Commonplaces and Peculiarities

Let us begin with this paradoxical statement: In a world which sets so much value on diversity, it has become virtually impossible to be different. Not that the whole population would wear the same uniform or share the same interests, on the contrary. Mass production has long been supplanted by customized models, work is individualized, everyone can operate in the networks of his choice. Yet within each loose scene and peer-group the attitudes are quite predictable. Especially in milieus which consider “normativity” as the worst of evils, both language and behaviour actually comply with an imperious set of norms. In the fear of hurting somebody else’s feelings, or being branded a reactionary of some kind, or just failing to be positive enough, communication merely consists in the repeated exchange of pre-established codes. This applies to non-verbal communication as well, see the silent, self-disciplined hand signs at protest meetings which have replaced the unruly heckling, clapping and booing. And obviously, this applies to the outfit too. It is indeed amazing how self-styled singularities look alike.

Of course, there’s nothing wrong with diversity if this means welcoming and experiencing the multiplicity of flavours, cultural expressions or thoughts the whole wide world can offer. Yet on the political level, “radical diversity” can be a misleading notion. It may become an excuse for the existing social fragmentation, in which all kind of particular interests coexist without being able to exchange with each other or to merge in a common cause. Let us consider for instance the case for cultural relativism. Apparently, it is a sign of tolerance to tell someone: “This is your point of view as an African woman or a rape victim and I wouldn’t allow myself to say anything about this.” But doesn’t it mean in fact: “You are so radically different from me that you have to be indifferent to my opinion”? Which finally amounts to the statement: You have your own subjective truth, I’ve got mine, we both accept that they stand side by side – period.  As the US-philosopher David Detmer puts it: “Relativism removes one of our most powerful motives to study the views of the other – the idea that the other might be right and we might be wrong.” When understood in this way, radical diversity amounts to a radical denial of dialogue.

Majority has become something fishy these days. Not so long ago, people used to think that in order to change the world, you would have to get the masses on your side. Concurring left-wing tendencies were blamed for their born inability to achieve unity, thus failing to defeat the tiny power elite. Now, majority is often equated to the norm, say: the white, heterosexual, adult, healthy European male. Defining oneself as such would mean identifying with the dominant norm – which shouldn’t bother us that much: Who is so numb to define himself as a white, European heterosexual male except neofascists who are so keen on identity politics? Most of the people would just say: Well, that’s the way it is, there’s nothing I can do about it, but never would I identify with such an identity. You just happen to have a white skin or to be born in Europe, this is neither a reason to be proud nor to be ashamed of. As far as sexual orientation is concerned, it can hardly be denied that even in tolerant, liberal countries the vast majority remains (most of the times at least) heterosexual. Of course, this says nothing against otherwise oriented persons. The question is: In the minority-focused narrative, which place is left for the expression of the frustrations and desires most of the people actually experience? As we know, those have little to do with the “norm” as represented in mainstream media and fiction. Indeed, masses of people feel trapped in an identity they don’t identify with, therefore they are reduced to embarrassed silence when it comes to it. They might feel sympathetic to all kinds of discriminated groups, but this is of little relevance as far as their own life is concerned. To make things worse, it is widely assumed that their own frustrations and desires are fundamentally different from those of other minorities.

Pluralism is being understood as the addition of singularities. The problem with this notion is that “singular” also has the meaning of “unique” in the sense of: something which bears no comparison to anything else (paradigmatic for this is the German dispute about the singularity of the holocaust). So the reasoning goes like this: Each minority is being subjected to a specific kind of discrimination. Cis-hetero-women are not discriminated the same way as lesbians are, lesbians as queer people and so on. Therefore, each minority has to deal with a particular form of micro-power which cannot be equated to other forms. Moreover, each group stands out for itself with specific codes, feelings and worldviews, it thus needs its own zones sheltered from prejudice and injury (some even aiming at radical separatism). A public encounter with others can be nothing else than a juxtaposition of particular subjectivities staging their own visibility ­ ­- as in occupy-like movements. There is no way they would merge for a common cause, as this would rebuild a majority which is postulated as being “totalitarian”. To put it in a further paradoxical way: This kind of self-empowerment leads to powerlessness.

In a way, disintegration is the state of things most of the people experience at present. They feel estranged from a globalized society which destroyed all kinds of collective ties and social protections.  They are left alone in front of invasive forces such as work, commodity and the markets. Cultural identity is the only admitted form of togetherness, provided it remains singular and refrains raising broad social or economic issues. Nonetheless, a majority is not necessarily monolithic. It can be based on the acceptance of all kinds of differences, yet looking for a common ground.

Guillaume Paoli

More from this issue
Rasha Salti

Be Still My Beating Heart

In what follows is an attempt at an impossible dialogue with an inanimate object that cannot answer me back. Namely, a book titled Maalesh, the Journal of a Theatrical Tour, by Jean Cocteau.

Banu Cennetoğlu, Erden Kosova

The List

I encountered The List for the first time in Amsterdam in 2002. After downloading the pdf file I found on UNITED's website, I found myself to have made a very quick decision.

Massimo Perinelli

The Society of the Many is Irreversible (with an introduction of Tunçay Kulaoğlu)

Migration is happening. It is irreversible. Acknowledging this means wagering on a future in a democratic, cosmopolitan society based on the right to have rights.

Das Netwerk kritische Migrations-und Grenzregimeforschung

Democracy Not Integration

The Critical Network of Studies for Migration and Border Regimes initiated a counter-campaign and their manifesto was signed by 3800 intellectuals. Here, we are presenting that campaign text (2010) as it remains still one of the most striking challenges to the discourse of integration.


No a la Integración, right to a legal status, globalisation and anti-racism

One year ago, Kanak Attak, a coalition against racism, presented its work to a larger audience for the first time at the Volksbühne Berlin. With the OpelPitbullAutoput revue, panel discussions, films and conversations in the hallways, we turned our attention to the history of migrant resistance, a topic whose traces have been lost in libraries and personal archives.

Max Czollek, Corinne Kaszner, Leah Carola Czollek, Gudrun Perko

Radical Diversity and De-integration: Towards a Political and Artistic Project

The concept of "integration" is all the rage in public discourse. There's no party manifesto where it doesn't occupy a central position, and there's no discussion about migrants in the media where it isn't used as a shorthand for the problem of "people who aren't like us".

Natalie Bayer, Mark Terkessidis

Beyond Repair: An Anti-Racist Praxeology of Curating

The exhibition conceived in 2014 by House of the History of the Federal Republic of Germany in Bonn, on the topic of Germany as an immigration country, was titled Immer bunter, which translates as "ever more colourful".

Emina Bužinkić

What If Political Landscapes of Solidarity Were All We Cared For?

In this article, two examples of social experimentations are presented: one that intertwines concepts of culture(s) and public infrastructure, and the other one that meets concepts of food and socio-economic emancipation.

Alisa Lebow

Filming Revolution: a non-linear database project about filmmaking in Egypt since the Revolution

This interactive archive does not attempt to provide a history of the revolution, nor does it attempt to an exhaustive chronicle of filmmaking in Egypt since 2011. The focus is on documentary and independent filmmaking and creative approaches to leading the Egyptian culture and society after the events of the revolution.

Begüm Özden Fırat, Fırat Genç

The Commons, Class Recomposition and Strategy

The main thesis is the following: The global political topography of our time is being reshaped through uprisings that exhibit a global momentum and share the same moment - although they are independent of the specific social and political contexts of which they are emerge.

Damir Arsenijević

The Working Group `Jokes, War, and Genocide’ Emancipating the Modes of Commemoration

Bosnian society is presently locating, exhuming, identifying and re-burying its dead. After the war, there are still 10 000 missing persons in Bosnia and Herzegovina buried in hidden mass graves.

Ruben Arevshatyan

Disclaiming and Reclaiming the Public

Within these last 5-6 years, it has been possible to perceive an increasing wave of public activism in the capitals of former Soviet republics, supporting the protection of urban buildings and spaces which had public functions during the Soviet period.

Rastko Močnik, Jelena Vesić, Vladimir Jerić Vlidi

Interview with Rastko Močnik: There is No Theory Without the Practice of Confrontation

Dispossession is a complex term, and we would like to try to break it down to particular fields of operation and use cases. You are among the rare people we know able to simultaneously analyze in depth three of the most prominent domains of the operation of the term - political economy, sociology, and psychoanalysis.

Jelena Petrović

What Does Freedom Stand for Today?

Impossibility to change neoliberal systems which shape and oppress everyday life on all social levels, as well as the simultaneous and paradoxical act of playing and resisting dominant social structures, put us in the position to rethink what the politics of liberation or its revolutionary practices of today.

Marina Gržinić

What Freedom?

Freedom is coming with the adjective in global capitalism. It is exponentially doubled, given as a gift, naked, illegal, and therefore stays today for an emblematic point of analysis of capitalism, its history and present: sovereignty, citizenship, the subject, and humanity.

Vladimir Jerić Vlidi

Dispossession by numbers: 2017/10/70/100

Excerpts from a visual essay for Red Thread: for the multimedia version visit

Asena Günal

“Cultural Hegemony” by Means of the Police

This is a somewhat personal text. Osman Kavala is my employer, and also, since he personally works side by side with us in some projects, my colleague. I was not expecting what befell him.

Red Thread Editorial Board

Issue 4 – Editor’s note

While preparing the issue on dispossession, one from among us is being taken into arrest. This has left behind powerful emotional traces. Is there a new doubt? Could we continue this magazine into the future?