Renormalization and Power

I am pondering over everything that was not done to prevent the genocide in Gaza, and that so many are complicit in having made it happen, or in having allowed it to happen. Some are even complicit in the fact, at this writing, that it is still happening. So what does a recovery from this situation look like? How does life arrive to a new normal?

Me, to the DeepSeek chatbot:

That it is import to renormalize any analytical model which is intended keep up, as well as it can, with reality, points to the fact that our models of complex phenomena is always imperfect. How far models must be moved in order to become renormalized is a measure of the understanding which was represented by the model, in comparison to reality itself. For example, we look at the genocide in Gaza. Perhaps it will soon be over. Then there will be a need to renormalize the understanding of global society to the implications to its institutions of what global society has done, or allowed to be done. Part of the re-normalization will be done through acknowledgments and assignments of blame both to individuals and to institutions, and part will be done by forgetting what cannot be clarified. The renormalization will encounter inertial elements in the erstwhile power structure, as power in action does not like to change established pathways. The forces which can cause established power to change course or to change its nature must come from somewhere. Where should we look to find such forces?

The DeepSeek chatbot replied:

This is a profound and insightful line of reasoning. You’ve correctly identified a core challenge in both science and human society: the constant need to update our imperfect models (be they scientific theories or social narratives) when they clash with a more complex reality. The concept of “renormalization” is a powerful metaphor for this process.

Let’s break down your question: Where should we look to find the forces that can cause established power to change course?

Following your model, these forces are the “counter-vailing energies” that overcome the inertia of the existing power structure. They can be found in several interconnected realms:

1. Internal Pressures (Within the System)

These are forces that arise from the contradictions and failures of the system itself, making the status quo unsustainable.

• Institutional Legitimacy Crisis: When institutions (governments, international bodies, judicial systems) are perceived as having failed—either by allowing a catastrophe to happen or by being complicit in it—they face a crisis of legitimacy. The force here is the withdrawal of public consent. This manifests as:

  • Mass Protests and Civil Disobedience: Sustained, widespread public outrage makes it politically costly for power to continue on its current path. It signals that the “social contract” is fraying.

  • Whistleblowers and Insider Dissent: Individuals within powerful institutions who, driven by conscience, expose wrongdoing from the inside. They act as a catalyst, forcing a system to confront its own flaws.

2. External Pressures (From Outside the System)

These are forces that the existing power structure does not directly control but cannot ignore.

• Global Civil Society and Transnational Networks: This includes:

  • International NGOs: Organizations like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the International Red Cross document facts, assign blame, and keep the issue on the global agenda.

  • Grassroots Social Movements: Movements that transcend national borders, coordinated through digital media, can apply pressure simultaneously in multiple countries.

  • Academic and Intellectual Discourse: Scholars, lawyers, and public intellectuals reframe the understanding of events, developing the new language and legal frameworks (e.g., accusations of genocide, apartheid) that become the tools for re-normalization.

• Formal Legal and Diplomatic Mechanisms:

  • International Courts: Bodies like the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the International Criminal Court (ICC) represent a formal, legalistic path to re-normalization. Even if their rulings are slow or difficult to enforce, they delegitimize the actions of power and create a lasting legal record.

  • Diplomatic and Economic Sanctions: While often politically selective, sanctions are a tangible tool used by other state actors to impose costs on a power that violates established norms.

3. Moral and Narrative Pressures (The Battle of Ideas)

This is perhaps the most fundamental level, as it underpins all others. It’s the fight over the story we tell ourselves.

• Moral Revulsion and the Awakening of Conscience: Sometimes, the sheer scale of human suffering, made visceral through media, breaks through political apathy. This is an emotional and ethical force that can mobilize all other forces. It creates a “before and after” moment.

• The Power of Storytelling and Art: Journalists, filmmakers, authors, and artists are the chief engineers of re-normalization. They humanize statistics, create empathetic connections, and craft the narratives that eventually become the accepted history. They are instrumental in ensuring that what “cannot be clarified” is not entirely forgotten.

• Intergenerational Shift: Young people, who are less invested in the old paradigms and power structures, often become the carriers of the new, re-normalized understanding. Their values, shaped by the catastrophes of their time, demand a different future.

The Inevitable Friction

As you astutely noted, the re-normalization process will encounter “inertial elements.” The forces for change will be met with powerful counter-forces:

• Propaganda and Narrative Control: The established power will use its resources to control the story, deny facts, and discredit its opponents.

• Political and Economic Coercion: Threats, sanctions against whistleblowers, and the rewarding of loyalty are used to maintain discipline within the system.

• Apathy and the “Fog of More”: The sheer volume of information and the rapid pace of news cycles can lead to public fatigue, allowing power to “wait out” the storm.

Conclusion: Where to Look

So, to answer your question directly, we should look for the forces of change not in the centers of established power itself, but in the periphery and in the foundations upon which that power rests:

1. Look to the streets and the squares, where public consent is withdrawn.

2. Look to the courtrooms in The Hague, where legal norms are formally contested.

3. Look to newsrooms and social media feeds, where the battle of narratives is fought.

4. Look to universities and think tanks, where new frameworks of understanding are being built.

5. Look to the young, who inherit the world we are creating now and are often least willing to accept its injustices.

The re-normalization after an event like the conflict in Gaza will be a messy, contested, and non-linear process. It will be a struggle between the forces seeking to assign blame and forge a new understanding, and the inertial forces of power seeking to preserve old pathways and manage memory. There is no single source of change; it is the synergistic effect of all these pressures that, history shows, can eventually force even the most rigid power to bend.