06 2006

To Embody Critique
Some Theses. Some Examples
Translated by Maribel Casas-Corts and Sebastian Cobarrubias / Notas Rojas Collectie C!a"el #ill
Marina $arcs
%Not only does it matter &!ic! "rinci"les &e
c!ose but also &!ic! 'orces( &!ic! "eo"le &ill a""ly t!em)
Merleau-*onty
+, T!e "roblem o' critique !as traditionally been a "roblem o' conscience, Today it is a
"roblem o' t!e body, #o& do &e incarnate critique- #o& do critical t!ou.!t acquire a
body- /' critique &as used traditionally to combat dar0ness( today it must combat
im"otence, T!e .lobal &orld is com"letely illuminated, 1ur minds are enli.!tened, T!ere is
not!in. &!ic! &e don2t see3 misery( lies( e4"loitation( torture( e4clusion( etc,( all are
com"letely e4"osed and brou.!t to li.!t, Nonet!eless &e are ca"able o' doin. so little,
5bout ourseles, 6or our &orld, 7e can say it all and nonet!eless &e !ae not!in.
releant to add, To embody critique is not to 'ind t!e correct &ordin.( nor to become
com"lacent in t!e .ardens o' .ood conscience( nor to sell t!e c!ea"est solutions to
e4istin. institutions, To embody critique means to as0 !o& to subert one2s li'e no&adays
in suc! a &ay t!at t!e &orld can no lon.er remain t!e same,
2, T!e critique t!at !istorically 'ou.!t i.norance !ad a !ero3 t!e artist-intellectual, T!eir
&ords and t!eir actions &ere bearers o' li.!t3 analysis( metanarraties( denunciation(
"roocation8 T!ese &ere t!e tools o' an interention made be'ore and about t!e &orld,
5rtist-intellectuals &or0ed 'rom t!eir des0( 'rom t!eir studio, T!at &as t!eir balcony, 6rom
t!ere( t!eir &ord could remain "ure or sell itsel' to t!e "o&ers t!at be( sacri'ice itsel' 'or t!e
cause o' t!e stru..le or return t!e stability to t!e current order, T!is &ord could be ri.!t or
&ron.( 'ait!'ul or treac!erous, T!e artist-intellectual could een abandon !er/!is balcony
and join t!e multitude, 5 critique t!at battles im"otence does not !ae a !ero( or it !as
many, /ts e4"ression is anonymous( &it!out a 'ace, /ts "lace o' enunciation is &anderin.(
intermittent( isible and inisible at t!e same time, Today( &!o is t!e subject o' enunciation
o' critical t!ou.!t- 7!ere &ill &e 'ind it- /' &e cannot name it( t!at is because it is an
anonymous and ambialent subject, Com"osed o' t!eory and "ractice( o' &ord and action(
t!is subject is brilliant and miserable( isolated and collectie( stron. and &ea0, /ts trut!
does not illuminate t!e &orld( rat!er its trut! contradicts it, /' t!e &orld claims3 %T!is is all
t!ere is() t!ere e4ists a we t!at res"onds3 %T!at cannot be all),
9, Impotence is not t!e consequence o' a !istorical &ea0ness o' social moements or o'
any ot!er 0ind o' "olitical subject t!at &e can t!in0 o', T!eir &ea0ness is t!e result o' a bi.
c!an.e in social relations( &!ere a logic of pertinence !as been re"laced by a logic of
connection, T!is means t!at t!e inclusion/e4clusion o' eac! one o' us is decided not
t!rou.! our relations!i"s o' "ertinence to some &ider collectie :a "eo"le( community(
class; but rat!er in our ca"acity o' connectin., Connections that must be fed and
renovated permanently, maintained by each person throughout all activities in
which s/he is completely invested in. In the networ!society, everyone is on their
own in their connection to the world. Everyone fights their specific battle in order to
avoid losing that connectivity to the world, to avoid remaining outside, to avoid
maing a story of exclusion out of their own biography, To s"end one2s li'e loo0in. 'or
&or0( to ris0 one2s li'e crossin. borders3 t!ose are t!e t&o "aradi.matic moements( t!e
bio.ra"!ies o' t!e precarious one and t!e immigrant one t!at &e all are, T!e lo.ic o'
"ertinence !ad it o&n 'orms o' domination, T!e lo.ic o' connection is sim"le and binary3
eit!er you are connected or you are dead, 7it! t!is re'ormulation o' social lin0s( -&!ic!
could be understood as a result o' t!e !istoric de'eat o' t!e &or0ers2 moement-( eery li'e
is "ut into motion to&ard t!e &orld, No one is sure o' &!ere t!ey are3 connections(
"ersonal and non-trans'erable( are inse"arable 'rom t!e t!reat o' dis-connection, 6or t!is
reason( t!is ne& social contract conerts us into "roducers and re"roducers o' reality( in
0nots t!at stren.t!en t!e net&or03 establis!ed unilaterally t!rou.! eac! "erson, T!is
net&or0 obli.ates t!rou.! sel'-obli.ation( controls t!rou.! sel'-control( re"resses t!rou.!
sel' re"ression,
<, /m"otence is not t!e result o' a !istorical &ea0ness o' social moements( nor is it t!e
result o' an inca"acity o' t!e %/), %/ don2t do/cannot do anyt!in.)3 not 'or society( not 'or t!e
"reseration o' t!e "lanet( not to sto" &ar8 Not!in., T!is is t!e declaration o' sel'-
contem"lation by a subject t!at can only moe bet&een culpability and cynicism, /t is t!e
oice o' t!at %/) t!at is isolated in its connection to t!e net&or0, 5lone in a lonely &orld,
5lone &it! all t!e rest, 6rom its "recarious and de"olitici=ed connection( t!at %/) is "rey 'or
moralism( o"inion( and "syc!olo.y, T!is %/) moes bet&een t!e s"!eres o' some alues
t!at orbit around t!e &orld( &it! &!ic! s/!e jud.es and is jud.ed> t!e mar0et"lace o'
o"inions t!at o''er t!is %/) a "osition in society and t!e restrictie enironment o'
discom'ort/com'ort,
?, 6i.!tin. im"otence and embodyin. critique must "ass 'irstly t!rou.! attacing that "I#.
5ttac0in. t!e alues &it! &!ic! &e 'ly around t!e &orld( attac0in. t!e o"inions &it! &!ic!
&e "rotect ourseles 'rom t!e &orld( attacing our own particular and precarious
comfort. /' critique can de'ine itsel' as a t!eoretical-"ractical discourse t!at !as
emanci"atory e''ects( the principal ob$ective of criti%ue today must be to free
ourselves from the "I#, T!e %/) is not our sin.ularity, The "I# is the device that
simultaneously isolates and connects us to the networ!society. Eac! "erson &it!
t!eir alues( o"inions( and states o' mind can remain calm be'ore t!e &orld( can remain
im"otent be'ore t!e &orld, Cynical and guilty( t!e %/) al&ays 0no&s &!ere it must remain,
6, 5.ainst t!e .rain o' t!e modern tradition( deelo"in. critical t!ou.!t does not mean
brin.in. t!e subject to its !i.!est de.ree o' maturity and inde"endence but rat!er(
u"rootin. t!e %/) 'rom t!at "lace t!at maintains it continuously in %its "lace) be'ore t!e
&orld, The modern ideal of emancipation &as lin0ed to t!e idea t!at to 'ree onesel'
really meant to %ta0eo'') 'rom t!e &orld o' necessity( to undo t!e lin0 until ac!iein. a .od-
li0e sel'-su''iciency( indiidually or collectiely, T!is &ould be t!e "at! 'rom t!e 0in.dom o'
necessity to&ard t!e 0in.dom o' liberty in its dierse 'orms, In our networ!society( t!e
question o' a critical or emanci"atory t!ou.!t s!ould "er!a"s be di''erent3 to as0 &!at is
our ca"acity to conquer liberty in t!e act o' net&or0in. itsel', No&adays( liberation !as to
do &it! our ca"acity to e4"lore t!e net&or0ed lin0 and 'orti'y it3 t!e lin0s &it! a "lanet-
&orld( reduced to an object o' consum"tion( a sur'ace o' dis"lacements and a de"ository
o' &astes> as &ell as t!e lin0s &it! t!ose %1t!ers) &!o( &!ile al&ays condemned to bein.
%ot!er)( !ae been eicted 'rom t!e "ossibility to say %&e), To combat impotence and
embody criti%ue then means to experience the "we#, and the "world# that is
amongst us. T!is is &!y t!e "roblem o' critique is no lon.er a "roblem o' conscience but
o' embodiment3 it does not concern a conscience 'acin. t!e &orld but rat!er a body t!at is
in and &it! t!e &orld, T!is not only terminates t!e role o' intellectuals and t!eir balconies(
o' &!ic! &e !ae already s"o0en( but also dis"oses o' t!e mec!anisms o' le.itimation o'
t!e intellectuals2 &ord and t!eir mode o' e4"ression,
@, T!e "rinci"al c!allen.e 'or critique today is to c!allen.e t!e "riati=ation o' our
e4istence, /n t!e .lobali=ed &orld( not only !ae .oods and land been "riati=ed but our
ery e4istence as &ell, T!e e4"erience t!at &e !ae o' t!e &orld re'ers us to a "riate 'ield
o' re'erences3 indiidual or collectie( it is al&ays sel'-re'erential, T!is "riati=ation o'
e4istence !as t&o consequences3 'irst( the depolitici&ing of the social %uestion, T!is
means t!at &e !ae enemies but &e don2t 0no& &!ere our 'riends or allies are, 7e can
"erceie t!e 'oci o' a..ression a.ainst our lies( but not t!e line o' demarcation bet&een
'riend/enemy, 7e can s"ea0 o' 'inancial s"eculation( "recarity( mobbin.'()( borders( etc,
Aut !o& do &e name t!e %&e) t!at su''ers and stru..les &it! t!ese realities- Ay t!e same
mec!anism( t!e %enemy) also becomes "riati=ed, Eery "erson !as t!eir o&n enemy( in
t!eir o&n "articular "roblem Bna!( still bi. bo.ey men( islamists( e.,C, T!e multi"le 'ronts o'
stru..le are di''icult to s!are, T!ey in'iltrate into eery cell o' our eeryday misery( &!ic! is
miserable "recisely because in t!is eeryday eeryone is on t!eir o&n( as an indiidual or
in t!eir small .!etto, Aut t!e "riati=ation o' e4istence also !as a second consequence3 t!e
radicali=ation o' t!e social question( &!ic! sin0s its roots directly in our o&n e4"erience o'
t!e &orld and not someone else2s, To as0 'or t!is %&e) requires startin. 'orm t!e only t!in.
&e "ossess3 our o&n e4"erience, T!e 'ra.mentation o' meanin. contains t!is "arado4ical
irtue3 &e are obli.ed to start &it! ourseles, #ere &e discoer t!e im"ortance o'
abandonin. t!e t!ird "erson( &!ic! dominated t!e traditional critical t!in0er( and e4"lorin.
our o&n 'ields o' "ossible e4"eriences, T!e quest 'or t!e common today requires t!e
coura.e to dro&n onesel' in t!eir actual e4"erience o' t!e &orld( een i' it is na0ed and
em"ty o' "romises, T!is is &!at it means to embody critique,
D, /n Aarcelona 2002( a "roject emer.ed 'rom t!e necessity to be.in a "ractical and
collectie 'orm o' critical t!ou.!t, Collectie( not because t!is t!ou.!t does not !ae any
"ro"er names but because in eac! one o' t!ose names( a %&e) ec!oes, *ractical( not
because it e4cludes t!e t!eoretical dimension but because t!e &orld is not t!e object o'
study or contem"lation 'or t!is "roject o' critical t!ou.!t, Rat!er t!e &orld is t!e area o'
o"erations o' t!is "roject2s collectie body, 7e call t!is "roject Espai en Blanc( Alan0
S"ace in Catalan :www.espaienblanc.net;, Ein0ed to t!e anta.onistic "ractices occurrin.
in t!e city oer t!e "ast 'e& years( t!is "roject o"ened a breac! &!ere critical t!ou.!t
could circulate outside o' t!e s"aces o' s"ecialists and in/t!rou.! t!e !ands o' t!e
"rota.onists o' real moements( in t!eir 'ra.ility( t!eir intermittence( and t!eir anonymity,
1ut o' t!e &or0s and "rojects in &!ic! Espai en Blanc !as "artici"ated( t!ree e4am"les
&ill be mentioned to indicate &!at to embody critique mi.!t mean today3 t!e re"ort
%Barcelona 2004: el fascismo postmoderno :%Aarcelona 200<3 "ostmodern 'ascism)(
200<;> t!e moie %El taxista ful :200?;( and t!e series o' encounters %La tierra de nadie en
la red de los nombres :%No man2s land in t!e net&or0 o' names)( 2006;,
F, T!e 'irst e4am"le( t!e %*arcelona +,,-. postmodern fascism) re"ort demonstrates
!o& a t!eoretical interention can be embodied in t!e city, T!is interention too0 "lace in
t!e 'rame&or0 o' t!e cam"ai.n a.ainst t!e Forum Universal de las Culturas :Gniersal
6orum o' Cultures;( a lar.e international eent or.ani=ed by city institutions in Aarcelona
200<, Espai en Blanc contributed an analysis t!at uncoered t!e mec!anism by &!ic! t!e
"roject 'or a multicultural city bein. "ro"osed by t!e munici"ality &as in reality t!e
im"lementation o' a ne& deice o' de-"oliti=ation and neutrali=ation o' con'licts, 7!at &e
call %"ostmodern 'ascism) is based in mobili&ing all the existing differences in the city
towards a single pro$ect for that city, towards a single reality, #o&eer( &!at could be
done so t!at t!is analysis didn2t just 'loat aboe and out o' Aarcelona but could actually
interene and inter'ere in t!e city2s moements- T!e idea( to.et!er &it! t!eBellaterra
"ublis!in. !ouse and ot!er critical collecties in t!e city( &as to edit and com"ile t!is
analysis( to.et!er &it! ot!er materials in a 'ree boo0 :t!is boo0 can be do&nloaded at
http://www.ed-bellaterra.com/uploads/pdfs/FOTUT%22!".pdf;, T!e boo0 &as
released at a lar.e "ublic .at!erin.( and t&o distribution "oints &ere selected, T!ose
"ersons interested in t!e boo0( &ould !ae to .o .et it and could only obtain one co"y, /n
t&o &ee0s( 9(000 co"ies &ere distributed, Een more interestin. t!ou.! is t!e 'act t!at t!e
a""earance o' t!e boo0 "roo0ed a mobili=ation, 1ne !ad to decide 'or onesel' !o& 'ar to
let t!eir interest ta0e t!em( trael to anot!er "art o' t!e city( and "ersonally relate &it! t!e
editor and &it! t!e collecties t!at &ere "romotin. t!e boo0, 5ll ty"e o' "eo"le arried3
teac!ers( actiists( "oliticians :H;( and most o' all( many anonymous 'ol0s &!ose intuition
led t!em to identi'y &it! t!e &ords in t!e title or t!e descri"tion o' t!e boo0, Many bodies
&ere mobili=ed in order to s!are t!eir rejection( ra.e and critiques a.ainst a model o' t!e
city t!at &as .ettin. more !y"ocritically a..ressie eeryday,
+0, T!e second e4am"le( the movie #El ta$ista ful# :200?;( is an e4am"le o' !o& all
critique is done &it! and on our ery body( &it! and on our o&n li'e( especially when our
life is understood as a common problem, T!is "roject &as born out o' a lon. collectie
initiatie dealin. &it! t!e critical consequences o' "recarity, 6or years( t!is assembly called
%inero &ratis :6ree Money; &as &onderin. about3 !o& could one re'use to &or0 &!en
t!e 'actory and stable jobs no lon.er e4ist Bor &el'are &it!out &or0'are and ot!er disci"line(
br!C- 6rom t!at "ers"ectie a series o' cam"ai.ns( actions and &ritin.s &ere carried out
t!at called to attention t!e "roblems t!at our relations &it! money( bot! indiidual and
collectie( "resent no&adays, T!e 'ilm director Iordi Sol :Io Sol; "ro"osed a 'ilm "roject
about t!ese issues, T!e interestin. t!in. &as t!at it &asn2t about "roducin. a
documentary about a "olitical moement or a social "roblem( but rat!er usin. 'ilm to
interro.ate our o&n "ractices( and call to t!e 'ilm s"ectator at t!e same leel, 7e &or0ed
&it!out actors and &it!out a &ritten scri"t, 7e &ere bot! subject and object o' t!e "rocess
o' creatin. t!is 'ilm, To.et!er &it! Io Sol and t!e non-actor *e"e Roira( a ery real 'iction
entered our lies3 t!e story o' a man t!at robbed ta4is in order to &or0, T!is &as a .uy &!o
&anted to !ae a normal li'e( t!at continued to as"ire to t!is normal li'e( and t!at in t!e
"rocess o' "ursuin. t!is dream( !ad become a t!ie' and a lunatic in t!e eyes o' t!e la&
and society, 7!at &ould t!is .uy t!in0 o' us- #o& &ould !e relate to us- T&o lines o'
'li.!t( t&o 'orms o' resistance to t!e iolence o' &or0 and money are 'ound in a story o'
'riends!i"( our true story o' 'riends!i", 7e don2t !ae a solution to t!e "roblem o' money
nor do &e !ae an ideolo.y t!at e4"lains and resoles our relations!i" to "recarity, 7e
!ae t!e ca"acity to "resent ourseles( to learn and stru..le 'rom our o&n 'ield o' "ossible
e4"eriences, T!e moie s"ea0s 'orm tere, T!e moie calls to t!e audience 'rom tere,
++, 6inally( t!e t!ird e4am"le is about t!e .at!erin.s called !La tierra de nadie en la red de
los nombres! :%No man2s land in t!e net&or0 o' names); ta0in. "lace in 2006, T!is
initiatie is an e4am"le o' !o& critical t!ou.!t is "roduced amon"st us, T!at is to say( t!at
t!e "roduction o' critical t!ou.!t !a""ens &!en &e brea0 t!e !ierarc!y %t!in0er-audience)
in order to constitute a t!in0in. %&e)( in order to build a collectie &ord ca"able o'
adancin. t!rou.! t!e "roblems t!at are truly "roblems, 6or 'ie mont!s( Es"ai en Alanc
called 'or an encounter eery last T!ursday o' eac! mont! in a local co''ee-bar, Eac!
.at!erin. dealt &it! a s"eci'ic "roblematic :social disquiet( border s"aces( t!e e4"erience
o' %&e)( and s"ea0in. u"; and be.an &it! a series o' questions and materials 'or
consultation t!at &ere distributed t!rou.! a blo. site #http://blog.sindominio.net/blog/
espai_en_blanc$, T!e attendance &as made o' t!ose t!at &anted to be t!ere3 no announced
con'erences( no coordinatin. committee( no turns to s"ea0 or rebuttal, T!rou.!out t!e ?
mont!s( more t!an a !undred "eo"le( most o' &!om did not 0no& eac! ot!er( .at!ered
to.et!er in order to t!in0 collectiely, T!is anonymous sel'-called assembly o"ened a
s"ace 'or "olitici=in. our lan.ua.e and our lies, 5.ainst t!e "riati=ation o' our e4istence(
a &orld amon.st %us) a""eared, /n today2s metro"olises t!ere are many collectie
!a""enin.s( &e could een say t!at t!e majority o' !a""enin.s are collectie,
Nonet!eless( t!e city !ad com"letely lost t!e ability o' callin. itsel' to assemble, /ts
!a""enin.s are em"ty o' a %&e), %7e) only moe i' someone calls us( i' t!ere is a
"ro.rammed actiity( and i' &e2re told &!at to do, 5t t!ese .at!erin.s( &e didn2t 0no& &!at
&ould !a""en( &!o &ould come( &!at direction t!e discussions &ould .o in( or &!en
silence &ould deour us, /e came with nots in our stomachs. 0nd every time, one
after another, the encounter wored. /ith more or less tensions during the course
of the discussion, each time a "we# emerged that gave the happening meaning.
Thans to this we could thin in another way. 1uring these processes lives are
shaen up. /e no longer wal the same way when we return home, Maybe &e don2t
een 0no& e4actly &!at &e t!in0, *er!a"s( an em"ty s"ace &as o"ened( a blan0 s"ace
&!ere ot!er &ays o' liin. could be e4"lored to.et!er &it! ot!er "eo"le, 5not!er
consciousness- No( a body better "re"ared to battle 'ear( a body more e4"osed and less
isolated, 5 body t!at 0no&s t!at its li'e does not belon. solely to itsel'( and eeryt!in.
de"ends in t!at &!ic! .oes beyond itsel',
[1] Note of the translators: Mobbing refers to many types of harassment and psychological
pressures used to coerce, stress or defeat someone with serious emotional and physical results. The
term is used most often in reference to the worplace and when there is some in!ol!ement "or
tolerance# of management. $t is not the same as se%ual or racial harassment though the lines may be
difficult to draw. Mobbing has also been referred to bullying, psychological terror, and
emotional !iolence.
0< 200D
What Are We Capable Of?
2rom Consciousness to Embodiment in Critical Thought Today
Marina $arcs Reised by Eri0a Joucette
Two centuries of modern critical thought ha!e brought forth many definitions of criti&ue, which
differ based on the ob'ect and conte%t of the criti&ue. $ would lie to start by proposing a definition
that summari(es the main aspects of a critical tradition in &uite a trans!ersal manner: )riti&ue is a
ind of discourse that has practical and liberatory effects on what we can see, what we can be, and
what we can do. $ am sure you may appreciate this classical definition. *fter years of crisis of
critical thining, $ belie!e this definition and its demands are still !alid today. $ts !alidity certainly
depends on our capability to endow criti&ue with new meaning, that is, situate it within the real
conditions of our present world and to manifest it in the way we determine our actual mode of
e%istence, which $ will show in my inter!ention here. This will be composed of three moments.
+ollowing the abo!ementioned definition of criti&ue, $ will begin by referring to:
1) What we can see , $ will elaborate on a new form of dogma that criti&ue is faced with, a
dogma without any pretence: the self-evidence of globali(ed capitalism.
2) What we can be , $ will point to the &uestion of embodying criti&ue and consider what it
means to be affected.
3) What we can do , $ will &uestion the conditions for creating critical thought today based
on my e%perience in the pro'ect -spai en .lanc "blan space in )atalan#[1].

What We Can See
$n nearly all its different meanings and traditions, critique has something to do with the idea of
showing or bringing light to that which we do not see: a hidden truth, the conditions of possibility, a
contradiction, an irrationality, the intolerable, the limits of our e%istence, and so on. Therefore,
criti&ue is lie an effect of !ision/ it is not reflecti!e but is supposed to possess the power of
transformation: to transform conscience, the sub'ect, history, forms of e%istence, etc.
0owe!er, one of the main characteristics of globali(ed capitalism1which presents itself as the only
possible concept of the world1is that it no longer wears any mass, for it has nothing to hide. The
secret of production no longer e%ists. *fter ha!ing shed all its mass, its self2e!idence is its
legitimation. This world con!eys to us e!erything there is already e%ists.
3ince the fall of communism and its disappearance as a !ision of social transformation, much has
been said about the triumph of capitalism. $f we obser!e the state of the world today, e!en in its
superficial appearance, it is clear that capitalism4s triumph has not been a real success. $ts promises,
!irtues, and achie!ements are no longer the basis for its legitimacy. $t rests on the self2e!ident truth
that capitalism is the only possible reality in this world. .ecause capitalism is not forced to defend
or 'ustify itself its self2e!idence has become a new form of dogmatism. This dogmatism without
mass cannot be demystified or combated by any form of e%posure. 5There are levels of
legitimation: 1. against eisting alternatives. 2. against the desire or need for alternatives ! here
"i#etty is attacted$ not because he %rovides an alternative$ but merely shows that one is needed.&
The world today cannot be freed from this illusion by bringing capitalism4s self2e!idence to light,
although it is a sort of enchantment. This enchantment neutrali'es criti(ue. The self2e!idence of
this world neutralizes critique and reduces it in three ways to:
6# a moral )udgment: we appro!e / condemn the state of things
7# an aesthetic )udgment: we lie /dislie this reality and choose different styles of
li!ing in this world
8# a %sychological )udgment: we feel good / bad about this reality, which only
becomes worse in !iew of the number of new mental diseases in -urope and
de!eloped societies.
*this self-evidence si an effect of absence of +alternatives. What does this mean: a lac# not of
elaborate alternatives %erha%s$ but of wagers of masses of %eo%le that their %rocesses of self-
organisation are a %art of emergent alternatives, with 2-11 this ha%%ened. "erha%s this is what
ma#es "i#etty scandalous today.&.
9egarding these three forms of reduction, criti&ue finds itself trapped between impotence and
indifference. $ analy(ed precisely this oscillation between impotence and indifference from an
ontological approach in my boo /n las %risiones de lo %osible$ -d. .ellaterra "7::7# 01n the
%risons of the %ossible). My analysis addresses the parado% of li!ing in a world where e!erything is
possible but cannot be changed, which led me to de!elop the concept of irreocable
contin!ence.
+rom a political point of !iew, prisons of the possible more specifically signify the idnapping or
e%propriation of the world as something we are capable of transforming collecti!ely and as a reality
that we de!elop together at the intersections of collecti!e action. ;lobali(ation can be considered as
the configuration of a uni&ue world without a common dimension. <e enable and e%perience the
proliferation of countless li!ed worlds that remain separate from yet confirm one another and
conform to a uni&ue reality. 3ome ha!e studied this as a conse&uence of the pri!ati(ation of
e%istence. +rom the point of !iew of these li!ed and pri!ati(ed micro2worlds we can see the world
in its self2e!idence and we are able to assess it "using the three ways of 'udgment mentioned abo!e#
although this !ision does not directly ha!en an effect of transformation. <hat is necessary for these
effects of transformation to happen= 0ow can we be affected by our own e%perience of the world=

What We Can "e
3omething has to tear us away from our powerless and indifferent e%istence. 3omething has to tear
us away from our role as !ictims and spectators.
$n 3pain, we ha!e e%perienced something that can contribute to illustrating this issue. * process of
critical resignification too place following the 662M bomb attac in Madrid.[#] 3ur!i!ors or those
who lost someone in the trains created an association re'ecting the category of the !ictim, which
was the term that was officially used up until that point. They began to call themsel!es the
affected. The transformation that too place thorough the use of this the term is !ery interesting
transformation, particularly in terms of their political situation. This transformation can be
summari(ed by three main aspects, raising three sets of &uestions:
6# They re'ect the passi!ity and recepti!ity of pain to open up the possibility for a
wider transformation of oneself. >ictimi(ation is a unidirectional process that has a
!ery specific effect. 0owe!er, what does it mean to be someone who has been
affected= <here do the effects of being affected begin and end=
7# 9eparation "punishment for the guilty and indemnification for the !ictim# is no
longer the only desire after suffering acts of aggression. <hat does someone who has
been affected e%pect= <hat is his/her hope= <hat ind of hori(on does his/her
condition open up=
8# The perfectly indi!iduali(ed !ictim identity fades into a common field of
e%perience. <ho are the affected persons= <hat ind of institutions recogni(e or do
not recogni(e them=
The spectator can only condemn the bomb attac and feel the horror of that !ision. The icti$ can
only suffer pain and e%pect reparation. .ut what is an affected person capable of= <hat can the
affected do= That4s the &uestion 2oro opens up. $t4s also the &uestion they pose to us.
This allows the creation of a new framewor for &uestioning the possibilities of criti&ue today.
)ritical thought has always claimed to raise consciousness. )an we maintain that= $s a call to
raise consciousness rele!ant despite the self2e!idence of our reality= $f we are able to see and now
'ust about e!erything "i.e. the world is already illuminated# and still nothing happens, the problem
we are concerned with is the embodiment of critical discourse: how can critical thought ac&uire a
body= $f consciousness only leads to indi!idual 'udgment as to the e!idence of the word 5world?,
affectation opens up a common field of e%perience and, as shown abo!e, another hori(on of
e%pectations where we do not now e%actly what we are capable of.
The shift from consciousness to affectation mo!es us from focusing on the mind to focusing on the
body. $n other words, it brings about a shift fro$ the duality of li!ht%dar&ness to the ambivalence
of vulnerability. $n what sense is !ulnerability ambi!alent= 5there are all sorts of shades of grey?
3n the one hand, !ulnerability refers to our emotional incapacity and incompetence. $ refer to an
e%pression taen from the interesting boo Thera%y 4ulture. 4ultivating 5ulnerability in an
6ncertain 7ge "@ondon 7::A# written by 'ran& 'uredi. That is what a new form of power called
therapeutic power culti!ates: a need for institutional inter!ention in almost e!ery aspect of our
e%istence and in the management of our precarious and pri!ati(ed li!es.[(] That is also the
dimension that is more e%ploited in the e!eryday, widespread e%periences of precariety today. $n
this sense, ulnerability also represents the base on which the entire e)ploitation of our li!es is
constructed.
3n the other hand, ulnerability also enables us to fundamentally bond with others, tying our
e%istence to others4 e%istences. $n Budith .utler4s recent boo "recarious 8ife she analy(es this
sense of !ulnerability. The starting point for her analysis is the e%periences of !iolence and grief,
both of which are rele!ant to the e%perience of a terrorist attac, such as 66 3. 3he !iews !iolence
and grief as capable of bringing out from within us the dimension of our e%istence that maes us
something more than an indi!idual and creates a bond that not only connects us but also constitutes
our e%istence and poses the &uestion of a <-, of a commonality.
66 3 and 66 M ha!e brought about a new !ocabulary, which could perhaps pro!ide us with a new
political starting point. 0owe!er, it would be a missed opportunity if these new semantics were to
remain only within the conte%t of catastrophe, disaster, and life2threatening situations. $t is
important to emphasi(e that !ulnerability is not only a determination of a passi!e human e%istence
that is only related to pain and suffering. >ulnerability is not simply recepti!e. $t also signifies our
real capability of e%posing oursel!es. To be !ulnerable is to be capable of e%posing oneself. Cr, in
other words, !ulnerability entails our capacity to be affected. $n this sense, !ulnerability is not a
form of being incapability but a potential, which is necessarily a collecti!e power. 5a very wea#
one&.
This second sense of !ulnerability, following .utler4s wor and going beyond the field of suffering
and pain opens up an approach to !ulnerability that is not defined by powerlessness but rather by
the re!elation of the impossibility of being an indi!idual. $t is a means of disco!ering
interdependence. *)periencin! interdependence, e%periencing <- as a dimension of our own
e%istence, is a way of taing bac our world today. $n a world held hostage by globali(ed
capitalism, interdependence can only emerge in the shadow of a threat: the threat of the destruction
of the planet through human action. This is a heteronomous sense of interdependence that lets
e!eryone now our e%istence is in the hands of others. .ut as we ha!e seen, there is another
autonomous sense of interdependence, through which we reali(e the world is the common
dimension of our particular e%istence. $f we are able to acnowledge that dimension
interdependence is the real $eanin! of autono$y, not in the sense of indi!idual property that
must be protected from the world and others, but in the sense of a co$$on irtue.
This relationship between interdependence and autonomy is not self2e!ident, in fact, it is not
ob!ious at all: it shatters the self2e!idence of our world. $nterdependence does not mean that my life
is 'eopardi(ed through connecting it to the actions of others, but that my e%istence always contains a
<- dimension e!en if it is repeatedly pro!en otherwise. 0ow can we get to that dimension= 0ow
can we e%perience it= Through the wor of criti&ue, through a transformation that radically changes
what we can see, what we can be, and what we can do. +oucault defines criti&ue as the creation and
criti&ue of oursel!es in our autonomy. +or me, this autonomy means what $ ha!e been saying here.
.eing a mature sub'ect capable of 'udgment is no longer most important, it is much more significant
to ha!e the courage to engage in a mode of e%istence that dares to be affected and e%posed. $t is no
longer about the con&uest of freedom as sub'ects mo!e toward becoming independent from the
world and others/ it is now more about the con&uest of freedom in our interlacements. To e%plore
these in all their autonomy as a collecti!e !irtue is, from my point of !iew, the scope of critical
thought today.

What We Can +o
<hat $ ha!e mentioned here profoundly affects how we should construct critical discourse today. $f
we pretend critical discourse has the practical liberatory effects $ mentioned in the beginning our
goal must be to pro!oe, awaen, and arouse this <- dimension of our e%istence. $n this sense,
critique remains a practical form of discourse that pretends to show us something we do not see.
This is no longer a !ision of our consciousness and cannot simply be announced or declared. ,t
$ust be done. $t must be manifested, but how=
<e could always say that words are actions still comfortably rest within the role of critical thiners,
and 'ust listen to oursel!es. .ut that is not enough, in fact, $ thin we ha!e all e%perienced how the
field of criti&ue often reproduces a ghetto, 'ust another one so many other ghettos, maing it
impossible to brea the chains of impotence and indifference.
$t is ob!ious that it is not up to us to decide on or program a re!olution. $t is, howe!er, urgent that
we &uestion and alter the conditions for creating critical discourse today. This means enabling a
shift of at least two things:
6# +rom the centrality of the ob'ect of criti&ue, which is always in front of us, always cut
off, and isolated by its distance to the &uestion of <0C is affected by the problems we pose
and analy(e. That is what embracing criti&ue means. The discourse commonly constructed
around T0-M "taing its cue from the analyst or e%pert rhetorician# shifts to become a
&uestion of <-, for which there is no longer an ob'ect of analysis, but a common field of
e%perimentation.
7# +rom the legitimacy of &ualified !oices "intellectuals, proletarians, students, precarious,
immigrants, and so on# to the proliferation of an anony$ous oice whose li$its are
difficult to define--so difficult. in fact. that the question of who the affected are re$ains
open/ These anonymous !oices remo!e the legitimated !oice from its chair, not to silence it,
but to point to its incompleteness and to force it to encounter its <- dimension. Then,
criti&ue is a discourse no longer presented to others, but a discourse that is crafted together
with others.
$f we desire liberatory effects on what we can see, what we can be, and what we can do in a world
of pri!ati(ed modes of e%istence and if we see to aim for the possibility of an autonomous
e%perience of interdependence, then these two ways of shifting critical discourse and the conditions
for creating critical discourse are still imperati!e today.
$n the beginning, $ mentioned the /s%ai en 9lanc pro'ect. $t is based on collecti!e and practical
thought and de!eloped fi!e years ago at the intersection of philosophy and acti!ism. $n the
beginning, we said we had wanted to mae thining e%citing again. To us, e%citing meant gi!ing it
its own life, that is, to be e%posed and affected by our own thought. To some e%tent, e!erything $
ha!e mentioned here has been a result of this collecti!e e%perience. C!er the past fi!e years we
ha!e done se!eral different inter!entions, publications, etc. The critical inter!ention in .arcelona
that has shaen so many people was not based on what we said !oid of any conte%t, but how we
said it. C!er the last two years, we ha!e been organi(ing monthly gatherings in a bar in the center of
.arcelona where e!eryone is in!ited to come and discuss a problem that we announce using on
posters, by using blog, and !ia a mailing list. No lecturers are in!ited/ no names mentioned... and
therefore there is no public or spectators. Those who tae part come to thin together with others. $t
is so simple, but it has really re!olutioni(ed the way we are affected by what we thin and the way
we embrace new &uestions and problems. This year, more than a hundred people came each time.
<e tried to open it to a forum on $nternet to include e!en more !oices and e%pand the temporal
dimension of the discussions. .ut it did not wor. <hy not= The point of this gathering is to be
there. To be affected by the silence and by the words we search for together and sometimes manage
to find. There is no idea or nowledge of indi!idual consumption at these encounters, instead they
in!ite the public to strengthen their !iews and !oices together.
$ will close with this !ery modest e%ample, because in our world, we hear big words e!ery day that
ha!e no effect. They are too often used as a shelter to protect us and to maintain a distance between
the world and us. )riti&ue must destroy that distance and help us not to find a shelter but the
courage to engage in our interdependent autonomy. )anetti says this wonderfully: only together
can men free themsel!es of the ballast of their distances.[0]
[1] +or more information about /s%ai en 9lanc see at: http:%%www/espaienblanc/net.
[#] Margarita Dadilla and *mador +ernEnde(23a!ater ha!e done in!aluable wor on this issue. 3ee
their contributions@as luchas del !acFo in /s%ai en 9lanc nG82A, @a sociedad terapHutica
.ellaterra "ed.# ".arcelona 7::I# and in the :ed 4iudadana tras el 11-;. 4uando el sufrimiento no
im%ide %ensar ni actuar by colecti!o Jesdedentro "*cuarela @ibros K *. Machado, Madrid 7::L#.
[(] 3ee the /s%ai en 9lanc publication nG82A, @a sociedad terapHutica, .ellaterra "ed.# ".arcelona
7::I#
'-) Canetti( E,3 Crowds and %ower& transl, by Carol Ste&art( 6arrar Straus $irou4( Ne&
Kor0( 200?,' poder&Mondadori( 200?( ", 6F