14 Jan 2014

Global Social Project

A real question is arising in my life:

Can we build objective standards of justice or is a relativist position necessary to avoid intrusive implementation of badly adjusted measures of 'progress'? 

For example, if an indigenous tribe draws a chart keeping women under control and disallowing western dress and music, whilst becoming economically viable and building an autonomous activity disregarding the corporate norm, in accordance with very precarious traditional values and relations to the land; 
Where do I draw the line between what I regard as authoritative rule and measures needed to shift a paradigm? What's more important: cultural (race, gender, class) emancipation, or control of our means of production? 

Does autonomy provide a safe haven for subversion and development? Does it simply isolate the alternate mode of organisation or provide it with space to strengthen? 
I am coming to the realisation that existing autonomously within is categorically not enough anymore. Whatever is needed for structural adjustments, it is the pressure inflicted on the institution and structures of power, the negotiation (remember what that actually means?) for advances within, to be inside and against, that makes real change, or progress. 
Maybe there is no reality but the pressure we inflict on the structure subduing us, and the movement we then implement, freed of shackles until the next micro liberation movement.