A very curious thing happened to me this weekend. I decided to make notes on a chapter of Werner Bonefeld’s Critical Theory and the Critique of Political Economy that I initially thought was odd in the context of the work, which mostly concerns a mode of critiquing political economy—what we now call ‘economics’—that was not dialectical, that recouped zero from its opponent, and that ended with no higher synthesis (aufheben). This negation of a social system—which had at its center the owners of the means of making a living on one side, and those who sold their labor to live on the other side—contained, according to Bonefeld, nothing that could be recovered and reformed. The whole system had to go. But what did any of this have to do with the chapter, “Anti-capitalism and the elements of antisemitism: On theology and real abstractions”?
In my second reading, I finally grasped the connection between it and the other chapters. Antisemitism is a form of anti-capitalism that capitalism can accept. This is the key idea, which is based on the most vivid and horrific expression of antisemitism, Nazism. In this framing, Jews represent “a capitalism not of productive labour and industry, but of parasites—money and finance, speculators and bankers.” This results in the coding of capitalist production as honest work that’s only corrupted by the greedy “moneychangers.” And it is here that the radical edge of Bonefeld’s negative critique makes its appearance: There is no such thing, he says, as a capitalism—at the level of production (low) and finance (high)—that’s doing anything that different: that is more honest, that is more humane, that is more or less exploitative. But when capitalism is in a state of crisis, in a moment of real danger, it prefers, as Nazi Germany made all too clear, anti-capitalism in the mode of antisemitism, which is an anti-capitalism that ultimately preserves it.
And now for Roseanne Barr’s blast of tweets. They not only resulted in the cancellation of her very popular revived TV show (Roseanne), but also rather too neatly confirmed the opening statement of Bonefeld’s chapter on antisemitism: “Racism and antisemitism are different-in-unity.”
Bonefeld writes:
…[the] racist Other is a potential slave, who needs to be kept in check for the sake of a society that demands to be served. This Other is regulated through institutional racism, threat of expulsion, segregation, racial profiling, slander, arson, murder and forced removal to indicate the precarious nature of her immigrant status. …[The racial] Other provides the excuse for a damaged life and becomes the object of hatred and ridicule, and is accepted, however precariously, for as long as she does her work quietly, without being seen. Antisemitism, in contrast, projects the Other as rootless and all-powerful. For the antisemite, the Jew comes from nowhere and, as a rootless cosmopolitan, is depicted as eternally wandering restlessly from place to place, peddling in money and misery.
I re-read that passage yesterday. Today, I was surprised to read this story about Barr’s tweets sent in The Hill:
In the tweet, the ABC star attacked [former Obama White House adviser Valerie Jarett, a black American] who was born in Iran, as a child of the Islamist organization Muslim Brotherhood and the movie “Planet of the Apes.”
“Muslim brotherhood & planet of the apes had a baby=vj,” Barr wrote, using Jarrett’s initials and responding to a tweet accusing the former Obama adviser of helping “hide” misdeeds for the Obama administration….
Barr also sent out a number of other tweets Tuesday morning, lashing out at billionaire liberal donor George Soros and former President Clinton’s daughter, Chelsea Clinton, whom the comedian linked to a right-wing conspiracy accusing Soros of trying to orchestrate “the overthrow of us constitutional republic.”
Much of the talk is about racism, but it’s also interesting that Barr’s tweets fit Bonefeld’s distinctions between racism and antisemitism to a tee. You have Soros as the rootless, cosmopolitan Jew who uses money to undermine a national spirit that, if functioning properly, would reward hardworking white Americans. Bizarrely Barr even suggests the extermination of Soros in a Nazi death camp would have been justified. No matter what Barr’s background is, such statements are not not inflammable in the era of Trump.
On the other, you have the Muslim as the inferior Other, the ape that needs to be in a cage or regularly checked with a lick or two or three.
But back to Bonefeld. What does he mean by “different-in-unity”? It is that both constructions of the Other are channels of dehumanization that redirect the obvious ills of capitalism away from capitalism itself and send them toward the misty regions of moneychangers and slaves. Annihilate the former (Soros), and whip the latter (the NFL players), and all will be right as rain.
