Readiness and Power: 7 Resistance, Refusal, and Recalibration

If power operates by governing readiness — through thresholds, escalation, release, and temporality — then resistance emerges as a disruption of that governance. It is not primarily argument, persuasion, or ideology; it is the refusal, misalignment, or recalibration of readiness itself.

Resistance as Misalignment

The most effective forms of resistance do not challenge meaning, they challenge coordination potential. By slowing action, withholding escalation, or disrupting anticipated release, individuals and collectives can unravel the patterns power depends on.

Examples include:

• Work-to-rule: performing only what is strictly required, keeping readiness within narrow, controlled limits

• Strikes and slowdowns: reducing escalation, altering thresholds, withholding release

• Deliberate delay or inaction: destabilising timing and anticipation of others

In each case, the refusal is structural: it acts on the temporal and energetic mechanics of readiness, not on belief or consent.

Recalibration of Readiness

Resistance can also be recalibration, where readiness is redistributed or modulated to shift power asymmetries. By adjusting thresholds, pacing, or release, communities and movements can reorganise who is prepared, for what, and when.

This may appear subtle. A coordinated pause, a mass withdrawal of attention, or selective disengagement can produce outcomes equivalent to overt conflict. Power is disrupted because expected readiness patterns no longer hold.

Subtlety and Effectiveness

Structural resistance often works below the radar. It does not require confrontation or persuasion. It exploits the system’s dependence on aligned readiness:

• By mis-timing escalation

• By accumulating readiness in unexpected ways

• By withholding release strategically

Even when participants cannot articulate their strategy or ideology, misalignment alone can shift power relations.

Limits and Vulnerabilities

Resistance through readiness manipulation is not limitless. Systems may anticipate, monitor, or enforce thresholds to mitigate misalignment. Chronic surveillance, predictive algorithms, and redundant escalation channels all function to stabilise readiness against disruption.

Yet even in tightly controlled systems, the relational and temporal nature of readiness leaves inherent vulnerabilities. Where multiple actors share attention and potential, misalignment can cascade, producing emergent space for recalibration.

Why This Matters

Understanding resistance in terms of readiness offers a non-ideological, structural explanation for why certain strategies succeed and others fail:

• Success does not depend on persuasion

• Success depends on altering readiness dynamics

• Failure often results from underestimating thresholds, timing, or escalation

Conclusion

Resistance, refusal, and recalibration are the mirror images of power. Just as thresholds, escalation, release, and temporality structure readiness for governance, they can also be reoriented to subvert it. The agency of individuals and collectives is expressed in the modulation of potential itself, not in debates over meaning or ideology.

In the next and final post of the series, we will synthesise the insights of thresholds, escalation, release, temporality, asymmetry, and resistance into a cohesive view of power without meaning, drawing the series to a conceptual close.