Descarcă revista în format PDF - idea

a urca sau pe care nu mai trebuie sæ ne-o reamintim, ci pe care trebuie
s-o adoptæm, s-o folosim, sæ ne-o însuøim, întotdeauna pe
bucæflele, fragmentar, imperfect. Accesorii de Supraumanitate. Supraomul
în accesorii. Omul-accesoriu.
Dupæ modernitate, am scæpat ræmînînd de cæruflæ, într-un fericit, salvator
anacronism faflæ de Sinele industrial-politic. Doar o secundæ
istoricæ a durat senzaflia de uøurare. Acum sîntem iar mînafli, dar nu
macroistoric øi politic, ci microistoric øi economico-tehnologic: zilnic,
clipæ de clipæ – pastoral-economic, prin invidie. Politicul s-a retras.
KONSUM MACHT FREI
Cu tranziflia noastræ de la comunism la capitalism, flærile, popoarele,
societæflile, statele, oamenii din Estul Europei, noi am nimerit nu într-un
capitalism aøezat, sigur de sine, aflat într-un stadiu de puræ funcflionare
sau într-o evoluflie internæ, de „reaøezare“, ci într-o macrotranziflie a
capitalismului însuøi, într-un capitalism în acelaøi timp exacerbat øi diluat,
„victimæ“ a propriilor tendinfle de fond, hiperbolizate øi devenite
irepresibile, un capitalism „ieøit din flîflîni“ øi, deopotrivæ, „cæzut“ irecuperabil
sub el însuøi, funcflionînd prin emfazæ, printr-o perpetuæ „stare
de excepflie“.
De aici, spaima øi graba de a da nume, de a proclama Globalizarea:
gest performativ pur, clasicæ disimulare a performativului în constatativ
(descriptiv). Autohipnozæ.
Nu de realitate e vorba, ci de un mod (grilæ) de lecturæ, de interpretare
prin numire.
Cînd „referentul“ lipseøte sau este haotic, adicæ întotdeauna, deci cu
atît mai mult cînd aceastæ crizæ de substanflæ este, ca acum, hiperbolizatæ
de starea noastræ postmodern/posttraumaticæ, spaima de anomie
øi de a-numire ne împinge la incantaflii liniøtitor consensuale, fæcîndu-ne
sæ ne øoptim des, tot timpul, unii la urechea celorlalfli øi pe toate
canalele: „Avem lume! Lumea existæ! Globalizare! Mondializare!
Globalizare! Mondializare! Sînt sigure! Este cert!“.
Øtirile media sînt, clipæ de clipæ, Bunævestirea: „Avem nume! Træim (sîntem)
Epocæ!“.
HABEMUS PAPAM!
HABEMUS NOMEN!
„Actanfli“ tot mai mici, mereu individuali øi chiar subindividualizafli, infraindividualizafli,
microindividualizafli, omul descompus în „træsæturi minimale“,
ca dorinfle øi interese (dupæ ce au reformulat øi eliminat
dorinflele, ca „iraflionale“, interesele sînt incitate sæ redevinæ din nou dorinfle,
pofte: de piaflæ) – scufundafli într-o „Lume a Binelui“, ca piaflæcîmp
globalæ.
Ideologia „filosoficæ“ anglo-saxonæ a individualismului metodologic øi a
economiei neoclasice presupune præpastia, abisul de netrecut din sînul
unui individ redus la el însuøi, flinut între propriile limite, acflionînd
direct în oceanul de piaflæ.
Nivelurile intermediare, altfel spus, identitæflile „tradiflionale“ de control
øi de standardizare, precum „popoarele“, „nafliunile“ sau „partidele“,
sînt înlocuite øi reformulate. Cele vechi øi-au jucat, gata, rolul „modernizator“.
Acum, microcolectiv, trebuie sæ fim altceva: sexe, etnii, organizaflii,
asociaflii – consumatori de Bine, nu doar de bunuri. Binele oferit
politically but micro-historically and economically-technologically: everyday, moment
by moment – pastorally-economically goaded by envy. The political has stepped aside.
KONSUM MACHT FREI
With our transition from communism to capitalism, the countries, the peoples, the
societies, the states, the men in Eastern Europe, we did not hit upon an established,
self-confident capitalism at a stage of pure functioning or that of internal evolution,
of “resetting”, but we stepped into a macro-transition of capitalism itself, into a capitalism
at the same time exacerbated and diluted, “victim” of its own substantial,
hyperbolized tendencies which have become irrepressible, into an “unhinged” capitalism
which has simultaneously irreclaimably “fallen” under itself, thus functioning
through emphasis, through a perpetual “state of exception”.
This brings forth the fear and the haste to give name to, to proclaim the Globalization:
purely performative gesture, classic disguise of performativeness under the certifiableness
(descriptiveness). Self-hypnosis.
This does not involve reality, but a way of reading (a reading grid), a way of interpreting
through naming.
When the “referent” is missing or is chaotic – that would be always – so even more
when this substance crisis is, as now, hyperbolized by our postmodern/post-traumatic
state, the fear of anomy and no-name-ness pushes us toward relievingly consensual
incantations, making us whisper one another, on all the channels, often, all the
time: “We have world! The world exists! Globalization! Mondialization! Globalization!
Mondialization! They are certain! It is for sure!”
The media news are in every moment the Annunciation 3 : “We have name! We live
(are) an Epoch!“
HABEMUS PAPAM!
HABEMUS NOMEN!
Ever smaller „actants”, always individual and even under-individualized, infra-individualized,
micro-individualized actants – the man decomposed into “minimal traits”,
into desires and interests (after having reformulated and eliminated desires as “irrational”,
the interests are incited to change into market desires, cravings) – submerged
into a “World of Good”, a global market-field.
The Anglo-Saxon “philosophical” ideology of methodological individualism and neoclassical
economics is based on the uncrossable chasm, abyss between individualities
reduced to themselves, kept between their own limits, acting directly on the market
ocean.
The intermediary levels, or otherwise put, the “traditional” controlling and standardizing
identities, such as the “peoples”, the “nations” or the Parties” are replaced, they are
reformulated. The old ones have played their “modernizing” role, it is all over. Now we
must micro-collectively be something else: sexes, ethnic groups, organisations, associations
– consumers of Good, not only of goods. The Good offered cannot be but consumed;
the vital, existential relation with Good and Truth cannot be other than that of
consumption, which is palely, barely sensibly related to the full-bodied Eucharist.
We do not have access to the production of goods, of Good as world-market, we do
not feel that we participate to it, other than insensibly, mediately, collectively.
Technology, the world-technology produces them (and self-reproduces) automatically.
There is no “mass” self-individualisation other than by the consumption of goods.
The production of good is immanently, immediately, contiguously inaccessible
(no one can appropriate it individually). It does not offer itself except to consumption,
it can be only consumed, lived and “embodied” through consumption, “ingurgitated”.
Essentially, consumption must be somatized, which means that by the
176