The Separation between State and Religion

In time we will realize that Democracy is the entitlement of individuals to every right that was in its times alloted to kings. The right to speak and decide, to be treated with decency, to serve and be served by people in a State of “love” that is, to serve with one’s work for the development of ‘life’. To belong to the Kingdom of Human Beings without racial, national, social or academic separations. To love and be loved. To die at the service of the whole and be honored in one’s death, for one’s life and work was legitimately valued. To be graceful and grateful. To have the pride and the humility of being One with the Universe, One with every realm of Existence, One with every living and deceased soul. To treat with dignity and be treated with dignity for One is dignified together with All others and Life itself. To walk the path of compassion, not in the sorrow of guilt but in the pride of being. To take responsability for one’s mistakes and sufferings and stand up again and again like a hero and a heroine and face the struggle that is put at one’s feet and in one’s hands. Millions of people, millions and millions of people might take many generations to realize the consciousness of our humaneness but there is no other dignified path for the human being.

The “work” as I conceive it is psychological and political. Psychology is the connection between the different dimensions within one’s self and Politics is the actualization of that consciousness in our practical lives. Religion is the ceremony that binds the connectedness between the individual and the Universe. The separation between religion, politics and science, the arts and sports is, in the sphere of the social, the reflection of the schizophrenia within the individual and the masses. The dialogue between individuality and the "human" belongs to consciousness. The tendency to develop cults resides in the shortcomings we’are finding in life as it is structured today. “Life” has become the private property of a few priviledged who cannot profit from it because as soon as it is appropriated it stops to be “life” or “life-giving”.

We are all the victims of our own invention and each one is called upon to find solutions. The only problem is believing our selves incapable of finding them. We are now free to use all Systems of knowledge objectively, sharing them without imposing our will on each other. To become objective about our lives means to understand that the institutions that govern its experience are critically important. That we are one with the governments, one with the religious activities that mark its pace, that the arena’s in which we move our bodies and the laboratories in which we explore our possibilities are ALL part and parcel of our own personal responsibility. That WE ARE ONE WITH EACH OTHER AND EVERYTHING AROUND US and acknowledge for ourselves a bond of love in conscious responsibility. That we human beings know ourselves part of each other and are willing and able to act on our behalf for the benefit of each and every individual. That we no longer allow governments, industries, universities or any other institution to run along unchecked by the objective principles of humaneness. That we do not allow gurus to abuse their power or governors to steal the taxes and use them to their personal advantage in detriment of the whole. That we do not allow abuse from anyone anywhere because life is too beautiful to do so and that we are willing to stop the rampant crime with the necessary compassion Conscious knowledge is every individual's right. Conscious action is every individual's duty.

Blog Archive

Monday 21 March 2011

Study of The Emotional Life of Governmental Power Part 3 'Subjectivation'



32 The psychic in Butler circulates in zones of un-intelligibility, is

surplus to the requirements for subject-hood and is disruptive to it.   This is a pretty familiar

psychoanalytic account of resistance.   For example, in Rose,

33

the disruptive potential of the

psyche is read through the Lacanian lens of an  ‛alienating destiny‛ wherein the subject is

rendered permanently unstable through the constitutive loss of (the possibility of) selfidentification.


Elena: if this means what I understand it’s very important and beautifully put. That is what I’ve been saying about cults for so long: that members are “rendered permanently unstable through the constitutive loss of (the possiblitily of) selfidentification.”_______________

   In Jefferson,

34

the ambivalence of Mike Tyson’s selfhood (as convicted rapist, as

superstar boxer, as hypermasculine superstud, as  ‛juvenile delinquent,‛ and as  ‛little fairy

boy‛) is understood through the Kleinian notion of an anxiety-reducing, psychical defencemechanism.  Tie invokes the Freudian motif of ‛the uncanny‛ as a ‛special shade of anxiety‛

35

which arises from  ‛a return of unresolved psychic dilemmas‛

36

– such as the realisation that

what had seemed familiar (a sense of self, for example) turns out to be disturbingly and,

perhaps, pleasurably strange.   Similarly, Butler has applied Freud’s concept of melancholia to

understand the trauma of the impossibility of coherent subject formation; as she puts it,  ‛the

melancholia that grounds the subject (and hence always threatens to unsettle and disrupt that

ground) signals an incomplete and irresolvable grief.‛

Elena: For me, there is no such a thing as an “irresolvable grief”. All grief can be mitigated. I should know!________________



37

In each account, subjects’ resistance is located in an affective dimension of psychic life 

alienation, anxiety, uncanniness and melancholia.   As such, it is not clear how these various

psychic (or emotional) states reformulate or subvert the conditions of subjection, or redirect the

discursive and material effects of power, so much as remain in a state of permanent powerlessness at the margins of subject formation.  And what are we to make of a psychic life  that is

                                               

31 Slavoj Žižek, The Mestases of Enjoyment: Six Essays on Woman and Causality (London: Verso, 1994), 56-57, cited

in Tie, 162, Emphasis added.

32

  Butler, 86.

33

Jacqueline Rose, Sexuality in the Field of Vision (London: Verso, 1987).

34 Tony Jefferson, ‚From ‘Little Fairy Boy’ to the ‘Compleat Destroyer’: Subjectivity and Transformation in the

Biography of Mike Tyson,‛ in Mairtin Mac An Ghaill (ed.),  Understanding Masculinities (Buckingham: Open

University Press, 1996), and Tony Jefferson, ‚The Tyson Rape Trial: The Law, Feminism and Emotional

‘Truth,’‛ Social and Legal Studies, 6, 2 (1997), 281-301.

35 Anneleen Masschelein, ‚The Concept as Ghost: Conceptualization of the Uncanny in Late Twentieth Century

Theory,‛ Mosaic, 35, 1 (2002), 54 cited in Tie, 170.

36 Tie, 170.

37 Butler, 23.Campbell: The Emotional Life

42

energised by such a limited repertoire of emotions?  ‛Good humours‛ such as delight,

excitement, satisfaction and optimism do not feature in a psychoanalytic register of affects;

Elena: It seems very strange that they’ve not dealt with positive emotions. Delight, excitement, satisfaction and optimism I would not even consider positive emotions but there can be delight, satisfaction and optimism as a result of experiencing them but not excitement. They do not excite but give tranquility, peace. __________




yet

there are no grounds to suppose that any emotional state – apart from apathy, perhaps – cannot

be experienced as excess.


Elena: I can’t agree either, apathy is in fact the chief emotion that most people have become used to experiencing because it is only through apathy that they can avoid experiencing the suffering from the state of affairs in which they and most other people live. Apathy is the negative emotion that buffers the suffering.__________




 Citing de Beauvoir,

38 McNay notes, ‛the language of psychoanalysis

suggests that the drama of the individual unfolds only within the self and this obscures the

extent to which the individual’s life and actions involve primarily a ‛relation to the world.‛‛

Elena: Bravo de Beauvoir! But not so true either. The drama unfolds within the individual and the deeper the individual can go within him and her self the more they can bring from other dimensions within to their “present” outer world. Then the dialogue between objective realities can begin. _________

39

 

There is clearly merit in drawing attention to the libidinal, kinetic energy of psychic life as a

destabilising force, but without an account of intersubjective relations, in which power is always

implicated, it induces/incites neither complicity nor resistance within processes of subjectivation.


Elena: Perhaps so and if so, then in processes in which not power but true love are involved then instead of ‘subjectivation’ there is ‘objectivation’. This is what is important about all this exploration: that we come to understand the solutions and put a stop to the causes creating the problem.______________





A significant route out of this impasse is found within the Deleuzian notion of ‛the fold.‛ 

Deleuze invents this metaphor to denote a ‛zone of subjectivation,‛

40

adding that ‛subjectivation

is created by folding.‛


‛The fold‛ does not presume a self with any essential interiority; nor is

it the effect of an exterior field of power relations; it is, rather  ‛a threshold, a door, a becoming

between two multiplicities.‛



E: From now on for Elena: E: will be good enough and I’ll continue to end with a line________

This zone of subjectivation that Deleuze calls the fold could well be the description of the ‘becoming’ of ‘false personality’. I would define ‘false personality’ as the personality that develops ‘mechanically’ until individuals are able to question their own self and the world around them. Until they are able to ‘transform’ what they’ve been ‘conditioned’ to be for what they choose to become. The word false for me, is used only in as much as it doesn’t represent the person that the I within the individual consciously chooses to be but the I that external influences ‘naturally’ develop. As far as I am concerned, the word conditioned personality would be a much better choice than false because it is easy to judge the personality for being ‘false’ but it is not in fact false, it is simply conditioned and it is very real to the individual experiencing life through it.




42 The notion of ‛the fold,‛ then, not only rejects psychoanalytical

suppositions of an interiorised psyche, but also addresses (and overcomes) the paradox of Foucault’s constituted-constituting subject.


E: This would be good to explore deeper.__________


43 As far as Deleuze is concerned  ‛self-realization‛ has

nothing to do with a psychic residue or unconscious excess, neither is it the effect of the limits

and exclusions of individualizing practices; he argues:

There never ‚remains‛ anything of the subject, since he (sic) is to be created on each

occasion, like a focal point of resistance, on the basis of the folds which subjectivize

knowledge and bend each power<   The struggle for subjectivity presents itself, therefore,

as the right to difference, variation and metamorphosis.‛


Elena: of course I would need to read these authors extensively before I can disagree so much with them but from what is here I’ll still dare to disagree even if one of the problems is that I am not familiar with the language they are using, the meanings behind the words as they are conveying them.

In the first part of Deleuze here on self-realization, I would agree that there is nothing left of the subject when the subject ‘objectifies’ his or herself but this idea that the struggle for subjectivity presents itself as the right to difference, variation and metamorphosis is strange. There is no struggle for subjectivity until individuals begin to ‘objectify’ themselves through the struggle between what they’ve become and what they ‘will’ themselves to be. Perhaps that too is false for ‘deforming’ essence into what the outside world conditions the individual to become is certainly a struggle that involves tremendous suffering. But there is no right to difference and variation on the contrary, in this ‘phase’ of development, the pressure is precisely on repetition. Society tends to develop psychological “amoebas” willing to repeat and conform and were it not for the fact that the human spirit beats within every individual, nothing would ever change. Every generation questions and reforms, adds and also repeats, solves some of the obstacles and repeats those that it couldn’t overcome.__________

44
Deleuze’s thesis of enfolding has been taken up by a number of governmentality theorists, most

notably Dean, whose essay stands, perhaps, as the clearest exemplar of Deleuzian-Foucauldian

eclecticism on matters of government.

45 Dean undertakes what he refers to as a  ‛critical

ontology of our selves‛ to explore how modes of ‛governmental authority,‛ and ‛rationalities of

rule‛ are doubled or enfolded into our ways of being, thinking and doing – ‛(i)n this sense,‛ he

                                                

38

  Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1972), 80.

39 McNay, Gender and Agency, 129.

40 Gilles Deleuze, ‚Foldings, or the Inside of Thought (Subjectivation),‛ in  Michael Kelly (ed.),  Critique and

Power: Recasting the Foucault/Habermas Debate (Cambridge: MIT, 1995), 337 Diagram.

41

  Ibid., 323.

42 Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari, Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Transl. by Robert Hurley, Mark

Seem & Helen R.  Lane (Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press, 1983), 29.

43

In ‚Afterword: The Subject and Power‛, Foucault talks of struggles against the ‘government of

individuation’ which ties an individual to ‘his own identity in a constraining way’


E: Yes, the constraint is powerful and de-structuring the conditioned personality is what has been traditionally called ‘esotericism’ ‘work on one’s self’. _____________





(Ibid., 212.)  However, he

leaves us with no analytical tools to think through how, in these ‘moments of struggle,’ we can overcome the

submission of subjectivity.


Elena: We would need to ask if he ever undertook such a process. What is fascinating about Foucault is that even if he didn’t undertake such a process he seems to have understood society’s intricacies intuitively and managed to bring that intuition to a language that we could understand. I wonder to what extent his homosexuality helped because homosexuals already have to create an ‘other’ self to exist in a society that tends to reject them.

44

  Deleuze, 325.

45 See, for example, Nikolas Rose, ‚Government, Authority and Expertise in Advanced Liberalism,‛ Economy

and Society, 22, 3 (1993), 283-299, and Nikolas Rose, ‚Authority and the Genealogy of Subjectivity,‛ in Paul

Heelas, Scott Lash & Paul Morris (eds.), De-Traditionalization: Authority and Self in an Age of Cultural Uncertainty

(Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1995).Foucault Studies, No. 9, pp. 35-53.

43

writes, ‛one might speak of a folding of exterior relations of authority to sculpt a domain that

can act on and of itself but which, at the same time, is simply the inside marked out by that

folding.‛

Elena: In other posts, I’ve been using the word ‘sculpting’ to mean that folding.

Bye for now.______

No comments:

Post a Comment