One of the series we are attentive to is force | power | politics, and the mechanisms through which excessive and deficient situations are kept going. How is evasion kept going, for instance and through what mechanisms? One possible response to evasion is to attempt to exercise power in order for the evader to engage, call on a relevant authority, or attempt direct engagement. The evader has an available strategy: minimization of the accusation or reproach. Such minimization, if effective turns the one who brought the claim into a “maximizer” who can then be either counter-claimed as performing vice (excess) and/or satirized. Moreover, if effective the reversal can qualify the minimizer as a victim of an attack.

Instance: annexation of communal space (part of a garden) for personal use results in evasion and delay of attempts to engage the issue, and when finally confronted, minimization of the episode (the annexation) and satirization of anyone who attempts to exercise power in order to address the situation (“over reaction” / “polemicist”). Available option: turn to a source of power that is backed by force (law/bailiffs), which is costly and thus unlikely. Result: deficient communal life.

1 comment

Gaymon Bennett wrote 3 years 4 weeks ago

Evasion and Self-Justification

Evasion seems to be a counter-response to a response to the minor vices. If someone is, say, negligent or heedless in the use of communal space, and that person is called on it, then evasion ensues. If in the course of confrontation the evader can be fixed long enough to face the negligence or heedlessness, one other move is that they will capitulate but only under the sign of self-justification: they had reasonable reasons for acting as they did.

Please register or login to post a comment.