Assemblage is always a joint. In fact, it is many joints stitched together. A joint is always a gap and link. Assemblage joins many things in a manyfold ways. Assemblage cannot be fully joined into a one. The regimes of the same reduces the assemblage as other of the same. They cannot reduce the multiplicity that forms the assemblage into one. Assemblages remain disjointed and can be converted into a disassemblages. The joint that forms the assemblage always remains out of joint. This is why assemblage is also a disassemblage. The assemblages of the regimes of the same are already disassemblages.
The assemblages of the regimes of the same pretend to speak in one voice. They only always manifest that they only have one voice to resound. All other voices have to become the echo of a single voice. Thus, their voice is privileged by silencing other voices. Other voices can only mimick and echo the single voice. The other has to be other of the same or one of the One. Thus one of the One or the other of same is a despotic signifier. It is its own bubble and its own amplifier. The assemblages under the regimes of the same link the one ( other) to the One. This means the assemblages under the regimes of the same constitute assemblages disjointedly. It puts up disjointed joints. They are simultaneously disassemblages. Hence, can mask itself as an assemblage without manifesting the subjoining subjuncture which is cancelling the co-functions of some of the assemblages.
Thus, for instance, democracy has become disasseblage. It is dying in its very functioning . We might say the same of Media, the same. The individual of modernity has become dividual of late modernity. The flows of the internet and the market has broken the unity of the self. We have become dividuals dividing ourselves at all levels. think of medicine. We are simply numbers. Our sugar, fever or pressure in simply a number. Hitting a wrong number makes us sick and misfit. We also have become our biometric for our administration. We are simply an Aadar card number. We have become raw data for Big Data Analytics, Artificial Intelligence and Big Data. Coding and algorithms that control us are numerical. Numbers have come to rule us. Numbers are numbered as humans and are circulated to manage humans. These are the new assembalges that keep us into their network. Our politics and religion has also become divisive. Humans have become disposable. As Karl Marx has rightly said’ all that is solid is melting in the air’.
When assemblages become disassemblages, we feel that time is out of joint. The regime of the same brings this sense that time is not on our side. Hence, it thinks that we have to set things right . We have to restore the order and bring everything under the sway of the One/ same. Religious as well as political fundamentalist like terrorists think that one is born to set things right. This desire to set things right also undergirds the market. We follow it to set things right in our lives. We can notice the jouissance of setting things right. Putting things right involves enjoining the disjointedness of the joint under the regimes of the same. Under this regime, even dwarfs claim to see further than the giants. The politics as well as religious implications of this gigantic sight of the dwarfs becomes visible in the religious fundamentalism milked by politics of our time. This inaugurates the coming of ‘our time’.
Slogans like good times , ache din indicate now it is our time. The sense of our time has come to produce a sense of mission to join, co-join the disjointed assemblies. We also experience the sense the arrival of ‘our time’ in the market, politics and religion in a similar fashion and we network with assemblages and disassemblages of the market, politics and religion accordingly. This imperative to enjoin the disjointed assemblies to fit into the regimes of the same will continue ceaselessly unless we ourselves become a disasseblage that interrogate the assemblages of the same. Becoming a disassemblage , we have the challenge to align with the assemblages of the regimes of the other that lie dormant alongside the assemblages of the regimes of the same.
The regimes of the same cancel our future in a sense that the future is determined. The hens are slaughtered and there are no more eggs to come. This means that there is no new tomorrow. In such a disjucture, tomorrow becomes the other of today. The future is also the other of the same. It means the future is simply the other of today. Future being closed as other of today becomes lost. Lost futures produces hauntologies. Hence, we have the challenge to open the future. Future has to still remain in the coming. Future is then truly future. It is not the other of today/present.
Under the regimes of the other, the future remains other. It is unreducable into the same. Tomorrow remains tomorrow. The hen is not slaughtered and there are more eggs to come. The regimes of the other orders time differently. To enter the regimes of the other, we have the challenge to disjoin the alignments of the assemblages and disassembalges of the regimes of the same . This disjoining will be a long drawn process as the regimes of same are already squatting in the playfield. We have the challenge to play the dissemblage. The imperative to play the dissemblage has the power to dismantle the assemblages and dissambleges of the reining regimes of the same . It will open us a disjucture that is also a disjointure. We have to inhabit the disjuctured space and disjointed time by continuing to become a disessemblage. As more people join us and feel the imperative of becoming dissemblage, the assemblages and the dissableges of the regimes of the same will disrupt, disentangle and dismantle. The dissablages of the regimes of the same will then steadily give way to the regimes of the other. We are actors in a network/ assemblages.
By being dissemblages , we reject being an actor in the network of the regimes of the same and steadily enable the regime of the other come to embed within our market , politics and religion. Such a process will make the ecology of love nestle in the market, politics and religion. The ecology of love flows from the regimes of the other. regimes of the other are regimes of love. Our minor voice has the power set in a big revolution. There are this minor voices already there. We have to co-join with these voices that align with the regimes of the other. we need the synodality and solidarity of these minor voices to bring in the revolution that will put us under the regime of love where every other is the other of the other.
