I think this is the most common question raised today concerning terror and
violence, that is "What motivates violence"? I think this is a wrong
question and very un foucauldian one, because of several reasons. The first
reason for it being a wrong question is that questioner poses itself from
the outset in the judging position, as a judge as to the verificacy of
other's
intention and motives etc. It already prejudges through such sort of
questioning,
prejudges its own innocense and demonises other through the very
questioning.
Secondly it does not seek reasons in what is obvious, in fact too obvious,
but
in what is hidden, in nature, motives, intentions etc. Therefore I think
this
mode of questioning must be rejected.
One should rather raise a different question (s). What is the limit of
repression,
persecution, and incurring pain on body and soul? What is the limit of
technology? What is the limit of power, of the hegeomon, and hegemony. I
presume that if we ask these sort of questions we will be able to find
answers on very surface, about what makes people indulge in gestures of
defiance, even in the face of presumably unsurpassable power.
regards
ali
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.