in a series of essays that will follow, not necessarily in order (we refuse to bind ourselves to any chrono-logic, it fucks us up), we will develop the concept of nomadic nationalism.
this is not for the sake of exercising abstraction, but to historicize our particular existence as a dividual of colonized nationality who have both assimilated to and dissimilated from the culture of Empire in the extent we have.
we believe our experience is not unique, and we believe expressing this experience will allow us to make new connections and strengthen old ones, proliferating escape routes from the prevailing stratified logic of Empire, setting up the conditions for a revolutionary dérive.
thus this will be a form of non-reactionary nationalism.
by “non-reactionary” we mean one that is not counter-revolutionary to Communism; by “nationalism” we mean the Fanonian nationalism, but one extended to and used by those of colonized nationalities living in the Metropoli of Empire.
we will momentarily identify the national subject along the lines of the deleuzoguattarian nomad, and in this moment, reveal the topological and metric structures of the territory we occupy, which we will momentarily bracket and submit to analysis in order to develop theoretical toolkits to walk through its walls.
we say “momentarily” because, although we are making an identification, within the identification we will place the kernel of its own dissolution, by refusing attachment to any human transcendence. and because we reject the significance of human transcendence, nomadic nationalism may be regarded as a nonhuman immanent humanism.
we also say “momentarily” because the point isn’t to analyze forever: any wise thinker understands that every particularity may be represented in infinitely different forms.
the point is to act, agir.
thus nomadic nationalism is a concept that only exists for a moment: the duration of this moment is contingent on the finalization of internationalism. once internationalism is achieved, it will become sublated into the category which will emerge at that moment...
a friend told us, “the story we need to achieve is one that is properly not a story, it is integrated with and is the world: it just needs revealing.”
so this is what we do: we tell the story of my becoming, which is the story of our becoming, which is the story of the actual movement of Communism, which is itself the movement of Art. it is a story of past movements leading up to this moment, right Here, right Now, becoming the marble immediately before us: la mise-en-scène.
we are to continue the story by living this story, and as we do, we sculpt a new future, making use of every moment we have, because every moment will have become a moment of world-building.
what story are we to tell if not the story of making Revolution?
we are the Revolution.