Acceso usuarios
Valentina Pazé
The essay deals with the problem of populism from the outlook of "subalternity ". According to Spivak, subalterns are oppressed subjects that are victims of "epistemic violence" prohibiting them from understanding their conditions and from acting freely. They are subjected to cultural hegemony of the ruling classes, up to the point of desiring, and voting, against their real interests. Paradigmatic examples of subaltern subjects are the Lumpen-proletariat and the peasantowners that elected Luigi Bonaparte in France in 1848. According to Marx, they are unable to represent their interests because of internal divisions and lack class consciousness. Nevertheless the author of the paper argues that the very notion of subalternity is problematic. When Marx claimed that the peasants were unable to represent themselves, he thought in terms of class interests and on the base of a teleological philosophy of history. A similar view can be found in Gramsci and the Frankfurt school. This way of reasoning is no longer consistent: We have to recognize that individuals and groups can legitimately pursue many different interests and that nobody can decide in their place. There are, however, situations forbearing autonomous choice, because the agent lacks the cognitive and cultural instruments required for it. In these cases, the best judge of my own interest might be another. Moreover, people do not always act out of interest, but out of other reasons, sometimes even unconscious needs and passions. It may occur that educated individuals, members of the middle class (i. e. not subaltern subjects, strictly speaking) uncritically believe in miracles promised by populist leaders. This phenomenon has been observed by many authors, like Freud, Le Bon, Pareto, Reich, Schumpeter; in other words, thinkers that highlighted the role of emotions in political life. This is important to grasp so as to understand modern forms of populism in the era of media power and political marketing.
