Blue Order/New Monday
  • Blue Order/New Monday
  • The Brian Jonestown Massacre
  • Aufheben

The Brian Jonestown Massacre - Blue Order/New Monday

Just got Aufheben in the mail today. Holy fuck is it good. It’s already way up there as one of my favourites, and definitely one of the best releases of the year…
It’s kind of like a combination of all my favourite aspects of the band, so it’s no wonder I absolutely love it. This is the last track on the album, and it could happily go on forever.

Having heard this album there is no way I am going to miss catching them on this tour…

Being is being, and nothing is nothing, only in their contradistinction from each other; but in their truth, in their unity, they have vanished as these determinations and are now something else. Being and nothing are the same; but just because they are the same they are no longer being and nothing, but now have a different significance. In becoming they were coming-to-be and ceasing-to-be; in determinate being, a differently determined unity, they are again differently determined moments. This unity now remains their base from which they do not again emerge in the abstract significance of being and nothing.
—  G W F Hegel, The Science of Logic, (Prometheus/Humanity, trans. A.V Miller 1969), p.35 Phenomelicious
To think that the positions are simply revolutionary, or that adopting them makes on revolutionary, reifies what being revolutionary is. Communism is the attempt to express the real movement; but the real movement is not fully present until it is successful; thus communist theory is only partial - an aspiration - and the theoretical work is never quite finished. It is taken forward by advances in the class struggle and the reflection on this. Put another way, theory does not take the point of view of the totality but of the aspiration to the totality.
—  Aufheben, Intakes: Communist Theory - Beyond the Ultra-Left

A critical analysis of the Zapatistas by Aufheben (2000)

Not proletarian, yet not entirely peasant, the Zapatistas’ political ideas are riven with contradictions. We reject the academics’ argument of Zapatismo’s centrality as the new revolutionary subject, just as we reject the assertions of the ‘ultra-left’ that because the Zapatistas do not have a communist programme they are simply complicit with capital. We see the Zapatistas as a moment in the struggle to replace the reified community of capital with the real human community. Their battle for land against the rancheros and latifundistas reminds us of capital’s (permanent) transitions rather than its apparent permanence.