Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T18:01:52.908Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Nomadic life's counter-attack: moving beyond the subaltern's voice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2013

DOERTHE ROSENOW
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

According to opponents of ‘neoliberal globalisation’ located in the postcolonial realm, multinational corporations are central agents in a structure of global hegemonic rule that leaves little or no space for the postcolonial subject to determine his/her own fate. This argument is contested by a number of scholars, who point out that presupposing a lack of agency on the side of subaltern is yet another way of silencing him/her. But how can his/her ‘true’ voice be recognised without at the same time disguising existing domination? In this article, it will be argued that one possibility is the development of a different theoretical framework that challenges the taken-for-granted assumption on which the dilemma is based: the existence of the subject and its conscious voice. For this purpose, the article will use Gilles Deleuze's theory of the various expressions and struggles of life. With the help of the analysis of a particular case, Monsanto's introduction of genetically modified cotton into India in 2002, the article will suggest that the multinational company (Monsanto) should not be regarded as yet another neo-colonial oppressor. Instead, it is a war machine that unleashes flows enabling nomadic life assemblages to counter-attack.

Type
Articles
Information
Review of International Studies , Volume 39 , Issue 2 , April 2013 , pp. 415 - 433
Copyright
Copyright © British International Studies Association 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Spivak, Gayatri C., ‘Can the Subaltern Speak?’, in Nelson, Cary and Grossberg, Lawrence (eds), Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture (Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1988), pp. 271–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Deleuze, Gilles and Guattari, Félix, A Thousand Plateaus, trans. Massumi, Brian (London and New York: Continuum, 2007)Google Scholar.

3 What needs to be stressed right from the start is that Deleuze and Guattari's narrative about states, capitalism, and nomadic life is not an exploration of ‘real’ empirical states and therefore not at all historically accurate. Instead, what they are interested in is challenging dominant ways of thinking that they identify with what they call the apparatus of the State, and to subvert them with a different ontology of life. Consequently, any potential allegation of ethnographic thinness that both Deleuze and Guattari's work and this article face is accurate, but at the same time misplaced.

4 See, for example, Herring, Ronald J., ‘Why Did “Operation Cremate Monsanto” Fail? Science and Class in India's Great Terminator-Technology Hoax’, Critical Asian Studies, 38:4 (2006), pp. 467–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Ronald J. Herring, ‘Global Rifts over Biotechnology: What Does India's Experience with Bt Cotton Tell Us?’, V. T. Krishnamachari Memorial Lecture, given at Delhi University (2 December 2009), {http://government.arts.cornell.edu/assets/faculty/docs/herring/KrishnamachariLectureFnlRHv15.pdf}.

5 Nussbaum, Martha C., Cultivating Humanity: A Classical Defense of Reform in Liberal Education (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2003), p. 10Google Scholar.

6 Dhawan, Nikita, ‘Zwischen Empire und Empower: Dekolonisierung und Demokratisierung’ (Between Empire and Empower: Decolonisation and Democratisation), Femina Politica, 21:2 (2009), pp. 52–3 (author's translation)Google Scholar.

7 Spivak, Gayatri C., ‘Feminism and Human Rights’, in Shaikh, Nermeen (ed.), The Present as History: Critical Perspectives on Global Power (New York and Chichester: Columbia University Press, 2007), p. 177Google Scholar. See also Spivak, Gayatri C., Other Asias (Oxford and Carlton: Blackwell Publishing, 2008), pp. 14–15Google Scholar.

8 ‘Northern’ and ‘Southern’ is used because of a lack of more adequate terminology. I am aware of the problematic connotations and implied simplifications.

9 See, for example, Prof Nanjundaswamy, ‘To Establish People's Power’, statement at the demonstration against the World Economic Summit, Cologne (19 June 1999), {http://caravan.squat.net/ICC-en/statement.htm}.

10 Interestingly, this hostility towards the state is at odds with what Sudipta Kaviraj calls the ‘immense enchantment’ that the idea of the state has been having on urban Indian intellectual life for the last decades. Kaviraj, Sudipta, ‘On the Enchantment of the State: Indian Thought on the Role of the State in the Narrative of Modernity’, in Gupta, Akhil and Sivaramakrishnan, K. (eds), The State in India after Liberalization: Interdisciplinary Perspectives (London and New York: Routledge, 2011), pp. 31–48Google Scholar.

11 Madsen, Stig T., ‘The View from Vevey’, Economic and Political Weekly, 36:39 (2003), p. 3735Google Scholar.

12 Goswami, Manu, Producing India (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

13 The KRRS became known due to its outspoken opposition against Monsanto's introduction of genetically modified Bt Cotton, manifested in the burning of field trials in 1999. See, for example, Prof Nanjundaswamy, , ‘Cremating Monsanto: Genetically Modified Fields on Fire’, in Notes from Nowhere (eds), We are Everywhere: The Irresistible Rise of Global Anticapitalism (London and New York: Verso, 2003), pp. 152–9Google Scholar.

14 Referred to in Madsen, ‘View from Vevey’, p. 3738.

15 Shiva, Vandanaet al., Seeds of Suicide: The Ecological and Human Costs of Globalization of Agriculture (Delhi: Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology, 2000), p. 98Google Scholar.

16 {http://caravan.squat.net/ICC-en/Krrs-en/Monquitin-en.htm}.

17 Nanjundaswamy, ‘Cremating Monsanto’, p. 155.

18 ‘Final Declaration of the Social Movement Assembly, WSF 2011, February 10th, Dakar (Senegal)’, {http://www.viacampesina.org/en/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1034:final-declaration-of-the-social-movements-assembly-wsf-2011-february-10th-dakar-senegal&catid=25:world-social-forum&Itemid=34}.

19 Sina, Subir, ‘Lineages of the Developmentalist State: Transnationality and Village India, 1900–1965’, Comparative Studies in Society and History, 50:1 (2008), p. 59Google Scholar; referring to Partha Chatterjee.

20 Ibid., p. 66 (emphasis in original).

21 Ibid., p. 73.

22 As K. Sivaramakrishnan and Arun Agrawal point out, ‘regional’ does not primarily mean halfway between ‘global’ and ‘local’, but rather that the ‘practices of individuals and institutions at a variety of spatial levels’ produce modernity socially and discursively. Sivaramakrishnan, K. and Agrawal, Arun, ‘Regional Modernities in Stories and Practices of Development’, in Sivaramakrishnan, and Agrawal, (eds), Regional Modernities: The Cultural Politics of Development in India (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2003), p. 14Google Scholar.

23 Gupta, Akhil and Ferguson, James, ‘Culture, Power, Place: Ethnography at the End of an Era’, in Gupta, and Ferguson, (eds), Culture, Power, Place: Explorations in Critical Anthropology (Durham: Duke University Press, 1997), pp. 18–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

24 Sivaramakrishnan, K., Modern Forests: Statemaking and Environmental Change in Colonial Eastern India (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1999), p. 14Google Scholar; Scott, James C., foreword to Agrarian Environments: Resources, Representation, and Rule in India, Agrawal, Arun and Sivaramakrishnan, K. (eds) (Durham and London: Duke University Press, 2000), p. viiiGoogle Scholar.

25 Kapoor, Ilan, The Postcolonial Politics of Development (Abingdon and New York: Routledge, 2008), p. 52Google Scholar.

26 Ibid.

27 Ibid., p. 53.

28 Herring, ‘Global Rifts’, p. 19.

29 Shiva, Vandana, Emani, Ashok, and Jafri, Afsar H., ‘Globalisation and Threat to Seed Security: Case of Transgenic Cotton Trials in India’, Economic and Political Weekly, 34:1–11 (1999), pp. 602, 605Google Scholar.

30 Shiva, Vandana, ‘Resources, Rights and Regulatory Reform’, Context, 3:1 (2006), p. 86Google Scholar.

31 Herring, ‘Operation Cremate Monsanto’, p. 469. Current data are from Choudhary, Bhagirath and Gaur, Kadambini, Bt Cotton in India: A Country Profile, The International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA) Series of Biotech Crop Profiles (Ithaka New York: ISAAA, 2010), pp. 3–5Google Scholar.

32 Herring, ‘Operation Cremate Monsanto’, pp. 469–70.

33 BBC News (17 June 2003), {http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2998150.stm}.

34 Business Standard (15 December 2006), {http://www.agobservatory.org/agribusiness_records.cfm?nID=1100}.

35 Referred to in Douglas McGray, ‘Biotech's Black Market’ (1 September 2002), {http://www.internationalreportingproject.org/stories/detail/655/}.

36 Sivaramakrishna and Agrawal distinguish the focus on ‘histories of doing’ from the emphasis on ‘discourse formations’ or ‘narratives’ that are characterised by ‘structure, linearity, and cohesion’. Sivaramakrishna and Agrawal, ‘Regional Modernities’, pp. 42, 48–9.

37 Herring, ‘Operation Cremate Monsanto’, p. 484.

38 See, for example, ‘Global Rifts’, p. 11. Herring declares an experiment as having not been ‘scientifically credible’, but fails to mention that it was published in one of the major peer-reviewed scientific journals, and that there was a huge political controversy when the study's leading researcher, Dr Arpad Pusztai, was sacked without being able to adequately defend his research.

39 Herring, ‘Global Rifts’, p. 29.

40 Ibid., pp. 26–7.

41 Ibid., pp. 14, 25.

42 Michel Foucault and Gilles Deleuze, Intellectuals and Power: A Conversation between Michel Foucault and Gilles Deleuze (1972), {http://libcom.org/library/intellectuals-power-a-conversation-between-michel-foucault-and-gilles-deleuze} accessed 26 February 2011.

43 Spivak, Subaltern. Compare to Kapoor, Postcolonial Politics, p. 41.

44 Spivak, Subaltern, p. 272.

45 Ibid., p. 275.

46 Birla, Ritu, ‘Postcolonial Studies: Now that's History’, in Morris, Rosalind C. (ed.), Can the Subaltern Speak? Reflections on the History of an Idea (New York and Chichester: Columbia University Press, 2010), p. 90Google Scholar.

47 Sivaramakrishnan and Agrawal, ‘Regional Modernities’, pp. 44–9.

48 Samaddar, Ranabbir, The Materiality of Politics: The Technologies of Rule, Volume 1 (London, New York and Delhi: Anthen Press, 2007), p. xiiGoogle Scholar.

49 Samaddar, Ranabbir, Emergence of the Political Subject (New Delhiet al.: Sage Publications, 2010), p. xiiGoogle Scholar.

50 Samaddar, Materiality of Politics, p. 3.

51 Ibid., p. 9.

52 Ranabbir Samaddar, Political Subject, pp. xvi, xviii.

53 May, Todd, Gilles Deleuze: An Introduction (Cambridgeet al.: Cambridge University Press, 2005), pp. 14, 19CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

54 Strathausen, Carsten, ‘Epistemological Reflections on Minor Points in Deleuze’, Theory and Event 13:4 (2010), {http://mtw160-150.ippl.jhu.edu/journals/theory_and_event/v013/13.4.strathausen.pdf}Google Scholar.

55 Deleuze, Gilles, Difference and Repetition, trans. Patton, Paul (London and New York: Continuum, 2009)Google Scholar.

56 Ritu Birla, ‘Postcolonial Studies’, p. 90.

57 Patton, Paul, Deleuze & the Political (London and New York: Routledge, 2000), p. 119CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

58 Deleuze, Gilles and Parnet, Claire, Dialogues II, trans. Albert, Eliot R. (London and New York: Continuum, 2006), p. 17Google Scholar.

59 Deleuze, Gilles and Guattari, Félix, What is Philosophy?, trans. Burchell, Graham and Tomlinson, Hugh (London: Verso, 1996), p. 110Google Scholar.

60 Ibid., pp. 110–11.

61 Deleuze and Parnet, Dialogues, p. 69.

62 Deleuze, Gilles, ‘Immanence: A Life’, in Pure Immanence: Essays on a Life, trans. Boyman, Anne (New York: Zone Books, 2005), p. 27 (capitals in original)Google Scholar.

63 Rajchman, John, introduction to Pure Immanence: Essays on a Life, by Deleuze, Gilles (New York: Zone Books, 2005), p. 8Google Scholar.

64 Gilles Deleuze, Difference and Repetition, p. xv.

65 Deleuze and Parnet, Dialogues II, p. 69.

66 Bennett, Jane, ‘The Force of Things: Steps towards an Ecology of Matter’, Political Theory, 32:3 (2004), pp. 360, 354CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

67 Sivaramakrishnan, Modern Forests, p. xv.

68 Deleuze, Immanence, p. 31.

69 Sibertin-Blanc, Guillaume, ‘The War Machine, the Formula and the Hypothesis: Deleuze and Guattari as Readers of Clausewitz’, Theory and Event, 13:3 (2010), doi:10.1353/tae.2010.0012Google Scholar; referring to Deleuze, Gilles, ‘Five Propositions on Psychoanalysis’, in Desert Islands and Other Texts 1953–1974 (Los Angeles and New York: Semiotext(e)), p. 280Google Scholar.

70 Colebrook, Claire, Gilles Deleuze (London and New York: Routledge, 2002), p. 56Google Scholar.

71 Sibertin-Blanc, ‘War Machine’.

72 Deleuze and Guattari, Thousand Plateaus, p. 460.

73 Ibid., p. 420.

74 Ibid., pp. 420–1.

75 Ibid., p. 430.

76 Cilliers, Paul, Complexity and Postmodernism: Understanding Complex Systems (New York and London: Routledge, 1998), p. 9Google Scholar.

77 Deleuze and Guattari, Thousand Plateaus, pp. 441, 438.

78 Ibid., p. 463.

79 See, for example, Doty, Roxanne Lynne, ‘Racism, Desire, and the Politics of Immigration’, Millennium, 28:3 (1999), pp. 585–606CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For a critique, see Reid, Julian, The Biopolitics of the War on Terror: Life Struggles, Liberal Modernity, and the Defence of Logistical Societies (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2006), p. 46CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

80 Deleuze and Guattari, Thousand Plateaus, pp. 463–4.

81 Reid, Julian, ‘A People of Seers: The Political Aesthetics of Postwar Cinema Revisited’, Cultural Politics, 7:2 (2011), p. 236CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Reid, Julian, ‘Of Nomadic Unities: Gilles Deleuze on the Nature of Sovereignty’, Journal of International Relations and Development, 13:4 (2010), pp. 405–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

82 Deleuze and Guattari, Thousand Plateaus, p. 397.

83 Ibid., pp. 473, 476.

84 Ibid., p. 474.

85 Reid, ‘Nomadic Unities’.

86 Deleuze and Guattari, Thousand Plateaus, p. 486.

87 Ibid., pp. 499–501.

88 Ibid., p. 501.

89 Ibid., pp. 502, 510 (emphasis added).

90 Ibid., pp. 507, 522.

91 Bailey, David J. ‘The European Rescue, Recommodification, and/or Reterritorialisation of the (Becoming-capitalist) State? Marx, Deleuze, Guattari, and the European Union’, Journal of International Relations and Development, 13:4 (2010), p. 338 (emphasis in original)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

92 Kaviraj, ‘Enchantment of the State’, p. 36.

93 Ibid., p. 37.

94 Ibid., p. 39; Sinha, ‘Developmentalist State’, p. 73.

95 Sivaramakrishnan and Agrawal, ‘Regional Modernities’, p. 37.

96 Deleuze and Guattari, Thousand Plateaus, p. 397.

97 Ibid., p. 459.

98 ‘The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety’, {http://bch.cbd.int/protocol/}. Also see ‘Indian Biosafety Rules & Regulations’, {http://dbtbiosafety.nic.in/}.

99 Samaddar, Materiality of Politics, p. 131.

100 Deleuze and Guattari, Thousand Plateaus, p. 425. Compare to Reid, ‘Nomadic Unities’, p. 412.

101 Deleuze and Guattari, Thousand Plateaus, p. 424.

102 Ibid., p. 460.

103 See, for example, Shiva, Emani, and Jafri, ‘Threat to Seed Security’, p. 611.

104 Parvathi Menon, ‘Waking up to GM Cotton’, Frontline, 18:23 (2001), {http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl1823/18230440.htm}.

105 B. Venkarteswalu, ‘The Indian Biosafety Regulations on GMOs under Test’ (December 2001), {http://www.poptel.org.uk/panap/latest/test.htm}.

106 BBC News (17 June 2003).

107 Lambert, Gregg, ‘The War Machine and “A People Who Revolt”’, Theory and Event, 13:3 (2010), doi:10.1353/tae.2010.0012Google Scholar. Compare to Deleuze and Guattari, Thousand Plateaus, p. 427.

108 Deleuze and Parnet, Dialogues, p. 107.

109 India Today (6 March 2010), {http://indiatoday.intoday.in/site/Story/86939/India/Bt+cotton+has+failed+admits}.

110 McGray, ‘Black Market’.

111 Ibid.