thoughts on the relationship between authority and resistance

...the relationship between oppression and resistance. it is a bit like a toxic relationship. there's a quote that made me think of this, a sort of dense quote about not having one without the other. 

"If speech depends upon censorship, then the principle that one might seek to oppose is at once the formative principle of oppositional speech." -Judith Butler (brilliant and insightful philosopher). 

this quote is directly addressing censorship, from one direction or another, and could apply in various situations, however at the heart of the statement is that opposition is always a two way street. some lanes are just wider than others.

“If speech depends upon censorship…”

→ if the way people speak out (especially against authority) is shaped or made possible because there is censorship in place…

“…then the principle that one might seek to oppose…”

→ The “principle” - censorship itself — the very thing being resisted or opposed.

“…is at once the formative principle of oppositional speech.”

→ “Formative principle” - the thing that gives shape or structure to something.

So: censorship becomes the foundation or condition for oppositional speech.

And so perhaps this begs the questions of: What would one do without the other? What would an oppressive regime become without a resistance? A happier oppressive regime? Would the oppression cease to exist without another entity to bring attention to its wrongs? Perhaps the opposition would become more like a bike lane or a sidewalk, as with most progressive movements in America (outside of Asheville, or Portland). 

What would a resistance become without the authoritarian rule? Would they become the oppressor? Or just a group of people content with their lot in life?  A people unencumbered by stress and worry about those that seek to take their autonomy and agency...

it seems that that it really depends on who is opposing what. Oppression is the less passive between the two and implies a wider lane (i.e. more broad support from the populace) or simply the more aggressive, dedicated group willing to dismantle protections for others in order to assert their own will. For what reason, it is difficult to tell. It seems that resistance is more or less a necessity born out of a desire to not be oppressed 

I think about this because it feels, intuitively as well as objectively, that we are witnessing this in America and across the globe. As a person who holds progressive ideals (at least to my mind), it strikes me as odd and confounding that other autonomous beings would want to impose their will. Whatever happened to 'live and let live'? Huh? 

I suppose the 'oppressors' in this situation (right wing reactionaries, pundits, think tanks and those in power) have created a phantom threat out of the LGBTQIA+  movement writ large (as pointed out astutely by Judith Butler in Who's afraid of Gender?). Phantasmagoric is the correct term here, because I believe the oppression and erasure of other humans and their right to self-determination is largely motivated by, for lack of a better term, yapping (see/listen to any right wing radio/tv). This yapping leads others to believe that a "Phantom Menace" so to speak (haha) is out there trying to destroy marriage and children and all that we as a country hold dear. 

these are only some thoughts.