslim beliefs. The Islamic Revolution is no longer to be treated as mere a sort of political rebellion or to be regarded as a political activity in resistance to change the institution. Rather, the momentum of Islamic Revolution will be crucially counted in the whole context of the duration followed by any political movements afterwards. For this reason, the speaker takes the Islamic Revolution as an event, which causes the ideas rushing out while they may happen unpredictably and explode unexpectedly at any time. Meanwhile such event will not fall into the boundary of ethnic classification, hierarchical battle and religion in opposition. What the speaker sees chiefly lies in the forces in the process of happening according to the Revolution. As it exceeds the frame of causes and effects, the Revolution will not be wished to be taken from the Occidental perspective at all.
This reminds me of Frantz Fanon’s The Wretched of the Earth, especially in the second chapter, “Spontaneity: Its Strengths and Weakness,” the rise of spontaneity based on proletariat mainly derives from the rural mass. They feel a positive hatred for the “politics” (Fanon 131) of demagogy as the deeds performed by those nationalist parties. Meanwhile they hold on one doctrine: to act by rising that the nation may exist. If there is the oppression from the colonialism, the so-called “Independence” of the nation will not change the colonial form but still carry on its colonial system in the newly imperial countries. Although there is the class mainly formed by the nationalists, the rural class seem to be cast outside the people who support the side of nationalists. The event of igniting such spontaneity on their own creates possible change of certain class. For this reason, the spontaneity concerning the rural people's passion to maintain their identity of Algeria cannot be slightly taken. To form the organization on their own is motivated by their determination of protecting the current state of Algeria occupied by the nationalists party in relation with the colonialists. Using the rough instruments at hand and organizing small groups in action become the subversive element confronting with the nationalists. Thus the possible change is still there. It does not only mean they must claim their own identity of their country but the process of flourishing the lands in forests and mountain. To temporarily ignore the aim to uphold the nation in itself, the action of rural people actually affect those proletarians at last and magnify their forces under such influences. The event as the spontaneity rises through the rural class themselves. Though the claim to retaking the Algeria may refer to the national existence time and again, it still remains potentiality of breaking under the nationalist party at the current moment by means of the rural class' spontaneity in support among others.
This reminds me of Frantz Fanon’s The Wretched of the Earth, especially in the second chapter, “Spontaneity: Its Strengths and Weakness,” the rise of spontaneity based on proletariat mainly derives from the rural mass. They feel a positive hatred for the “politics” (Fanon 131) of demagogy as the deeds performed by those nationalist parties. Meanwhile they hold on one doctrine: to act by rising that the nation may exist. If there is the oppression from the colonialism, the so-called “Independence” of the nation will not change the colonial form but still carry on its colonial system in the newly imperial countries. Although there is the class mainly formed by the nationalists, the rural class seem to be cast outside the people who support the side of nationalists. The event of igniting such spontaneity on their own creates possible change of certain class. For this reason, the spontaneity concerning the rural people's passion to maintain their identity of Algeria cannot be slightly taken. To form the organization on their own is motivated by their determination of protecting the current state of Algeria occupied by the nationalists party in relation with the colonialists. Using the rough instruments at hand and organizing small groups in action become the subversive element confronting with the nationalists. Thus the possible change is still there. It does not only mean they must claim their own identity of their country but the process of flourishing the lands in forests and mountain. To temporarily ignore the aim to uphold the nation in itself, the action of rural people actually affect those proletarians at last and magnify their forces under such influences. The event as the spontaneity rises through the rural class themselves. Though the claim to retaking the Algeria may refer to the national existence time and again, it still remains potentiality of breaking under the nationalist party at the current moment by means of the rural class' spontaneity in support among others.
Comments
Post a Comment