Autonomy as alternative - 1

Autonomy refers to the ability of an individual to construct his or her own principles of existence and codes of interaction (Auto being the 'self' in its reflexive dimension and nomos is the ancient Greek for law, rule or convention). In short, it carries a meaning quite different to that which is commonly bandied about in 'political' and economic discourse. Our vulgar conception of autonomy is in truth closer to that of 'independence' or 'self-sufficiency', something often equated with a child's development or designated as an admirable quality to have in the workforce and as an individual in general. This unfortunate semantic distortion is rooted in the liberal conception of the individual and of political action. The founders of political liberalism believed that autonomy characterized the adult state in which the individual is no longer dependent on others and is capable of satisfying his needs on his own. 
The dissociation (that liberals pride themselves on making) between individual and society does not create emancipated or autonomous individuals, but creates parcelized individuals, who are fragmented and isolated making them vulnerable to coercive power emanating from extra-social structures (e.g: the Market, organized religion, technocrats...). Extra-social structures are those who lack reflexive action and that instrumentalize society by exploiting it as a resource in order to achieve dehuminizing goal. Parcelized individuals are participants of a network and suffer from an inter-relational deficiency. They believe themselves to be free, but are in truth nothing more than operatives.   
What the munificent institutions of 'democracy' and 'freedom' preach is that individuals becomes free by extrapolating themselves as much as possible from society and that society is a necessary evil that must be reduced to its most harmless sediment. Margaret Thatcher expressed this frightening obsession in the most eloquent of ways (as always) : "There is no such thing as society: there are individual men and women, and there are families."
Society creates context and yet receives context. Society determines meaning and yet receives meaning. Society is inter-subjective, meaning that it emanates from the interaction of the subjective experiences of its members, and yet, it cannot be reduced to the sum of these individual experiences. The circular dynamic between society and individual gives the relation its indeterminate nature which in turn allows for critical interpretation. It is indetermination that constitutes the foundation of human freedom and any attempt to bracket the human condition to arbitrary theories of determination is an act of enslavement and exploitation. (A future post will be dedicated to the subject of indetermination).  What we are witnessing today, in our society, is not the individual's liberation from society (this being the official liberal and capitalist discourse), but the progressive weakening and isolation of the individual by the destruction of society, or rather of social consciousness (this being the veritable liberal and capitalistic action). Parcelized individuals are tragically dependant. Dependant because they are neither reflexive, nor transformational, nor inter-subjective, as we shall see.  And tragically because they see themselves as free, when this vision is rooted in their blindness.

The answer, or, to use a more clinical vocabulary, the cure, to the plight of the parcelized individual lies in the autonomous actor.
Autonomy, in its etymological source, has three constitutive facets. 
1. Autonomy is reflexive : the autonomous actor is conscious of his or her autonomy and is able to elucidate it. The actor has both an external and internal perspective on his or her conventions and actions and is aware of the limits inherent to these. 
2. Autonomy is transformational : by constructing rules and laws that are reflexive, the autonomous actor transforms reality. By conventionalizing reality, the actor deforms it. This is an act of individual appropriation, for reality declines itself to the number of autonomous actors.
3. Autonomy is inter-subjective : the autonomous actor constructs reflexive conventions by interacting with other subjective realities, thus creating relations of interdependence (and not of dependence as in the configuration of a heteronomous society of parcelized individuals). The construction of conventions implies a coherent structurating of reality based on communication; being autonomous does not, therefore, entail everyobody doing their own thing.
If individuals are to be autonomous actors then society must be an autonomous stage, and a stage must be built by actors. Autonomy finds its vitality in this indetermination and is, theoretically, what gives vitality and originality to democracy. A true democracy is reflexive, transformational and inter-subjective. Its constitutive dynamic is the circular relation between individual and society, a relation in which extra-social coercion and structures of dependency are absent. In this light, it is glaringly evident that ‘democratic’ actors are a myriad of smiling puppets and that liberal capitalism is the puppet master.