You have defined your political philosophy as libertarian socialism/anarchism, but refuse to accept the view that anarchism as a vision of social order flows naturally from your views on language. Is the link then purely coincidental?
It’s more than coincidental, but much less than deductive. At a sufficient level of abstraction, there is a common element – which was sometimes recognized, or at least glimpsed, in the Enlightenment and Romantic eras. In both domains, we can perceive, or at least hope, that at the core of human nature is what [Russian anarchist Mikhail] Bakunin called “an instinct for freedom,” which reveals itself both in the creative aspect of normal language use and in the recognition that no form of domination, authority, hierarchy is self-justifying: Each must justify itself, and if it cannot, which is usually the case, then it should be dismantled in favor of greater freedom and justice. That seems to me the core idea of anarchism, deriving from its classical liberal roots and deeper perceptions – or beliefs, or hopes – about essential human nature. Libertarian socialism moves further to bring in ideas about sympathy, solidarity, mutual aid, also with Enlightenment roots and conceptions of human nature. (*)
geração atrás de geração, a revolta dos filhos bastardos
que neste sistema infame não se querem manter deitados
mas…será que saberás viver em liberdade?
o prazer que te dá a autogestão são posturas e variedades
mas será que tu saberás viver sem autoridade?…….
será que saberás viver em liberdade?
Before anything else, the first thing that power imposes is a rhythm (to everything of life, of time, of thought, of speech). Those who are subjected to power – the populace in general – are obliged to synchronize from above. We fall into the rhythm of work, and the sub-rhythms and counter-punctual beats that the world of labour creates for us (rhythms of thinking, speaking, acting, eating, moving…being). The demand for idiorhythmic is always made in opposition to power.
porque querer construir qualquer de novo não é repetir os
mesmos erros sem conta….não se trata de uma certa idade,
mas de um sentimento e de uma expressão….
será que saberás viver em liberdade?
ZV: What is your opinion about so-called “scientific” anarchism – attempts to scientifically prove Bakunin’s assumption that human beings have instinct for freedom. That we have not only a tendency towards freedom but also a biological need. Something that you were so successful in proving with universal grammar (language)…
NC: That is really a hope, it is not a scientific result. So little is understood about human nature that you cannot draw any serious conclusions. We can’t even answer questions about the nature of insects. We draw conclusions – tentative ones — through a combination of our intuitions, hopes, some experiences. In that way we may draw the conclusion that humans have an instinct for freedom. But we should not pretend that it is derived from scientific knowledge and understanding. It isn’t and can’t be. There is no science of human beings and their interactions or even simpler organisms that reaches anywhere near that far.(*)
FOCOLITUS 