Eddie, 9/18

We have now heard of Lyotard’s idea that everyone should strive to be free from the old and the stagnant. In the perfect world, we would all be as we see fit and not have some “-ism” tell us what to do. It is from a world where we are all comfortably different, he says, that conflict will cease. Though for people who have signed up for Lyotard’s hypothetical utopia of the artists, there are strange surprises waiting for them around the corner.

But first, we must put down our own mindset of” samism,” and picture this world where difference, rather than the same, is the equilibrium. Picture it in the form of two magnets. Now that we have flipped one around, the polarities push one another until they are a happy distance apart. Here, we learn not from our predecessors’ experience but from contemplating what they had failed to realize. There is always a better way in Lyotardian-America. Thus, contentment breeds stagnation, so people who just follow the ways of another and transcribe ideals are incapable of growing and flourishing. Even people who trust their own routines are part of this group of lazy, worthless and incompetent outliers (or inliers?). They are people who come short in their contribution to society and spend their days on flaccid labors. It is not too far from our own definition of a social deviant, really. This schism is a form of conflict.

Yet, it can be argued that such a social divide is of a world not yet made perfect. Should everyone embrace the idea of questioning and evolution, there would be no need for such exclusion. Truth be told, it would solve conflict, albeit that of a very specific flavor: the conflict of difference. That is, there would be no call to arms against “those freedom-hating Muslims” or “those decadent western infidels.” But in their place, we will experience a new kind of war: between countries similar to one another. What if, by chance, the proud course of revolution, evolution and innovation of two countries happen to be alike one another? Could it be that the other is leeching on the efforts and accomplishments of their neighbor? How could anyone stand by such an insult on their heritage of unique being? In a world of difference, we fight to eradicate the same.

Conservatives conserve, we were told. Thus, the world of the different is filled with conservatives who conserve individuality. And when there are things to conserve, there are threats to be fought, and we end up being no better off in terms of conflict in Lyotard’s world.