Re-translation from the edition in Spanish of the book SPK – Turn illness into a weapon (SPK - Hacer de la enfermedad un arma). Also published in Patientenstimme Nr. 4-5 (Patients’ Voice, No. 4-5).
In this book, too, we often use the term alienation. Therefore, here are some notes.
With regard to alienation, Karl Marx, perhaps, was the less good Hegelian or Marxian when he affirms that the social, that is the state of society as a whole, must become the first, the most important, the most natural and the most self-evident interest of man (often abbreviated as: humanization of nature, naturalization of man). Hegel, on the other hand, argued: the first and indispensable object of man is consciousness, that is, man himself.
Nature reappears again as a disease, that is, as a disfigured but also humanized nature, where alienation, the first moment of the concept of illness --- fails.
Alienation finds its only possible fulfillment in the human species, which must be realized by us and by all, or alienation turns into a relapse which is called, for example, ecology (= part of the alternative "iatrocapitalism").
For us, alienation is therefore something different from what it is for Marx, who esteemed alienation as something commendable in relation to the production process. He had even criticized that this alienation was not sufficiently complete; he considered it to be a catalyst that changed the forms of social organization. A bill of exchange on the future [Marx distinguishes four types of alienation of the worker: the alienation from the production process, the alienation from the products of the production process (commodities), the alienation from himself (commodity), the alienation from other workers (commodities)].
For us, alienation is also something different from what it is for Hegel, who considered alienation as the reversible part of the spirit's estrangement, the part that can be undone ( = man; the subjective, objective, absolute man), while the estrangement of the spirit as such is irreversible, it cannot be undone, neither in nature nor in history nor in society. Therefore, alienation in the sense of Hegel is for single "individuals" the reason and the possibility of shaking off at least alienation in the philosophical self-reflection, even if only for a moment ("νους", ŕ 'im Nu' = on the instant).
Nor was our theme salvation (in Christ) from sin (of Adam), which is alienation from God (in those remote times the false gods, the goods in our age, in short: fetishism).
For us, alienation was and is illness, which, as such, if all influences by anyone are deducted, eyery time in itself is or too much or too little alienation, but it is, at the same time and thanks to the strength of illness, always, immediately and everywhere activity as a solution as well as liberation, because and as it is matter of pathopractics. The question of alienation is not a question, not even is illness a question, but it is something one should fight for in favor of illness, a fight that questions everything and that persists in questioning.
The traditional responses to the theme of alienation are not at all wrong. Nevertheless, they are wrong because everything depends on illness, and because everything finds its respective completeness only in connection with illness or it does not find it at all. When alienation is perceived, conceived and grasped first and foremost as illness and turned into pathopractics, it is liberating both illness and alienation, even as a word, and dispenses it from any terminological observance.
In short: the level is no longer a therapeutic-theological-eschatological level, not even a Marxist level, which refers to a future society, nor a level of merely Blanquist-social-revolutionary actualization or a level merely of philosophical actualization (Hegelian), but it is the level of collectives in wild and furious joy with illness, and this means: in an eager and urgent relationship between the illnesses of the single ones and the human species (= universal illness and common to all).
This remark is addressed only to those who have a special interest in continuing their studies on alienation. With that, our grateful thanks go also to Jean-Paul Sartre, who in his time (see preface to "SPK – Turn illness into a weapon", April 1972) had more than anticipated the significance and scope of alienation.
(once called theory)
What is a problem? By far not everything;
but: where to 'what' is missing the 'how'.
The solution: the universals-deductive method of construction
(Not yet published, apart from the visible external
since the times of the SPK/PF(H). It is as public as it gets).
Effect intensity = quantity x quality