Radicaux les plus libres
par David Turgeon |imnt_0201-0001|
[traduction française non disponible]
“so too, in a political sense, a free radical could be someone operating
within a conservative environment where the traditional order rules, so much
so that it may refuse to change, adapt, and evolve so that it can stay
‘healthy.’ to survive, it needs to make sure the potential causes of its
cancer go away, permanently, if at all possible.”
— brian carroll, “automadness: terrors of EM research” (2001)
i saw ayn rand reffered to just the other day on some mailing list as a
“defender of freedom to the point of radicalism,” which gave me a chill &
a chuckle at the same time. what our title pretends we are is “the freest of
radicals,” implying radicalism along & at once with freedom, whereas ayn
rand would have freedom (for herself) before radicalism (to get there). but
of course, our position is politically untenable in its very terms. freedom
impairs the practicality of true radicalism… & yet…
can you not get along by not being friends? freedom is a uniter along with
an individualizer. radicalism is a socializer along with a dissenter. of
course, i’m painting large strokes. but perhaps my proposition aims at
accepting the fact of their imperfect marriage, & to make it fruitful on
both a social & an individual level. i think the goal is that if there is
a game, there are plenty of different rules on every level, & the
understanding of this existence of many rules becomes a “rule of rules.” it’s
a thrilling prospect, but it’s a risk too: how do you “enforce,” not to say
“justify” this meta-legality?
with this in mind, perhaps one may conceive of art as a simulation space,
as a means to resolve, or at least attempt, this complex, perhaps dangerous,
problem. i don’t doubt that this has been done before, & this is actually
more of a reason to try. i believe with marshall mcluhan that technical
advances (“new media”) may effect other spaces such as social; internet is
already a powerful way to conduct new community experiments. prudently
seeking positive change — & keeping in mind that this change must be
threefold: individual (the gall to step forward), social (care for whom &
what we may affect) & the both of them considered together, as a third
party, for complex, changing systems require a momentum of 3. & the new
possibility, now unveiled: to be “a radical, freely”; hence “everything,
moderately.” as for the danger: this whole thing sounds too metaphysical for
its own good.
David Turgeon [xi-01]
|