Universals are effective within particular historical conjunctures that give them content and force. We might specify this conjunctural feature of universals in practice by speaking of engagement. Engaged universals travel across difference and are charged and changed by their travels.
From the opposite perspective, it is difficult to speak of intentionality in the productive misreadings and engagement with universals on the part of the various groups that lead to their coalescing around Amy. How does one even go about intentionally misreading in any sort of serious sense unless one considers all readings to be necessarily misreadings? The issue then is one of translation that is productive of meaning through its interjection of the unfamiliar within the familiar and forcing us into prolonged occupation of the space between. We as readers become the medium for the dialog to take place in.
But this raises a second question, one addressed by Terranova. How do we ensure the accuracy of intention as it is translated across this medium? Is there some ur universal that others such as freedom, truth, etc. all engage with that allows for them to coalesce so effectively around a single piece of activism?