What of No?

In anticipation of the 2021 Performance Philosophy conference, I've been thinking about "problems" in the sense that Deleuze discussed them. I particularly like Bourassa's parsing of the term in the book Deleuze and American Literature:

"Problems, far more than solutions, open our eyes. It is said that every solution is worthy of its problems and that every problem gets the answer that it merits. So we can talk about good and bad problems, problems that are more or less worthy. And this is truly the challenge of thinking. Not to get the 'correct' answers, but to formulate the worthy problems, problems that carry their answers with them in the clarity and rightness of their form. [...] The difference between a bad problem and a good one is that the bad problem demands a solution that will quickly be recognized and validated. When we read the essay that portentously comes to the same conclusion as the last dozen essays of its kind, we are in the presence of a worn-out problems. A good problem is one that changes our vision, makes new things visible, breaks up the previous divisions, and installs new ones (which may themselves be replaced). The good problem is often the articulation of a mystery that has not been voiced, and in the setting out of the mystery, much comes to us, not as answers, but as singular points of the question we have posed" (2009, 195; this appears in the conclusion where the problem being put forth is that of the Nonhuman)."

In this sense, a Performance Philosophy problem would be one of the mysteries that have evolved within the seams of the organization since its emergence in 2013.

I'm interested in the problem of "No," and I'd like to explore it along the following lines:

• Given that arts and humanities fields have gradually turned away from "Criticism" as a means of knowledge production in favor of a "productive" approach (in which Deleuze is often cited as a main point of inspiration), what has happened to "No"? 
• By "No," I mean the articulation of refusal. There are times when an approach or an ideology is wrong. Full stop. I believe, for example, that the protests of Trump supporters who wish to "Liberate" states from the Covid-19 quarantine are wrong. I want to say no to them. They may be productive expressions of specific modes of thinking, but they are also to be challenged.
• Is there a way that Performance Philosophers could challenge them, a way that employs the artistic-academic methods we have come to know from the field?
• Historical precedents for this type of "no" include: Dada's refusal of rational language through their poetry and performance practice; the creation of new calendar systems in the wake of political revolutions, which essentially negated the entire temporal scheme on which previous regimes were founded; hacktivist virtual sit-ins and the "classical" embodied sit-ins of the Civil Rights movements in various countries.
• I'd like to elaborate on each of these historical events so as to more fully understand what a Performance Philosophy "No" might look like.
• Ultimately, I'm interested in forwarding a specific "No": No to the current educational system (specifically Universities).
• I'll probably have to deal with Deleuze and Guattari's unique deployment of "No" towards the end of What is Philosophy?