It is generally thought that the person who instigates a confrontation automatically losses the confrontation. We might say that it’s because the instigator has a “vigilantism” to him. We might say that he’s betting on someone to be in the wrong place, at the wrong time, messing with the wrong person. Many would say that the instigator has built up resentment inside of him. He has the potential to do harm…he wants to… but he has to be vigilant for someone to make the first move. But this would be a mistake. Catharsis uses the language-of-production or what Deleuze and Guatarri call it – “Psychic repression.” D+G would like us to approach virtual (potential) and actual field differently. A potential field does not actualize as it passes from virtual to the actual field. But they are in constant communication with each other via partial objects. My book The Modus Operandi: is a theory about cowardliness. It’s about gift-giving and loving-capitalism vs. altruistic capitalism. How do adults repress desire but at the same time reproduce it? What does it mean to grow up to be an adult if both, youth and adult participants in flows-of-growth? Wouldn’t an insult place the insulted in a better place than the insulter if both participate in flows-of-growth?
This parody describes something like the rebellious teenager rebelling against his parents only to become a parent himself. Then, his child rebels against him closing the loop. Now we add “anticipation” to loving-capitalism: “we are tough precisely on those we love,” rather than altruistic-capitalism. Think of the college town who lives off tax dollars and protests for more socialist policies. Now we add permission (or allowance) to loving-capitalism: “it’s just a phase… they’ll grow out of it”. This idea of “letting the phase act itself out” may be precisely the reason why we are in the problem in the first place. Nobody needs to persuade anybody on becoming more conservative later in life. They already know. It always happens this way. Anticipation (not the psychic repression) is the concealed that unconcealed. i.e. “we allow you to rebel so that you will mature faster…” This unchallenged confrontation worries me because events begin to implode on itself. Once this catches hold, it cascades all the way down until we reach a point where time-events overcode themselves. This is why we can not simply leave a petty conversation. We are always left shortchanged. Even in the “negotiation stage” where both parties are meant to compromise. “the best negotiations are where both parties are left unhappy…” This is what Hegel described as “the death of subjectivity” and the rise of spirit. It is in spirit where contradictions are allowed to roam free. The dreaded dialectics.