The invocation of the proverbial idea “chickens coming home to roost” finds resonance in the recent scrutiny faced by Judith Butler regarding her concept of gender in relation to the transgender identities. Butler, renowned for her seminal work on gender, explained as a social construct, encounters challenges in fully elucidating the underpinnings of transgender identities within her framework. While prevailing leftist ideologies often assert the non-existence of an intrinsic essence to gender, the lived experiences of transgender individuals diverge from this perspective, underscoring the complexities inherent in the conceptualization of gender. Despite Butler’s influential contributions, the current discourse remains unsettled on this matter.
Cinema
This of course brings me to the
2023 film Do Not Expect Too Much From The End of The World, directed by
Radu Jude. This film warrants consideration as a significant contribution to
political cinema. Situating its narrative within the urban milieu of Bucharest,
the film meticulously chronicles a day in the life of Angela Răducanu,
portrayed by Ilinca Manolache, foregrounding themes of labor exploitation
within a working-class context. However, its salience lies in Jude’s astute
utilization of innovative cinematic techniques, which serve to interrogate
conventional narrative structures and challenge the prevailing paradigms of
commercialized cinema.
By integrating elements of
literature and philosophy, Jude disrupts the traditional flow of scenes,
effecting formal shifts that compel viewers to critically engage with the film’s
commentary on global politics and resistance within the framework of late
capitalism. Consequently, Do Not Expect Too Much From The End of The World
emerges as a relevant political cinema that transcends established norms,
offering a nuanced exploration of socio-political dynamics in contemporary
society.
Subsequently, Jude’s portrayal
of Angela’s zombified existence serves as a pertinent critique within the
cinematic framework, elucidating the nuances of late capitalist society.
Despite the gravity of the subject matter, the adoption of a satirical and
playful approach imbues the narrative with a distinct impact upon the viewer.
Additionally, the deliberate choice to render Angela’s narrative in a digitally
manipulated monochromatic palette rather than color further underscores the
film’s dialectical approach. Notably, Jude’s inventive incorporation of
segments from the 1981 film Angela Goes On adds a layer of complexity to
the narrative structure. Through the juxtaposition of vibrant scenes from the 1981
film with the grayscale depiction of Jude’s Angela, a deliberate intertextual
dialogue emerges.
This juxtaposition is not merely arbitrary, as both protagonists share the name Angela, representing two different, yet same socio-cultural contexts from a feminist perspective. The 20th-century Angela, a cab driver portrayed as a self-assured and free-spirited woman, serves to establish the realities of 21st-century Angela. The convergence of these narratives culminates in a poignant moment when the actress who portrayed the Angela from the 1981 film is reintroduced into the contemporary storyline. In essence, Jude’s cinematic brilliance is deeply rooted in the Romanian cultural and political discourse. Moreover, the film contributes to the exploration of Romania’s political and socio-cultural landscape spanning the preceding five decades. This juxtaposition of two women from disparate temporalities encapsulates the intricate interplay of gender and class dynamics within Romanian society, offering a compelling lens through which to analyze the nation’s trajectory, particularly in the context of its membership within the European Union.
Politics
In Angela’s navigation of her
complicated work life, her iPhone here serves as a medium for political
expression. This is particularly evident in her engagements within the digital
sphere. Here the significance of the smartphone as a quasi-political medium, gets
highlighted through Angela’s interactions on TikTok. Of note is the choice of
Angela’s ringtone, Beethoven’s “Ode to Joy,” which of course carries political
connotations in this context. It is imperative to comprehend the symbolic
resonance of this selection, as “Ode to Joy” was officially adopted as the
anthem of the European Union in 1985, following its earlier adoption by the
Council of Europe in 1972. Given the absence of lyrics in the anthem, its
essence resides solely within its musical composition.
This thematic choice prompts
broader considerations regarding citizenship within Romania as a member state
of the European Union. The film underscores the pervasive discrimination faced
by Romanians, thereby interrogating the efficacy of a purportedly empowering transnational
union like European Union. Through the
strategic use of the ringtone, Jude interweaves moments of humor within the
narrative, juxtaposing Angela’s experiences of both adversity and occasional
triumph, all against the backdrop of the dehumanizing realities of precarious
labor conditions and the gig economy. What Radu Jude achieves here is the
undermining of the security and welfare that European Union offers to its member
states.
Returning to Jude’s deliberate
inclusion of the iPhone as a political medium, its significance extends to
Angela’s engagement with TikTok. Within this platform, her videos predominantly
feature a character named Bobiţă, portrayed through a filter resembling Andrew
Tate, who is currently embroiled in legal proceedings in Romania. Bobiţă
assumes the persona of an incel, disseminating misogynistic rhetoric and
launching vitriolic attacks against women. One feature is the visual contrast
between the Bobiţă videos, presented in color, and the monochromatic depiction
of Angela’s reality. Here one might argue that Angela’s outrage through Bobiţă
against the underlying conditions of existence is a cathartic act. But this is
not the case as Bobiţă should be read as an attempt at the sublating the
precarity of late capitalism. Here by sublation I mean the negation of
something by affirming the same.
Additionally, through the
character of Bobiţă, Angela not only articulates grievances related to misogyny
and the objectification of women but also offers commentary on broader
geopolitical trends. Notably, Bobiţă admires Vladimir Putin and expresses
staunch support for the Russian state in its conflict against Ukraine. This could
also be read as the director’s effort to situate these discussions within the
broader European context to which Romania belongs.
Amidst the ongoing conflict in
Ukraine, divergent perspectives among leftist factions worldwide have emerged,
prompting debate regarding allegiances and culpability. In India, the
mainstream left has attributed responsibility for the conflict to NATO, a stance
that has recently faced scrutiny following Kavitha Krishnan’s departure from
the Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) due to ideological disparities.
Despite this divergence, the mainstream left continues to hold NATO accountable
for the crisis, invoking a longstanding discourse on the Leninist-Stalinist divide
(Lenin was for the self-determination of the Ukrainians while Stalin clearly
was against establishing Ukraine).
Moreover, Putin’s veneration
of Stalin is evident in his denigration of Lenin and his ideas. The recent
incidents in Moscow where police detained individuals commemorating victims of
Stalinist repression, underscores this ideological tension. Significantly,
Branko Milanovic contends that there is an ongoing state-driven narrative aimed
at portraying Stalin as a figure emblematic of a glorified historical epoch.
Returning to the question of NATO’s culpability, while it is reasonable to assign blame, pragmatic considerations necessitate solidarity with Ukraine. The looming threat of destruction faced by Ukraine and its populace compels a unified stance in support of the nation. Rather than solely demonizing US and NATO actions, the imperative lies in standing in solidarity with Ukraine in the face of Russian aggression, thereby prioritizing humanitarian concerns over ideological divisions.
India
Shifting focus to South Asia,
India is currently immersed in the elections for its lower house of parliament,
which will subsequently determine the nation’s Prime Minister for the ensuing
five-year term. Predominantly, surveys indicate a probable return to power for
Prime Minister Modi and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Meanwhile, opposition
parties find themselves fragmented, coalescing under the umbrella alliance
INDIA. However, the Indian electoral landscape is renowned for its
unpredictability, and the opposition clings to the prospect of potential
upheavals.
The electoral prospects of leftist parties in India, particularly those leaning towards socialism rather than communism, are of paramount significance in this election. The five mainstream leftist political entities in India have experienced a notable decline over the years. The Communist Party of India (Marxist) [CPI(M)], historically the largest among them, has encountered setbacks since the beginning of the 2010s. Additionally, the Communist Party of India (CPI) has lost its national party status and now relies on alliances for electoral leverage. The Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist), Revolutionary Socialist Party (RSP), and The Forward Bloc make nominal electoral contributions. Consequently, the onus rests largely on the Indian National Congress, formerly dominant in Indian politics, to secure a minimum of 150 seats out of the nearly 300 contested. While optimism persists for Indian democracy, it is tempered by a sense of uncertainty rather than reassurance.
Kerala
In Kerala, recent developments
have brought attention to the stance of the left government, as evidenced by
its submission of an affidavit in the Kerala High Court asserting that welfare
pensions are not considered a right of citizens but rather a form of
assistance. This declaration carries inherent paternalistic implications, as
underscored by the petitioner’s argument in court regarding the state’s
collection of social security cess on the sale of liquor and alcohol, which has
not been promptly redistributed as welfare pensions. In Kerala’s
socio-political context, characterized by a reverence (fetishization) of/for
state authority, individual autonomy is often subordinated. While proponents
may posit this legal petition as a form of insurgent libertarianism, it
behooves the left government, imbued with societal obligations, to reconsider
its stance.
It is in this context that one
should remember that neglecting public safety risks conceding a crucial sphere
of discontent to ideological adversaries, particularly amid prevailing societal
instability that inclines individuals towards right-wing ideologies. The
prioritization of everyday security is particularly pertinent given its
disproportionate impact on marginalized communities, highlighting a potential
shift towards capitalist tendencies eclipsing socialist principles. This calls attention
to the state of the mainstream left parties in Kerala. And there is nothing
else but a Zizekian joke that could help me here.
He writes, “Lacan called the
pure signifier (the Master-Signifier, a signifier which falls into the
signified and is as such a signifier without signified). And this is how one
should read the tautology “Socialism is socialism.” Recall the old Polish
anti-Communist joke: “Socialism is the synthesis of the highest achievements of
all previous historical epochs: from tribal society, it took barbarism, from
antiquity, it took slavery, from feudalism, it took relations of domination,
from capitalism, it took exploitation, and from socialism, it took the name.”
Does the same not hold for the anti-Semitic image of the Jew? From the rich
bankers, it took financial speculation, from capitalists, it took exploitation,
from lawyers, it took legal trickery, from corrupt journalists, it took media
manipulation, from the poor, it took indifference towards washing one’s body,
from sexual libertines it took promiscuity, and from the Jews it took the name…””
The left-leaning political
parties in Kerala have demonstrated an inclination towards embracing centrist
(center-right) political strategies previously espoused by the Indian National
Congress within the state’s socio-political milieu. This phenomenon, termed “social
engineering” by contemporary left parties, bears resemblance to the tactics
historically employed by leaders such as K Karunakaran. Taking the accusation
from the Zizekian joke, one could not help but connect the joke with the mainstream
left in Kerala. It took compromise and spinelessness from the centre-right
politics. It took exploitation from neoliberal attitudes in industry and growth.
And finally, it took Communism from Communism. Perhaps, this is why apparently
when you ask a CPIM member, “what is communism?” He is likely to return the
naive tautological answer: “Communism is Communism.”
Here, an imperative
consideration lies in the emergence of potentially perilous alliances within
Kerala’s political landscape. The Thottappally mineral sand-mining issue serves
as a notable illustration of the prevalence of right-wing managerial/corporate
politics in the state. The CPIM seeks to perpetuate a fusion of Congress’
center-right political ideology with traditional communist cadre
characteristics. This strategic amalgamation positions the CPIM to supplant the
Congress party, leveraging its adeptness at long-term political maneuvering.
Consequently, this trend underscores the absence of proactive leftist action,
signaling a paradigm shift in Kerala’s political dynamics. As such, a new
political Compass has been drawn in Kerala and it goes without saying that the
future once again looks more disappointing.
Comments
Post a Comment