|
Transition or Interregnum?| title | Transition or Interregnum? |
|---|
| start_date | 2026/05/28 |
|---|
| schedule | 14h-16h |
|---|
| online | no |
|---|
| location_info | salle de réunion de l'IJN, Pavillon Jardin |
|---|
| summary | In our times, talk of ‘transitioning’ to a world without fossil fuels has become pervasive. Despite its prevalence in environmental politics, this article argues that it is counterproductive to envisage the current conjuncture through the prism of a transition. I defend this claim by first outlining three respects in which the transition paradigm falls short : political corruptibility, historical inadequacy and conceptual confusion. Rather than recuperate the meaning of transitioning for progressive purposes, the constructive part of the article then asks which analytical framework should take its place. My proposal is to take inspiration from Antonio Gramsci’s notion of an interregnum to illuminate the distinctive political challenges of the Anthropocene. Gramsci’s conceptual apparatus foregrounds the fundamental openness of the future and thus facilitates a better understanding of various ‘morbid symptoms’, whose proliferation today can only be explained through a theoretical approach that combines attention to both individual well-being and social pathologies. This perspective also affects techno-optimist celebrations of our species’ ingenuity and skill, such as when megalomaniac billionaires like Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos fantasize about space travel as a "solution" to the problems of climate change. In the fantasy realm dreamed up by today’s oligarchic class, under no circumstances must there be any space left for uncertainty, lest the immense perils and (unexpected opportunities) of an organic crisis become apparent. |
|---|
| responsibles | Thaler |
|---|
Workflow history| from state (1) | to state | comment | date |
|---|
| submitted | published | | 2026/05/27 12:54 UTC |
| |
|