Desiring desired desires or why we are a bunch of idiots?

How is it possible to determine what make us desire in the way we do? Our desire is constituted by a process which integrates its reality as an essential part of our reality. It means that every desire is only real when desired, and desired when shared as a common basis of human interactions. Because we desire what we see, feel, hear, smell, and taste, when we behold the pleasure in others, perhaps: when others behold the experience in me. Also, we have to remark the next: I do not desire the object itself, but the gratification. The same happens in displeasure situations. So, -mimetically we develop our interactions of desire.

This is a dialectical process, for sure: culture, selfness, and otherness establish an intimate relationship when they communicate with each other -beholding- the experience. So they want to feel the same, in the same way, and for the same reason by imitation. Mimetic structures of desire constitute our perspectives as morally good, social or politically correct, but it does not mean that those are absolutely true nor free, even Truth (in social terms) is based mimetically: but mimetically in the symbolical longing of power and disciplinary control. Where one imposes its own will to another.

The imposition of will can be developed by material force, like the economical philosophies do, by indoctrination like religions do, by the establishment of social rolls, morals, values or any specifical measurement of reality. Which mean that will is not only imposed by force but as we mean by desire. Platonic nomenclature describes this process with the words "mimesis" and "methexei", the first subscribe that we do everything by imitation, the second that we do "certain" things using our reason critically. So if I got pleasure in a certain set of truths, these could be desired by others, because of the pleasure they behold in me -by the objectuality of desire- Thus I can desire what others desire by imitation and sometimes [critically] by participation.

If Truth is based mimetically, and people start acting in a mere way, they will be enslaved by their own freedom to choose slavery rather than reason; tradition, and dogma rather than crisis, and all of these, just by their own mimetic desires, by their own mimetic truth. This is why, even truth shall be reconsidered as perennial, or as an internal and rational reflection about material and historical circumstances of existence when has passed through the eye of reason. Truth is not true when its consequences destroy criticism or prevent radical emancipatory movements designed by reason.

At the main core of mimetic desire, we should recognize the anthropological structure of desire itself, as congenital and ontological, even when someone assumes a sort of voluntary renounce to the nexus. And it's said ontological because like the fish subsist in the water unquestioning the element's existence. We are not aware of the water (the mimetic desire and the nexus) until we experience its existence as "contitio sine qua non" of our own possibilities and existence. The nexus is our ontological relation with everything, that could not be denied but -just ignored. So any desire could be rational or rationally desired when it is criticized in its own integrity, like something substantially attached with reality. I only can think my own existence when I feel it as a radical situation of a sort of the indeterminable. 

I am aware of my existence when I experience the otherness's sight as the weight of culture when I experience my selfness as otherness. When I am touched by anyone, and also: when my deepest desire is desired by anyone else, but not -just- me. This is when I experience the misfortune of being outside me: when I am aware that my own emptiness is filled by cultural imitation of values, laws, religions, and everything which is not mine. This is the complex nature of that unconscious nexus of imitation. When we experience our "naked being" and "hide that nakedness" with the pervert art of desire.

The nexus among other categories, reveals its own nature as a master signifier, as a princeps of ontological determination. The nexus is unbearable because, like the Pied Piper of Hamelin it determines what path should I take, what desire should I desire. This kind of violence is not felt as physical or material violence, but as knowledge, because it creates a world and systematizes our epistemological structures of meaning and desire, then our reality is a fiction ideologically created, ontologically ignored and critically horrendous. Thus like rats, we march behind the master signifier, reproducing (mimetically) everything, enjoying and hating, following as its command.

Perhaps, we can not exist without this conflictive basis! That is why our desire is not possible beyond the realms of culture, -neither socialization, because our existence is supported by the dialectical conflict between "conscious and unconscious" basis which design what shall we desire and how.

**These reflections were given in Spanish, so I will be glad fo any corrections.