A German Newspaper in the 1800's challenged its readership by asking the question of what Enlightenment was?  Apart from the usual responses to the editor, the noted philosopher Immanuel Kant responded also.  In his eloquent address he was to account that Enlightenment rest not in a collective idea or movement but lie more closly in the human ability to release itself from the self-imposed chains of servitude.  He notes that our clergy define spirituality for us, our judiciary, law, teachers define knowledge and our doctors determine our health.  On his way to an argument that passively reaffirms elitism and a monarchy, he engenders advice in regard to the self-emancipation of a human, suggesting subtly that human freedom lie somewhere in a narrow divide magnified and exaggerated by our own machinations of self.  A self generated by the choices of a closed and superstitious mind, divided and cut off from the true nature of itself.

Well what does this exactly mean? Prior to his death another acclaimed philosopher, this time French, Michel Foucault, responded to the initial article from the perspective of his strength 20th centuray existentialism.  He was to assert at the age of Kant's response in no uncertainness, as suggesting that times had indeed changed, and from him to now each age could now barely recognise it precedents.  Foucault stressed the importance of rigorous investigation, open, inward, collective and individual as being the tools necessary for the on-going battle for the freedom of the self or individual.  The individual ultimately having the means within their own capacities to be able to commence the journey to freedom.  In traditional Foucauldian analytical discourse he suggests again the need to investigate the most benign of our institutional structures, as the embedded histories unfold tales of why we are where we are and how, and more importantly through this rigour the hidden agendas of the most friendly of these apparatuses of control begin to come into our realm of awareness.  Therefore it is at this point that autonomy of the human being can begin, and it is through the edifice of questioning we allow our selves the opportunity for freedom and we are only limited by our own individual capacity to let go and demystify the illusion for the true reality of the human experience to unfold thereafter. 

At the time of his writing he was responding in a world that was held in the grip of a battle between communist and capitalist doctrinal dominance, it was still a time in which his own lifestyle choices were still somewhat obscure with relation to public transparency.  In essence when comparing the age of Foucault with that of today, we would see the philosopher living personally with more freedom than he would have experienced in any time in his lifetime or in the ages previous, however he would see a time where public liberty is slowly winding away like the arms of a slow turning windmill.  Turning for the worst toward the powers of the state, the greed of the bankers and the corporates.  The dilemna, how to respond?  Foucault would suggest the same method and when applied to today we would see his academic legacy suffice us in our journey to commence our inspection of the apparatuses of control, however I would suspect that once someway down the road to freedom the wheels might begin to fall off...

Enter the Age of Terror and all of its associated challenges.  Having had a historical legacy that has seen the world to war twice, political disturbace, war and famine as a staple of our daily diets for as long as I can remember, one would think that we as humans would be better prepared for the world as it has become.  However our current reality is further from the truth, in fact it would appear that we now occupy a station that sees us in opposition to the very nature of our true reality as human beings.  This position if analysed from a perspective of western linear discernment would see the human race set up for a final Armageddon - much more of what we have see in the past over an accelerated period - do we survive? 

From a different perspective, one of continuance, cycles and holistic inter and in-dependant systems of life we could view our current predicament as a phase, a passing one...  But passing where and what to?  To answer this question would take more time than it would be worth, suffice it to say that we as humans have always had the capability to respond to evil and oppression.  If one element of history if is consistent it is that wherever and whenever tranny arose in the land, after a period of persecution, a rebellion would arise from what was left over.  United bands would stand, uniting under a common banner to defend against the threat to common freedoms. 

However in the 21st century we are seeing more quickly than ever before the human race descending into a stupor of living bateries, seeking out an existence rather that experiencing true freedom.  Freedom not prescribed by my gp, or the supposed freedoms of any political regime or organised clergy.  No not the kinds of freedoms solds by Versace and Calvin Klein.  No the kind of freedom that first orginates in the freedom of thought, an analytical and de constructive mind that never tires in its restlessness with the world and how it is sold to us throughout all levels of their apparatuses of control. 

We must first reclaim ourselves, it begins in the mind and it takes courage and resolve not to sway away from the pictures that start to flow from this new vision synonymous with critical thinking and informed decision making.  Like Foucault would assert the most begin institutional apparatuses are the most dangerous, as these are the ones we most commonly ignore or pass over.   First decolonise our questions and this will eventually lead to a decolonisation of our living behaviours and once our behaviours of living equate to that of our intended purpose in this world - then humanity will unfold, God willing.

The operational system at present works upon the fear, division and isolation of an individual to regulate itself in accordance with the standards and norms of those in power.  However this form of control is only an illusion, self-regulation and societal regulation work upon the psyche of the individual and via emotional persuasions cause a process of autonomous regulation.  This falls down though when liberty becomes just an ideal manipulated by the ruling elite, when this happens we as a united front should question and debate in a call for dialogue.  Again when this breaks down we should be autonomous, assertive and break away from the ruling structures to establish alternatives wherever the space allows.  However this first takes the courage to open our eyes and with an open heart ask our selves what exactly is going on?  The next step is to accept the answers we find, deal with it and re-invent.  The future is always ours - we just have to have the courage to be what we were intended to be...  that is - human  - redefined by the age in new terms of reference.