First, thank you Hammish for these great remarks.
People ask me this very question all the time. Does Post-Architecture potentially enable a scary dystopia? Should we not be scared? My usual answer to that is — you bet. It is scary. We should be scared.
Can this power be wielded on others in an opressive manner? Yes. Has it got the potential for being used in foul, exploitative manners? Absolutely. But like Paul Virilio said, “When you invent the ship, you also invent the shipwreck; when you invent the plane, you also invent the planecrash; and when you invent electricity, you also invent electrocution… Every technology carries its own negativity, which is invented at the same time as technical progress”.
There is an integral accident in Post-Architecture. That is because it frames a sort of methodology, a “toolset of ideas”. As any tool, it is amoral, and can be used for anything — be it chilling social engineering scenarios in which people do not understand just how they are being manipulated, or people who use these ideas to make their lives a work of living art. This only attests to the potential power of this vision of humans and space.
It allows for a better practice of freedom because it enables us to interfere with the variables that make our life what it is. These variables are rarely perceived (they constitute our reality tunnels, where we are immersed) and they are often left to a random chain of chance events.
We can be said to be those who desire a greater degree of independence, in our lives from chaos and manipulation. We must learn how the invisible manipulation of ourselves occurs outside our perceptual field, in order to — if we so desire — to do it to ourselves, through our own choice.
That’s why Post-Architecture is — as I personally see it — a defence against social engineering. Of the best kind!