Paris 1871 and Fatsa 1979: revisiting the transition problem

ABSTRACT

This article approaches transition as a problem on its own right, through the cases of the Paris Commune of 1871 and the Fatsa ‘Commune’ of 1979. Transition has received scant attention as an object of theoretical inquiry. Prior to Etienne Balibar’s suggestion that the history of the mode of production occurs at the intersections between political struggles and economic contradictions, a theory of transition had not been explicitly explored. Problematizing transition can reveal what is ‘ruptural’ about ruptural moments, indicating the limitations of the prevalent mode of production. This investigation builds on the Althusserian theory of temporal lag, and considers aspects of the cases in order to translate its insights into the historical events, and conversely to develop theoretical initiative based on findings. An examination of outstanding figures and events in the cases suggests that they can inform a theory of transition and address certain challenges of contemporary radicalism.

KEYWORDS:

• Transition
• capitalism
• anti-capitalism
• Marxism
• Althusser

Acknowledgement

I would like to thank David Bailey for his thorough and thoughtful comments on earlier drafts of this article.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1. The full passage reads as follows:

Thus the Paris Revue Positiviste reproaches me for, on the one hand, treating economics metaphysically, and, on the other hand – imagine this! – confining myself merely to the critical analysis of the actual facts, instead of writing recipes (Comtist ones?) for the cook-shops of the future. (Marx, 1990, p. 175)

This suggests that aside from substituting preconceived blueprints for reality, Marx simply sought to avoid association with positivist and elitist pretensions of superior knowledge of laws governing society.

2. Badiou’s (2010, p. 35) third form of defeat refers to those cases of intransigence in nominally socialist regimes where local initiatives accuse the existing political systems of reneging on their revolutionary promises. The Prague Spring and the Shanghai Commune, for instance, represent two clear examples.

3. Much of the factual discussion here is informed by the fascinating exploration of the Commune in Ross, 2016. Ross considers individual stories of emancipation throughout the course of the Commune and draws sophisticated conclusions regarding contemporary possibilities. However, the intention here is to shed light on what the Commune as a contingent phenomenon signals for debates around transition.

4. To give just one example: Proudhon believed that women should remain within the home (Guérin, 2013, p. 11).

5. On the trajectory of authoritarian neoliberalism in Turkey, see Tansel (2018).

6. For the complete election results, see Aksakal, 1989, p. 134).

7. For a more detailed account of hazelnut production and networks of usury and hoarding that drove up market prices, see Morgül (2007). This work, along with Türkmen (2007), have been consulted for local social and political history in Fatsa.

8. See Morgül, 2007, pp. 124–125 for an account of these receptions.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Onur Acaroglu

Onur Acaroglu is a doctoral student in the School of Government and Society at the University of Birmingham. His research focuses on Marxist conceptions of transition to socialism, with a special focus on the question of time, and the work of Althusser and Balibar. Before joining Birmingham he completed an MA in Social and Political Thought at the University of Sussex.