#6

#6

Kapitalismo-sozjietie's omnipresent falsifications serve as the basis for unrealistic authoritarian planning, its industrial production proves superior to its bureaucracy, but its “bureaucracy cannot resolve the question of agriculture...”¹ The beginning of labour is marked by the end of a contentless freedom, the end of idlety, when agriculture becomes sedentary, confined within a locality by the industry of Kapitalismo-sozjietie, confined to “the repetition of {the sequence of activity}.”² Cyclical time, based on the rhythm of the seasons, governs the agrarians and their productions. “Eternity is within this time, it is the return of the same here on earth.”³ Without cyclical time, we are subjected to the movement of capital rather than the migration of people. The latter economy is more sustainable.

Bryan Silcock writes to us from 1975 to describe agrarian revolution, a “so-called green revolution ... that {can} produce enormous yields in response to massive applications of nitrogenous fertilizers.”⁴ Citizen Silcock goes on to explain that the fertilizers are “beyond the means of many peasant farmers in developing countries.”⁵ Citizen Silcock is looking for a “transformation in agriculture comparable in importance to {a} 'green revolution'{.}” Agrarian, proletarian, revolution. What Kapitalismo-sozjietie provides is a possibility.

°How does Kapitalismo-sozjietie feed me?° wonders Citizen Smith.

Citizen Silcock provides the answer: through the acquisition of the scientific knowledge that grass bacteria are able to alter their atmospheric conditions for growth rather than relying entirely on the soil. So, the lesson is simple – maybe the message prophetic – that when the system has appeared to have exhausted all its natural resources, it begins to adapt by colonizing outer space and create the conditions there to thrive. “There would be no such obstacle,” writes Citizen Silcock, “to the introduction of cereals able to 'fix atmospheric nitrogen.'” So, we see that Kapitalismo-sozjietie also has the ability to modify its own atmosphere to produce better growth conditions.

Citizen Silcock explains that “{l}egumes fix nitrogen with the help of bacteria of the Rhizobum genus, which form conspicuous nodules on the roots.”⁶ Alongside this thinking “Deleuze and Guattari offer a decentered and multiplicitous thinking which they call rhizomatic. The rhizome,” according to Postmodern Anarchist commentator Lewis Call, “is a nonhierarchical, centerless mode of organization.”⁷ Nothing in this pandimensional multiverse is unrelated to the centre, or hierarchy for that matter. The 'radicle' - part of a plant embryo that develops into the primary root – is related to the 'folicle' in that the structure of the flora and the fauna can replicate the rhizomatic foundations found below it, surviving in different conditions. Both the rhizomatic foundations and the flora and fauna configurations stem from the single radicle's extensions. The rhizomatic foundations rely on the radicle's attraction to light. The flora and fauna depend on the rhizomatic networks' capture of soil nutrients. This is our allegory for the relationship between the proletarian class and the bourgeoisie, that they are organically linked by the radicle, the root, of the tree schema, as once proposed by the eighteenth century statesman, Edmund Burke, whom Karl Marx vilified as playing the romantic laudator temporis acti against the French Revolution.

1Debord, G. (2002) Society of the Spectacle. Trans. Ken Knabb. London: Rebel Press; #108.

2Ibid.

3Ibid., #127.

4Silcock, B. (1975) “Another green revolution?” The Montreal Gazette, Sep. 29.

5Ibid.

6Ibid.

7Call, L. (2002) Postmodern Anarchism. Maryland: Lexington Books; p.123.

©Elijah Nathaniel James.