close
終於出刊了。
全球反藥正典中的眾罔兩，重點不在正典，而在正典如何霸佔「一」片光明，驅離退散three billion perverts，使其如鬼魅般窩藏角落。眾而不一，各自踡曲、取暖、苟且的「貌似多」。
雖然只是一篇problematise時事，藉以觀看「被凝視」的非正典存在，從中，更可探求人們如何膝反射地簡化「繁多的事實」。既然繁多，複數的主體、敘事、面向，那還有可能存有真相嗎？
令中國社會嘩然的宋冬野事件，又突然被抓出來叫罵坑殺「吸毒者」（雖然我個人傾向用藥者），再度成為網上熱搜的眾矢之的。然而，無法化約的生命，不是非白即是黑。
對照謝孟穎、潘渝霈那篇《如果這輩子不再嗑藥，不如安樂死！》和今天另一則新聞《飢餓、痛苦太殘酷 尼泊爾兒童吸毒膠逃避》，世界未免太諷刺，莫非irony真是肉搏殘酷最後的出口？
不能過於輕看無知的力量。
公式告訴你「知識即力量」，所以會害你誤以為「無知則無力量」，殊不知無知是ignorance，不是指沒有知識（no-knowledge）而是忽略其他知識（against-knowledge）。
所以無知者的力量其實不小於有知者，差別只在於後者希望理解前者的worldview，不排除「也是一種知識」的可能性；但前者拒絕這樣的說法，只在乎自身知識所帶來的力量能否「持續發展」。
有知者，視「他者的觀點」為培力的途徑；無知者，則待之如擴權的攔阻。都是「視知識為權力，而資本」，但方法不同，結果就不會一樣了，於是「輿論」沒有成為想像中的自由競爭市場。
在【惟工新聞】上讀到一篇《讓智障人士「可以說不，也可以要」 康橋之家事件後談智障人士性公義》。真實存在卻不被承認的慾望，被democratic paternalism馴／斥為虛假。
這種種對平整社會的渴求，使差異原則只在公共的「權利」圖像中產生意義，私領域的排除，致使光明之下、之外的魑魅魍魎皆非正道、都該收服；或，鞭數十，驅之別院。
當「眾」生命無法平均地出現在「無知的帷幕」後，再多的權利論述，也成rhetoric。最後，僅剩的只是自由（與平等）的simulacra，在歷史的長河中，再也無法輕易斷言「公義」。
－…→ 交給學校depository的摘要，寫得比原文還好（私以為）－…→
Between criminality and addiction: multiple penumbrae of global anti-drug normativity
The global War on Drugs has successfully constructed the ‘anti-drug normativity’ in international law and domestic policies. Lately, drug problems and related law enforcement provoke controversies both in Taiwan and the Philippines – from the extreme of ‘taking drug users’ lives’ to the other of ‘helping them back to normal life’. However, what count for ‘death’ and ‘abnormality’ has seldom been probed. Also, is that a drug-free – and then all-substance-free – world really desirable? Were there penumbrae for the unwanted ‘ghosts’ to live behind and beyond the lights? In an pharmacopornographic era, this paper queries: is there something missing between normativity and non-normativity – so as to the matter of life and death?
Inspired by some post-drug users, I conducted an analysis of the statements given by the governing – the ruling class who owns power to manage regulation, knowledge and capital. I argue that the discourses of criminality (felony punishment) and addition (harm reduction) have both reduced the contexts and reasons of different drug users into a good-bad citizen bifurcation. Drawing on Gilles Deleuze’s distinction of vital and deadly experimentation – along with the Apollonian-Dionysian dichotomy – in this paper I conclude that we need a non-reducible understanding of drug-using experiences that better serves both criminal and health policies in an open-ended society of global control.
全球反藥正典中的眾罔兩，重點不在正典，而在正典如何霸佔「一」片光明，驅離退散three billion perverts，使其如鬼魅般窩藏角落。眾而不一，各自踡曲、取暖、苟且的「貌似多」。
雖然只是一篇problematise時事，藉以觀看「被凝視」的非正典存在，從中，更可探求人們如何膝反射地簡化「繁多的事實」。既然繁多，複數的主體、敘事、面向，那還有可能存有真相嗎？
令中國社會嘩然的宋冬野事件，又突然被抓出來叫罵坑殺「吸毒者」（雖然我個人傾向用藥者），再度成為網上熱搜的眾矢之的。然而，無法化約的生命，不是非白即是黑。
對照謝孟穎、潘渝霈那篇《如果這輩子不再嗑藥，不如安樂死！》和今天另一則新聞《飢餓、痛苦太殘酷 尼泊爾兒童吸毒膠逃避》，世界未免太諷刺，莫非irony真是肉搏殘酷最後的出口？
不能過於輕看無知的力量。
公式告訴你「知識即力量」，所以會害你誤以為「無知則無力量」，殊不知無知是ignorance，不是指沒有知識（no-knowledge）而是忽略其他知識（against-knowledge）。
所以無知者的力量其實不小於有知者，差別只在於後者希望理解前者的worldview，不排除「也是一種知識」的可能性；但前者拒絕這樣的說法，只在乎自身知識所帶來的力量能否「持續發展」。
有知者，視「他者的觀點」為培力的途徑；無知者，則待之如擴權的攔阻。都是「視知識為權力，而資本」，但方法不同，結果就不會一樣了，於是「輿論」沒有成為想像中的自由競爭市場。
在【惟工新聞】上讀到一篇《讓智障人士「可以說不，也可以要」 康橋之家事件後談智障人士性公義》。真實存在卻不被承認的慾望，被democratic paternalism馴／斥為虛假。
這種種對平整社會的渴求，使差異原則只在公共的「權利」圖像中產生意義，私領域的排除，致使光明之下、之外的魑魅魍魎皆非正道、都該收服；或，鞭數十，驅之別院。
當「眾」生命無法平均地出現在「無知的帷幕」後，再多的權利論述，也成rhetoric。最後，僅剩的只是自由（與平等）的simulacra，在歷史的長河中，再也無法輕易斷言「公義」。
－…→ 交給學校depository的摘要，寫得比原文還好（私以為）－…→
Between criminality and addiction: multiple penumbrae of global anti-drug normativity
The global War on Drugs has successfully constructed the ‘anti-drug normativity’ in international law and domestic policies. Lately, drug problems and related law enforcement provoke controversies both in Taiwan and the Philippines – from the extreme of ‘taking drug users’ lives’ to the other of ‘helping them back to normal life’. However, what count for ‘death’ and ‘abnormality’ has seldom been probed. Also, is that a drug-free – and then all-substance-free – world really desirable? Were there penumbrae for the unwanted ‘ghosts’ to live behind and beyond the lights? In an pharmacopornographic era, this paper queries: is there something missing between normativity and non-normativity – so as to the matter of life and death?
Inspired by some post-drug users, I conducted an analysis of the statements given by the governing – the ruling class who owns power to manage regulation, knowledge and capital. I argue that the discourses of criminality (felony punishment) and addition (harm reduction) have both reduced the contexts and reasons of different drug users into a good-bad citizen bifurcation. Drawing on Gilles Deleuze’s distinction of vital and deadly experimentation – along with the Apollonian-Dionysian dichotomy – in this paper I conclude that we need a non-reducible understanding of drug-using experiences that better serves both criminal and health policies in an open-ended society of global control.
文章標籤
全站熱搜
留言列表
