Friday, 28 November 2014

To break free from Pseudo-Liberality

To Break free from Pseudo-Liberality

Notes from the Anti-Modern

by Kirit Thanarat

The question is, does these people whom afford to show freedom really invoke freedom? Does their resistance to the so-called establish norms offer an alternative? 

At first, it's been so long for this writer after observing people who sport anything out of their personal expression. Traversing the streets, it was just a normal day for those who had red, blonde, or brown in their hairs, ear plugs, and skirts to have someone else's ire or appreciation at the streets of España, Morayta, Dapitan, Padre Noval, and other thoroughfares of Manila. And most of them are likely not to enter their respective campuses, be it UST, FEU, San Sebastian, or at UE unless abide by the policies such as dying back to black, without earplugs, and dressed appropriately for the class.

To these unfortunate students they would say it infringes their right to self-expression, or rather say invades their personal-matter as individuals. As certain codes, official or not, yet still being imposed and "trying to regulate" the student's behaviour, to theirs it means, indubitably a curtailment of their right, particularly those of expression, and affront of their personal matters in the name of "order". These issue may others think of it as shallow as compared to much serious ones in regards to venting dissent and going beyond the parameters of order, such as those whom trying to propose a "mailed fist" strategy in pursuit of checking expected campaigns trying to disrupt industrial and scholastic order.
That last 1985, according to the campus paper DAWN of the University if the East, school administrators, whilst presenting themselves as "liberal", "free", "progressive", also calls for reactivation of agencies whose intention is to gather intelligence, security, and rapid mobilisation of armed forces to forcibly 'put into control institutions under state of siege' by those who oppose the system and its policies, be it political like those of the dictatorship or economic as the increases in tuition and other fees. 

Thank god it didn't realise after being disbanded 4 years before it's attempt. If had it resuscitated by those "concerned", may include those who invoke their expressions out of their personal matters. 

Quite absurd actually citing the fact how a system catered to the interest of the ruling class tends to restict in spite of presenting themselves as free, liberal, progressive, democratic, or even revolutionary;  and since this person know that those whom sporting their personal expressions may disregard this message, in their movements he guesses that they are still trying to express themselves to be free but some, if not most or few would dare to go beyond the parameters such as defying the established norms and create new ones. The fact that the impression how most of these people are brought by trend, pressure, rather than choice; perhaps it is not these people who are enjoyed in their cosmetic kind of expression or freedom as they think of,  but those who pushed them into the current of time, and be exploited unknowingly by those who benefited from their unawareness such as being treated as a cogwheel and be sedated by a thing called 'freedom' the system had offered. Of course, that freedom isn't freedom after all! 

It may be disappointing to some, but the nature of liberality nowadays has become reduced to a showcase of both arrogance and self-pityness. Instead of getting critical, of getting involved, it end rather trapped into reasons far from its supposed intentions such as finishing course just to land a high-paying job if not impressing a person for the sake of gaining trust. Those who achieve seen it as a showcase of pride to depnd on but not a means to contribute in their remolding; while those who self pity, regardless of its contributions, no matter how successful it is rather treats as a failure and desperately seeks for an impossible called perfection. Ego has replaced freedom, it has almost becoming freedom itself in today's society, in which far from its heroic beginnings. 

But come to think of this, liberalism and liberality are confused terms no matter people tries to make it interchangable. Just because of the root word it goes the same, then how come conservatives nowadays speaks of freedom, liberty, and other similar claptraps yet actually they speak heavily of order? As in throne and altar? Tradition and reaction? Good to hear about freedom of the individual according to their statements, but what kind of freedom of the individual they are trying to say such as freedom to consume what they bought and freedom to impress for the sake of mere applauses? That freedom, liberty is not the freedom, liberty Idealised for in the past, but a frustrated one diluted of substance and exaggerated in its form as it is in the present or in the future come. That kind of 'liberalism' had made Marx, Bismark, or Bonifacio chose to oppose their initial inclinations in favor of revolution through blood and iron, much more that kind of 'liberty' being peddled is not what Robespierre, Danton, Saint-Just or Babeuf hath said in their writeups; but instead, by those who afford to parrot for the sake of keeping their privileges especially those of the market. 
And books like "Hunger Games", "Divergent", and other resistance-invoking themes (inlcuding the Anarchist-inclined "V for Vendetta") has been used by the market and has diluted, revised its essence, such as "cultivate the spirit of struggle towards social liberation" into "submitting to the interest of the market called 'free'". Readers may afford to "be inspired" but does it mean they can able to resist just like those who read "Hunter" and "The Turner Diaries"?

Well, amidst the inconvenient reality such as a semifeudal, semicolonial, capitalistic repression, people who treats freedom as a showcase to impress others fail to radiate the light of freedom as what supposed to no matter how it tries to invoke. Those who present as revolutionary yet fails to invoke may rather end as Counterreactionary in its essence, that they babble social change the way they dress or sing, yet they fail to assert, or worse, assail instead those who protractedly assert just like those who comment about the latest protests and opposition towards anti-people policies. Those who can't even justify why they sport something besides trend and peer pressure fail to temper their  impressions with a justifiable cause, and Freedom that is treated as a façade is all but bullshit that tries to water the host of a profiteering repressor acting suffering, and that also somehow right to hear what Lenin saidth:

"Freedom in capitalist society always remains about the same as it was in ancient Greek republics: Freedom for slave owners."

Yes, freedom for those who gained profit using that goddamned term. And to the victims, they demand, rather than want freedom to break that so-called 'freedom', to break free from pseudo-Liberality!

Apologies to the offended, to the misunderstood, but Are you sure you are free while actually being treated by the system as a mess amidst presenting to the world anything goes as according to so-called principles? Amidst semblance of tolerance presented to its neighbours, the system cannot tolerate a  growing demand such as those who are exploited and trying to go beyond the parameters. But nonetheless, it is important for people to inform, or enlighten again what a liberated individual should be, and It is more than what being sought such as its hairstyle, clothing, or music. These may be manifested by the individual as such, but that same individual who tries to express has expected to go beyond the parameters of impression for chrissakes towards real expression for themselves and for others. To some it may end disagreeable to redefine what an emancipated person should be, but of what is freedom if it is made for chrissakes? Perhaps, this person thinks that their freedom made for chrissakes is a mere display, a mere showcase as they are actually trying to escape themselves from, rather than confront the repressive reality such as poverty and repression. Although he recognises that the freedom that tries to cultivate from the bottle of beer, bars and supperclubs isn't the same freedom that tries to cultivate in the barricade-strewn streets and the petrol-filled bombs, there's a "bridge" thanks to those whose music means rebellion, subversion rather than submission knowing that HipHop, Punk didn't start as music for chrissakes; that every word and sound reflects the scene such as protest marches and armed robberies- before it end almost replaced by sex and on-cam relationships.

Admittingly speaking, invoking liberality is different from liberalism the way individuality is as different from individualism. And invoking one's freedom is different from be a craphole of the society.  You may express ideas, views, dreams, and other stuff to vent upon with a cause to justify, but venting without any cause is nothing but a waste of time, voice, face, and gesture. Most of the present generation has turned its supposed expressions into mere impressions, impressing an individual or a groupuscle, rather than trying to express what comes from themselves as persons; yet besides impressing, do they have any cause to justify their impressions? If not, then what a waste of time besides self-arrogance to abhor with. 
The colour of ones hair, like religion, is indeed a personal matter that has to be respected. It is also an expression to show what beauty that person wants to show as an individual rather than made to impress or out of mere pressures without understandings; that Punks didn't just have their Mohawks for chrissakes or getting in with the scene on the first place! But real expression comes in how to put change further beyond the parameters of so-called order. That requires the use of observation, formulating idea from looking and reflecting, and creating alternatives to realise what freedom should be. Freedom, Liberty, and other similar terms nowadays has been raped by the market, by the bourgeois whose intention is to keep their interests off from those who called for anything Just. It almost become a canned idea that replaces freedom to unshackle and create by those of freedom to be shackled and consume. 

No wonder why there are more Kim Kardashians and Kanye Wests than Ulrike Meinhofs and Jean-Paul Sartres. When will there be a reversal?

In short:

To be genuinely free in every moves, freedom has to be tempered with cause, as man was born with a purpose to keep.

 And it is up to them how will they try to invoke it. 

In memory of the late Fr. Frederick Fermin O.P. 
and Ms. Jeanne Mari Alanis Diwata