“to become true compas is a constant process … which
requires a new sense of self“(Koopmann, 2008: 299, original emphasis, my underlining).
(…)
Consciousness in itself is apparently not a sufficient basis to lead to liberation without a healing of one’s personality. The outline above [not included] seems to suggest that involvement of personality, or as Koopmann puts it, the capital ‘Self’, is not merely necessary to building solidarity, but a precondition for it. In our attempt of solidarity building this seems unfortunate to me for two reasons.
First, it implies an individualization, or personalization, of solidarity, where the prime concern no longer is the relationship, but the inner workings of the Self. The process of conscientization is “reverted”, from being group processes to a (politics of) bodily-mental obligation of making solidarity personal. Koopman aims at creating ‘new ways of relating’, that avoids the objectification in enacting solidarity upon, which creates one(‘s) [S]elf as a subject. But becoming ‘true’, ‘a compa’, ‘a voice with’, and ‘accountable’ requires somebody to be true, a compa, etc. to – it requires others, that are different from one(‘s) Self. If solidarity is inverted to a ‘P’ersonal ‘p’olitics, there is hardly anymore any room left for the interpersonal solidarity relation. …
quoted from the 1st journal.