Autonomy, Responsibility and Freedom - Interview Part 2
Read Part 1 - Autonomy, Responsibility and Freedom - Interview Part 1
"Failure is the foundation of success; success is the lurking place of failure". Laozi
Sara Aleixo - Concentrate autonomy in a unique pole that is the Power: deeply, Autonomy and Power are always in relation...?
Charlie - Yes, the Power has, in the background, control over the volitional freedom (meaning choice and exercise of will), in the world and in human beings.
I remembered now about a study came to the conclusion that after all, who is richer and has more Power, has a super longevity that exceeds the average of the non-self-governing, the worker, sometimes in twenty or thirty years duration.
And it is not only the question of being able to buy health, or to buy more doctors or more ... this is not the big question.
The big question has to do with the exercise of volitional capacity, or who exercises it has the ability to last for many more years. But this capitalist society this capacity is concentrated in those who have Power are those who exercise their will.
Sara Aleixo - The will to Power ...?
Charlie - No, it's not the will Power, you have to get to Schopenhauer, who said that the will was all in man, Nietzsche was dangerous, because someone later misinterpreted the concept of will, because it supported the rise of fascism without intention . It was an independent writer against Power, which ends up being used for Power.
Even then, to explain the fascist will, the volition, which now has the latest repercussions on some satanic societies ...
Now we must speak of will as we speak to autonomy.
Is there the will in satanic organizations, who think they use to an extreme the will of others in its way : the will is exercised by those who have the Power and can use the other as an object, from holding a higher Power.
These satanic organizations for those who violate, the shredded, the broken, destroying minds of those who initiate the rits, those in Power do not destroy themselves psychically, and perhaps last longer years because they are able to exercise their volitional capacity upon all others.
Because when I do not exert my will, I am not autonomous ... the will is a power and if I am autonomous I can exercise it much more on the environment
But if I do not I exercise it , we are energy and that energy and if we are not autonomous.That energy turns turns inside against us and destroy us, because, perhaps, is not the physical work that leads the worker to die earlier, the structure in which it is inserted that does not allow it to exercise any volitional capacity, and that in the end is precisely by consuming, not only physically, but spiritually and then it comes up to hurt or own family or community.
Because when it comes to family, one supposedly has the Power, and exercise this volitional capacity of a satanic way, without realizing that, in addition to our will, is the will of all the others around us. And this is the great question of democracy, "Policracy" or "Multicracy", if you want.
Sara Aleixo - Now returning to the case worker, how can a person exercise his will ... as there is possibility of autonomy when we are always in relationship with others? I have spoken with someone who told me that it is impossible because we are always in mental, cultural, social structures ... it is always co-relationship, is not it? As autonomy is possible?
Charlie - I think it is within the paradigm of autonomy devoid of the concept of Power , autonomy is to act with responsibility and accountability mean to exercise my will, since this exercise did not go to prevent the other from exercising his/her will.
Sara Aleixo - And now the opposite, and the will of others prevents us from exercising our?
Charlie - Then there is a difference between will and action, that is, we are people with some permanent values, that when we enter into social interaction, we rely on virtual values (in approach to commune with the values of others) and this is part of our own adaptation.
Get to know a person and we will see to what extent the exercise of our will does not invade the territory of the other person.
But there are people who do not have autonomy, and they "like" that their territory is invaded, there are others that have a great autonomy and do not allow it...
So the big question that you make is born from interaction.
Of course, there must always be cultural and educational relations to convince the person that autonomy has nothing to do with a capitalist concept, and one continue to exert our will knocking everything and everyone, seeing the consequences of our actions on others, but as for new concept of autonomy, that has to do with exercising my will without having to run over others.
But we are flexible and human, and the exercise of the will ... We may have the will to do one thing, but when we are immersed in a social structure, as we have to be, when I have to exercise my will, there is always the others.
In this exercise of will, but precisely, we are in social, we are not isolated in our will.
And then there will be a game, but there has to do with who is democratically educated or not, there will be a game where it comes to a consensus of wills, but as each was educated in a democratic system , participated in the preparation, and then, in accepting that his will after all, could not be exercised by, and if exercise there, the other is better and the person also benefits from this, but it has always to do with cultural education.
Sara Aleixo - But there are always constraints, that is, there is a person who is born, their autonomy will be completely conditioned by family education, the area of the country you live in, the schools they attend, the kind of people you know. Where is the pure will ?.
Charlie - Do not confuse desire with autonomy, autonomy is something that is gained by the exercise of our will.
That trilogy of what each thinks is, autonomy, freedom and responsibility, comes into operation when we exercise our will. And, say it is the interaction between these factors determines the way we determine our will on others.
But deep down, I think it has to do with the two concepts of autonomy, one exercise the without t looking out, and try to put yourself in the Other situation, feel the Other, and exercise autonomous, an the other capitalistic and fascistic will, without interest in the impact it has on the other person's desire to exercise.
Society can create three types of education that model in social terms these three vectors of autonomy-responsibility-freedom.
It turned out that one can create three types of education:
Education "laissez faire- laissez passer", appoint me leader of that, but I do not lead anything, I do not know what is happening.
Then there is the democratic:, appoint me leader for me to put those people to interact without me there to exercise my will, but the aim must be to put all the people to exercise their free will.
Or create a fascist education as my teachers for twenty years. although they were all good teachers ... only half of them were totally autocratic and self-centered
Come to the conclusion that is only in the democratic group, that people really changed because they exercise of their will in discussion and experimentation
Perhaps describing an example, is easier.
The idea was that the Americans should eat the offal of animals instead of meat, because it was during the war. Nobody liked offal of animals and is was a disposable.
But as it was during the war it was decided to take advantage of this disposable and then Kurt Lewin has created three types of groups, experiencing three different types of educational leadership, to see which of these groups began to eat these offal of animals.
We came to the conclusion that tin the Laissez faire- Laissez passer " group, everybody talked about it, but no one won the consumption habits.
In the fascist leadership group (directive), there may have been someone who would change, but only because those ones had established a relationship of fear with the directive educator.
It turned out that the democratic leadership group, where there was an individual asking people to tell everybody how it was done, and then send them home to think about how those snacks could be made and then came back discuss it in group.
In this group, where all people have exercised their wills, it had achieved 90% of the group internalized habits of eating offal of animals.
What is behind this such a social group, is the model of education of the education system, that belongs to Power and is managed by it.
This brings us to the big question, which is the oldest, we have to go back to Shakespeare, between being and not being.
Sara Aleixo - But how is that going to be? Democratic societies are those that can promote more autonomy in people, is not it? This becomes a cycle ...
Charlie - You always cycle. Evolve as it develops the culture, evolves awareness of people who are subject to this cycle, to this education and that culture. This is the a constant cycle of chicken and egg. Egg and chicken are an inseparable structural unit. Egg producing chickens, which will produce. It's just one being.
Sara Aleixo - In that case, how do you put the egg of autonomy in a fascist society?
Charlie - Modifying such an education system in the background, with the diversity of cultural communication, may be open a few cases of people follow some new models of structuralist alternative.
The problem is that people will report the a-historical revolutions, that happened many years ago, to today make the revolution, and today there is no revolutionary idealist philosophy, which causes a "Nascent State,"
Dr. Alberoni, which in his doctoral thesis called the Genesis raises the question of such a group of autonomous will. Marxism was a very beautiful idealism that leads to the equality end without exercising Power, everyone would have access to Power.
When humans take in idealism, one must realize the volitional state of the people who believed in this idealism, and is here to blur the collective personal will.
The "nascent state" is precisely when people look at each other realizing that they all have a common volitional state, there is a personal volitional state.
In these states "nascent states", artists and philosophers followed, when taken by individuals, and after transformed into institutions ...
It, as idealistic, has the will of a people to become autonomous and be democratic, but it appears that after people taking Power and using that idealism and the exercise over the public will, transforming it in a system of rules, that will just destroy this idealistic state and turns it into a material thing, if we are to a Lenin or Stalin, is to create a cultural system that destroys the collective will to zero, passing them to exercise their free will (a good example of bad exercise of the will).
Lenin, killed millions of people to exercise his will in the name of idealism. The big problem is that the most beautiful ideals of the world, for example, the ideal of Christ, on behalf of which it killed more people in history.
Because the institutions, with their Power, take in the culture transforming it by the media, in order to exercise their free will. The "most beautiful" is the ideal born, more death, blood and destruction may result.
As in the case of of the ideal of Christ(church institutions), the new idealists of Marxism, to seize Power, become great murderers, these ideals of community, equality, fraternity and solidarity, all these values that are usually underlying the will to exercise the ideals of the crowd, the group are immediately taken when the Power structure.
What arises is that the concentrated Power decreases in history, but in its logical-mathematical limit, it will never be destroyed and will never be equal. This is well explained in the shyster's Animal Farm, George Orwell.
Animals from a farm, rebel and drive the owner, but after the first moments of collective euphoria, the group of pigs takes Power through the dogs as police and seizing food for themselves, turning the other animals to the state first subjugation.
The exercise of Power corresponds to possession earth material that belongs to everyone.
For example, 5% of the population has 95% of Power equipment in the world, destroys 95% of the earth in terms of pollution. Autonomy is always on so to Power, that will never be destroyed, never able to come to be pure autonomy.
Because there is an immanent force of historical collective unconscious and culture that, even if there is a revolution and exercise capacity of collective autonomy, there is always a group, or from outside, to take Power and exercise their will and has the means of production and materials.
Even with a gaseous state social disruption due to rooting Power, always ends up restructuring and destroy this such an ideal which permits the collective will ... Can not create the idealistic state that can destroy the Power forever.
These states Autonomic springs from the crowd, seem to be a necessary evil for Power, so that the dominant Power never stagnate, creating the conditions for its perpetuation, with a resemblance to the biological diversity of adaptation, complexity and growth.
Despite the Power of the kings have scaled in parliaments, there are cultural differences, for example in the Netherlands democratic "communalism", a regime in which people participate more in political decisions, but never reach the autonomic state Power for everyone.
Sara Aleixo - Why is it that people are becoming less and less autonomous? There are lot of artists were talking, for example, a Picasso is harder to find today ...
Charlie - What is missing today is the direct pressure to a certain historical moment, because when people were attacked by the Power they became aware of the figures who attacked them.
Today Power lives with a curtain called Medium that does not allow us to target which is the Power to disrupt or destroy.
The Power used the birth of television as non-interactive mechanism and only for passive discharge of culture on the crowd. Net brings a new beginning, but is based on the television.
Sara Aleixo - Just were talking about the Net and ambiguity. More and more information, but there are also a lot of manipulation ...
Charlie - Less communication. Communication when I speak of sound human values, more communication, but communication of freedom, was made from group to group and not by an object such as a computer, that is, to make the revolution today, there are not Ideals because there is the interposition of the Material between the Spirit of the people who are perhaps manipulating cultural concepts communicating and talking about human values.
The human face to face communication is different from the communication with the machine interface.
Using structures outside the level of the spirit, as they are on the material level, which is why there is a decreasing depending on communication are developed the media, which are always developed according to the structures that Power gives them.
Net scares Power, for the first time can someone independent news in cyberspace.
The Net is the world's first organization that has autonomy, but advertising already invaded it , and has the logic of Power. It is the first organization without Power structures that define the rules.
The great dream and the big scare for Power is to master this great medium, at last, for the first time allows, in historical terms, personal autonomy over Power, is a fully autonomous mechanism staff. Is achieved by a page on the Net, despite the FBI the Power to arrest you in 15 days it will be distributed to everybody in the cybernaut community.
Net brings it, but Power always finds way to adapt to these new "autonomisms". Sales in the Net took strength. It was to create a Net that only it were questions of the Spirit and not the Material things and production structures.
The Net has begun to lose its autonomous nature, because it already has dominant cultural objectives of the educational system of people.