Before I leave this topic behind, I would like to sum up my theory. The conversion experience and its analogues (Badiou’s événement or the universal transformation of love at first sight, the coup de foudre, as well as the so-called mystical experience)—these are possible because the sphere of our experience does or did encompass certain boundaries, chasms separating sub-spheres, which are kept apart, yet susceptible to breaching. For the mystic, there is this world and the transcendent world of the angels and celestial spirits. For the lover, there is one’s own private sphere and the obscure impenetrable sphere of the beloved. Between any two human beings, there may be a similar chasm which might be deepened by differences of culture, language, gender, race, or individual circumstance. Between my life and that of a convict or illegal immigrant, there are chasms of disparity which are not easily and not often bridged. What I refer to as the conversion experience presupposes a leap across a chasm of this kind, whereby I recognize myself in the other and adopt the other’s point of view. If such experience is less common now it is because everything in the world has been rendered familiar and accessible. The hell of the convict has become the stuff of entertainment and humor. The sufferings of refugees and immigrants are reported to the point of saturation and of “compassion fatigue,” though we are likely to remain segregated from any personal encounters with such people. I am convinced that the inner transformation at the root of mysticism, of love as a coup de foudre, or of radical politicization involves traversing these chasms or boundaries. If there are no barriers at all because love and intimacy no longer mean a leap in the dark, a perilous salto mortale; if the sphere of the other is either completely inaccessible or completely familiar, then there is no ground for radical transformation, no need for the radical turn around of the conversion experience. Of course, everyone still wants fulfillment. People still adopt political positions and this involves investment and risk. But we no longer risk our soul. We make “investments” like any other investment of effort or money.
In this blog, we have discussed the alienation and atomization of young people as a precondition of right-wing recruitment. The political polarization and withdrawal of liberals into the private sphere is oppressive to anyone who remembers better times or who travels in countries where a freer public spirit still prevails. Perhaps our alienation is now so extreme under the conditions of the pandemic that the act of spontaneously emerging and coming together in crowds would effect a kind of conversion experience. When my friends and I were meeting last fall and winter in parks and train stations to talk and enjoy human companionship, I liked to imagine flash mobs and impromptu rallies with music and dance and coteries of people talking about issues of common concern and comparing notes. Is this possible or is a free public culture no longer feasible when people prefer an online communication that gives them a simulacrum of freedom while they are manipulated by algorithms and demagogues?
Signed,
Andrew (Weeks)
Normal Thoughts 