For example: it would be interesting to see whether the repressive apparatus would not react more violently to a simulated holdup than to a real holdup. Because the latter does nothing but disturb the order of things, the right of property, whereas the former attacks the reality principle itself. Transgression and violence are less serious because they only contest the distribution of the real. Simulation is infinitely more dangerous because it always leaves open to supposition that, above and beyond its object, law and order themselves might be nothing more than simulation. But the difficulty is proportional to the danger. How to feign a violation and put it to the test? Simulate a robbery in a large store; how to persuade security that it is a simulated robbery? There is no "objective" difference: the gestures, the signs are the same as for the real robbery, the signs do not lean to one side or another. To the established order they are always of the order of the real. Organize a fake holdup. Verify that your weapons are harmless, and take the most trustworthy hostage, so that no human life will be in danger (or one lapses into the criminal). Demand a ransom, and make it so that the operation creates as much commotion as possible--in short, remain close to the "truth," in order to test the reaction of the apparatus to a perfect simulacrum. You won't be able to do it: the network of artificial signs will become inextricably mixed up with real elements (a policeman will really fire on sight; a client of the bank will faint and die of a heart attack; one will actually pay you the phony ransom), in short you will immediately find yourself once again, without wishing it, in the real, one of whose functions is precisely to devour any attempt at simulation, to reduce everything to the real--that is, to the established order itself, well before institutions and justice come into play. It is necessary to see in this impossibility of isolating the process of simulation the weight of an order that cannot see and conceive of anything but the real, because it cannot function anywhere else. The simulation of an offense, if it is established as such, will either be less severely punished (because it has no "consequences") or punished as an offense against the judicial system (for example if one sets in motion a police operation "for nothing")--but never as a simulation since it is precisely as such that no equivalence with the real is possible and hence no repression either. (132) |
For example: it would be interesting to see whether the repressive apparatus would not react more violently to a simulated rape than a real rape. Because the latter does nothing but disturb the order of things, the right of sexual consent, whereas the former attacks the reality principle itself. Transgression and violence are less serious because they only contest the distribution of the real. Simulation is infinitely more dangerous because it always leaves open to supposition that, above and beyond its object, law and order themselves might be nothing more than simulation. But the difficulty is proportional to the danger. How to feign a violation and put it to the test? Simulate a rape in a private, but visible location; how to persuade the police that it is a simulated rape? There is no "objective" difference: the gestures, the signs are the same as for the real rape, the signs do not lean to one side or another. To the established order they are always of the order of the real. Organize a fake rape. Verify that your weapon is harmless, use a willing partner as the simulated victim, so that consent is not an issue (or one lapses into the criminal). Demand every perversion your partner wants, and make it so the operation creates as much commotion as possible--in short, remain close to the "truth," in order to test the reaction of the apparatus to a perfect simulacrum. You won't be able to do it: a network of artificial signs will become inextricably mixed up with real elements (the police will really threaten you with their weapons; a witness may tackle and attack you; your partner will actually stop struggling because of your threatening demands), in short you will immediately find yourself once again, without wishing it, in the real, one of whose functions is precisely to devour any attempt at simulation, to reduce everything to the real--that is, to the established order itself, well before institutions and justice come into play. It is necessary to see in this impossibility of isolating the process of simulation the weight of an order that cannot see and conceive of anything but the real, because it cannot function anywhere else. The simulation of a rape, if it is established as such, will not be punished because, as a simulation, it is welcomed and encouraged by the real. The very essence of a defense strategy is just to argue that the rape was not "real," but was just a simulation of rape. Thus, the system of simulation cannot be resisted through a hyper-simulation approach. |