In this new reconfiguration of class struggle, we are the revolutionary subject. We? Who are we? We are a question, an experiment, a scream, a challenge. We need no definition, we reject all definition, because we are the anti-identitarian power of creative doing and defy all definition. Call us the multitude if you like, or, better, call us the working class, but any attempt at definition makes sense only in so far as we break the definition. We are heterogeneous, we are dissonant, we are the affirmation of ourselves, the refusal of alien determination of our lives. We are, therefore, the critique of representation, the critique of verticality and of any form of organisation that takes responsibility for our lives away from us. Listen to the voices of the Zapatistas, of the piqueteros of Argentina, of the indigenous in Bolivia, of the people of the social centres of Italy: the subject they use all the time to speak of their struggle is “we”, and it is a category that carries real force.

We are feminine, nosotras not nosotros, because the crisis of abstract labour is the crisis of a male-dominated activity and form of struggle and because the new class struggle does not have the same gender composition as the old.

We are the breaking of time, the shooting of clocks. The movement of abstract labour projects revolution into the future, but our revolution can only be here and now, because we are alive here and now and in the future we shall be dead (or immortal). We are the intensity of the moment, the search (Faust’s search, Bloch’s search) for the moment of absolute fulfilment. We are the poetry of the working class.

Our revolution, then, cannot be understood as building for the great event in the future, but only as the creation here and now of cracks or fissures or ruptures in the texture of domination, spaces or moments in which we say clearly “no, we will not accept that capital should shape our lives, we shall do what we consider necessary or desirable”. Look around and we can see that these spaces or moments of refusal-and-creation exist everywhere, from the Selva Lacandona to the momentary refusal-and-creation of an event like this. Revolution, our revolution, can be understood only as the expansion and multiplication of these cracks, these lightning-flashes of refusal-and-creation, these volcanic eruptions of doing against labour.

Asking we walk. Preguntando caminamos.

We are the crisis of capital and proud of it. Enough of saying that the capitalists are to blame for the crisis! The very notion is not only absurd but dangerous. It constitutes us as victims.

Capital is a relation of domination. The crisis of capital is a crisis of domination. The dominators are not able to dominate efficiently. And then we go into the streets and tell them that it is their fault! What are we saying, that they should dominate us more effectively?

It is better to take the simpler explanation and say that if the relation of domination is in crisis, it is because the dominated are not prostrating themselves sufficiently. The inadequacy of our subordination is the cause of the crisis.