Book Review: Capital’s Grave: Neofeudalism and the New Class Struggle by Jodi Dean

Jodi Dean’s newest book Capital’s Grave: Neofeudalism and the New Class Struggle, published by Verso Books, is a fascinating explanation of the current state of society and how it may be backsliding into a more feudal form of existence. The book represents a continuation of Dean’s past literary ventures into Marxism, labour and communism, incorporating the current political, economic and social landscape with ease. The book is split into six chapters discussing Marx’s Grundrisse, stagist Marxism, the signs of Neofeudalism, widespread apathy, the servant class and more.

Dean describes neofeudalism as a new form of society that sees the lords and peasants of feudalism return with a modern twist. Naturally, Dean incorporates or responds to the writings of other prominent Marxist scholars who have made similar claims: McKenzie Wark, Cédric Durand, Yanis Varoufakis, Katharina Pistor and Brett Christophers. These references serve to help situate Dean’s version of neofeudalism: the lords are the uber wealthy while the peasants are those dependent on them for work and housing. Dean argues that the two prominent powers of the feudal lord, economic and legal authority, have reemerged with arbitration and the like taking the place of legal authority, while cryptocurrency and rent have replaced economic authority.

Dean’s first basis for her argument comes in the form of an examination of Uber from the perspective of Grundrisse. Dean provides some valuable context on the rise of Uber, using venture capital the company spent millions on incentives for drivers and customers – pushing out pre-existing taxi companies. An intentional consequence of all of this is that Uber is now the only taxi service in town, meaning that drivers are reliant on Uber for work, reestablishing part of the serf-lord relationship. Dean discusses how driver’s vehicles shift into a means for accumulation. Dean writes of this dependency saying, ‘The company puts others’ cars to use, in effect getting cars to employ their owners’ (p. 40).

The previous chapter left me wondering if neofeudalism is a new stage of capitalism, is it truly a backslide into feudalism, or is it something new entirely? Dean must have anticipated this kind of question while writing the book and makes it readily apparent that stages aren’t black and white, they blend together in a transitionary period. Dean posits that the worker has lost and that the traditional stage progress (slavery to feudalism, to capitalism, to socialism, to communism) is inaccurate. Dean then cites Negri’s interpretation of what a working-class defeat looks like: a breakdown of the relationship between surplus value and capitalist command. Traditionally, capitalism would dictate that surplus value be reinvested and used to further expand the company or exert influence. Contrary to that tradition, modern corporations buy back stocks and give pay raises to their executives. Dean describes it as ‘Capital’s laws of motion turn into their opposites as the drive to accumulates incentivizes plunder and hoarding rather than investment and improvement’ (p. 70).

Dean’s next chapter lays out what she sees the basic features of neofeudalism: reduced sovereignty, the return of lord and serf dynamics (see Rentier Capitalism by Brett Christophers), the economic hinterlandization of non-urban society, and widespread feelings of anxiety and insecurity. The weakening of sovereignty can be seen in how the new ‘lords’ skirt around law by bribing officials or use international economic policy to override local law. The issue of hinterlandization comes from classical feudalism, traditionally cities were ruled by the dominant class who then wealth from the surrounding hinterlands. In neofeudalism, this takes the form of higher costs of living in urban centres where public goods are privatized to serve the elite. The hinterlands meanwhile are the site of a great deal of loss as people move away and financial opportunities are few, referring to this Dean writes ‘with closures of hospitals and schools, and diminution of basic services, life becomes more desperate and uncertain’ (p. 96). The issue of catastrophic anxiety is rooted in neoliberalism’s destruction of social safety nets. Dean links this anxiety to the rise of conspiracy theories and the reemerge of paganism as a form of regaining ‘control’. This then flows into the penultimate chapter which links this sense of anxiety to Lacanian illness. Dean explains the relationship between Lacanian illness and identity politics writing that ‘identity politics and its reflexivization collapse the signifier into the subject’ (p. 111). Dean ends the chapter examining the interplay of Lacanian illness and rising social apathy.

In this final chapter, Dean introduces a more political activist tone, discussing the purpose of the communist party and how it can fight off neofeudalism. Dean identifies three areas in which communism can be used to fight against neofeudalism: climate, universal basic services and the servant class. It is on the issue of climate that Dean blindsided me, leading me to simply annotate ‘What?’ on the page where it first appears. Dean suggests that communism will enable the fight against the effects of climate change (How? By all accounts we’ve long since crossed the line of no return) or that a seemingly global, communist government will put an end to fossil fuel extraction and transition the entire world to a new source of energy while restructuring consumption and production globally.

My gripes with the climate argument aside, this book is perfect for a class on political theory or critical cultural theory. It readily describes modern political, governmental and cultural phenomena in an approachable yet nuanced manner. It cites a wide range of Marxist scholars, from the well-known historical figures like Antonio Negri, to the modern scholars like Yanis Varoufakis. It would be a challenge to find a book more fitting for teaching today’s students about the current Marxist outlook on the world. Throughout the text, the signs of the ‘death’ of capitalism are apparent. It is like playing a game of Cluedo, slowly gathering hints that identify the killer, the location and the weapon. Dean’s answer: it was the economic elite in the halls of government with neoliberal policy.