Resisting Capital: Simulationist andSocialist Strategies ZEUS LEONARDO (CaliforniaState University, LongBeach) ABSTRACT Postmoderntheory has problematizedthe concepts and concerns ofMarxism with respect tosocialist praxis.One of the most diligentexamples ofthis engagement comes from Jean Baudrillard’s simulationtheory. Pronouncing the death ofMarxist categories,such asdepthand revolution, simulation theory offersan aleatory,indeterminate model of society where the real implodesinto the hyperreal.With special attention tothe concept ofresistance, this essay assesses the conceptual frameworkof both simulation and socialist theory fortheir promisesand problems in the context ofpostmodernity. Bringinghistorical materialisminto dialogue with simulation theory reasserts the importanceof Marxism in addressingthe unnished projectof social emancipation.There is much to suggest that with the real becominghyperreal, exploitation intensies intohyperexploitation. In short,notwithstanding the merits ofsimulationtheory, Marxist concepts andconcerns are still central toboth radical theory andpraxis. Bringing the merits ofsimulationtheory toMarxism offersa social theory of meaningin the context ofcapitalism. “Resisting Capital:Simulationist and Socialist Strategies” In the secondmillennium, social theorists are in a maddash to construct newways of explaining the shiftingterrains of social life. Speci cally, theorygeneration over the roleof capital in today’s postmoderncondition arguablyrepresents a dominantmatrix in academic discussions. Clearly, oneof the mostfertile terrains in the debateover current conditions Critical Sociology, Volume 29,issue 2 also availableonline Ó 2003Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden www.brill.nl 212 Leonardo ² representsthe engagement betweenMarxist theories and postmodern discourses.Discussions over theory generation bene t fromcritically addressingthis intersection. Having witnessed the victoriesas well as failuresof the 1960’s movements torevolutionize social life andthen the subsequentfall ofthe formerSoviet republics, many intellectuals attemptedto move “beyond”the polemicsand promises of Marxism. Jameson(1988a) has suggestedthat one cannot avoid periodization, in the sense thatpostmodern theory arrived in a contextfollowing the material dissolutionof colonial rule and the change insocial thought to explain thisnew formation. It is a bitlike living inan eraof post-Michaels, followingthe fall ofthe eraof Michael Jordan,Michael Jackson,and the SovietMichael, Gorbachev.Dubbed as the “postmodernturn” in social theory,the “post”in po-mo, posty, post-ism, or post-al thought has been interpretedas anti moderntheories like Marxism.In particularpostmodern thoughthas pummeledMarxist theory with objections to itsuniversals and totalities:in short, its hubris and hamartia. The mostextreme challenge toMarxist orthodoxy issues from Jean Baudrillard’s simulationtheory, an ironicdiscourse of resistance through strategiesof hyperconformity, which insist that the realhas been absorbed inthe hyperreal,the copywith no original. Responding to theoretical de- velopments invarious post-ism’ s, Marxist scholars found themselves doing doubleduty: generating new modes of thought to resist capital’ s general expansioninto everyday life aswell asresponding to the postmodernchal- lenge oflinguisticplay and jouissance.Itis atthisintersection between social- ismand simulation where capital is wedged. Critical scholars have found thatscholarship must confront the effectsof capital on the sign.For exam- ple,critical theorists have suggestedthe need fora politicalhermeneutics thatprovides scholars and students with the mostemancipatory strategies againstthe distortionsof capital (see Leonardo,in press). In thisessay, I examine the meritsand problems of simulation theory through the works ofJean Baudrillard.Furthermore, the essay engages the Marxistresis- tanceto postmodern condition as the mostrecent incarnation of capitalist relationsof exploitation. Because ofthe globalizationand intensi cation ofcapital, resistance theory becomes even morecentral to the project ofnegation. In otherwords, although the essay acknowledgesthe shiftin culturo-technologicallife, it also argues that the postmoderncondition does notrepresent a breakfrom capitalist production but rather an extension ofit. Finally, bringingMarxism in conversationwith simulation theory af- rmsthe dialogicalarm of Marxism through its ability to engage, rather than merely refute,competing claims. As such, while the essay problema- tizesBaudrillard’ s simulationtheory, it appropriates useful insights from hiscontributions and joins them witha socialistpraxis. Simulationist andSocialist Strategies 213 ² JeanBaudrillard’ s SimulationTheory Jean Baudrillard’s (1988a,1988b, 1981, 1975) early workforeshadowed whatwould eventually becomehis of cial break from Marxism. The System ofObjects , ConsumerSociety , Fora Critique ofthe Political Economyof the Sign, and The Mirrorof Production ,all dealtfrom an arm’s length withMarxist interpretations of society. In these early texts, Baudrillard privilegedconsumption over production in attempts to understand the social meanings behindproduction. By prioritizingconsumption over production,Baudrillard emphasizes the superstructureover the basein Marxisttheory. Baudrillard was part of an intellectual movement –along withFoucault, Derrida, and Lyotard (and later their followers) – searching fornew ways to theorize the currentconditions of social life characterized by fastcapitalism and an even fastertechnology and communication system. In effect,Baudrillard and many otherFrench theoristscoming outof the 1960’s triedto put Marx backonto his superstructural feet. For example, in Fora Critique ofthe Political Economyof the Sign ,Baudrillardtried toinstitute a revolutionthrough semiotic Marxism by linking exchange anduse value withsign value, orthe waysocial meaning conspires withthe structurallogic of the economicsystem. Despitehis growing disenchantmentwith classical Marxist categories, Baudrillard was still hauntedby Marx’ s ghostsand he spenta considerableamount of text deconstructingconcepts like labor,value, andhistory. Consideredpart of the “discursiveturn” in social theory, Baudrillard advancedhis assault on Marxist theory by downplayingclass struggle andlater denigrating economic revolution. Through engagement with discourseson cultural (as opposedto historical) materialism, Baudrillard’ s love/hate relationshipwith Marxism is now purely one of animosity. Simplyput, the economicsphere cannot assume its privileged position ofalterity because the priorityof political economy is jettisoned. Thus, resistanceto capitalismseems ironicallybourgeois and passé . The economic baseis not“ the last instance”so it does not require an organicstance from aself-proclaimedtheoretical terrorist like Baudrillard.Whereas Antonio Gramsci(1971) encouraged people to become “ organic”intellectuals, Baudrillard,following Georges Bataille, adoptsthe “orgiastic”intellectual, onewho functions under the signof excess andwaste, rather than economicproduction. The proliferationof meaning in the currentsocial formationpostmodernizes the economyas adiscursiveconcept that has no inherent privilegeover other signi ers, like desire,eroticism, and seduction. Andif the capitalisteconomy is no longer “ real”in the theaterof semiurgy, then resistanceto it is likewise aspuriousstrategy. For over a century, socialistshave resistedcapitalist accumulation with the ideaof communist production.To Baudrillard,much time has been wastedresisting a system 214 Leonardo ² thatseems tostrengthen asa resultof resistance. It is as if capitalism growsas it feeds on minor subversions, like unionstrikes. On the other hand,the ironicstrategy of conforming to the system’s imperatives(what Baudrillardcalls “code”) saturatesit to the pointof collapse, much like a personwho overeats only tovomit. So rather than resist,people should assist the consumptionof commodities (i.e., the objectsystem) until,like a potlatch,there isno more to consume (Bataille 1997,1991, 1988, 1985; see also,Richardson 1994; McLaren, Leonardo, and Allen 2000,1999). However,this does not suggest that social critique is no longer valid. ToBaudrillard, critique becomes a formof seduction, not reduction (a commoncritique of Marxism). Critique is a formof gift that seduces thoseit engages torespond with greater intensity, not synthesis. Therefore, dialecticalmaterialism is out, excremental materialismis in. The pointof critiqueis not to arrive at deep embedded structures of exploitation on the roadto truth and emancipation, but rather, as Bataille mightsuggest, tolaugh excessively andcynically inthe faceof it all. Critiquebecomes an exercise ofwaste rather than production.To Baudrillard, following Bataille, exploitationis not a tragedybut a comedy.And Marxism, as the harbingerof it all, isthe biggestshow in town. It led peopleto think that adeepnarrative existed as and in the formof history through labor and classstruggle, a storyto besurebut one that assumed a trueworld. Taking from Ecclesiastes ,Baudrillard(1983a) follows the dictum:“ The simulacrum isnever thatwhich conceals the truth– itis the truthwhich conceals thatthere isnone. The simulacrumis true” (p. 1). And then again: “Whereas representationtries to absorb simulation by interpretingit as false representation,simulation envelops the wholeedi ce ofrepresentation asitselfa simulacrum”(p. 11). Following Nietzsche, Baudrillard dismantles any notionof a true,or transcendental world.