Imagining the thereafter, abolishing the present

There exists a common trope in crude left-wing theorising: ‘will [institution] exist after The Revolution?’. Putting the amorphousness of ‘The Revolution’ as a concept to one side, this is a simple fallacy of ‘revolutionary’ thinking that, itself, needs to be abolished above any of the institutions it trains its eyes upon: The Family, Restaurants, Money, Work, etc etc.

If the central imperative of revolution – in its immediate phase – is to upturn wholesale the existing Order of Things, then no concepts or structures are immutable. No re-ordering can be possible without first a necessary ‘de-ordering’.

While people may be ‘occupied with revolutionizing themselves and things, creating something that did not exist before’, as Marx writes, and doing so by ‘anxiously [conjuring] up the spirits of the past to their service’, this does not inherently beget, as if all temporalities are in symbiosis, an essential utility in the dragging of banal, unplanned – and unplannable – inanities of the scarcely imaginable future into the present.

And thus the only sensible answer to such questions is: who cares? It is a fundamental waste of time to answer it with any more thought.