The Politics of Unification in a Fragmented World: Metapopulism and the Precariat

Michael Hauser 1
  • 1 Institute of Philosophy of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Jilska 1,, Praha, Czech Republic

Abstract

Neoliberal capitalism intensified the social fragmentation, which resulted in the upswing of heterogeneous communities without a unifying meta-language that was liberal universalism of citizenship. Our society shows “paralogical” traits and paralogy reverberates in the new populist policy I call metapopulism (Trump, Putin, etc.)-witness their inconsistencies. Metapopulism establishes unifying principles as a substitute of liberal universalism. These are allegory and the Real. An allegorical signifier (“patriotism” etc.), which is separated from the signified (the meaning), is a common representation of heterogeneous communities and simultaneously maintains their paralogy. The Real appears as the signifier that is excluded from “correct” liberal discourse and promises to enhance the experience of a system’s failures by attributing a social meaning to it (sublimation). These principles work on the condition that their promises are permanently thwarted and deferred, which is their spectrality. However, another type of unification may be feasible. It is a unifying discourse and practise that is grounded in a specific position of the “precariat” as the hegemonical class as formed by neoliberal capitalism (the Lukacsian concept). Here, a unification is borne by the praxis of sublimation.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Barassi, Veronica. Activism on the Web: Everyday Struggles Against Digital Capitalism. Routledge, 2015.

  • Filipov, David. “Putin can’t seem to find a ‘national idea’ for Russians, so he’s proposing a law to do it.” The Washington Post, 5 November 2016, https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/putin-cant-seem-to-find-a-national-ideafor-russians-so-hes-proposing-a-law-to-do-it/2016/11/05/1fba53d2-a1d5-11e6-8864-6f892cad0865_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.35ae8ff590eb/.

  • Foster, Belamy. “Neofascism in the White House.” Monthly Review, April 1, 2017, https://monthlyreview.org/2017/04/01/neofascism-in-the-white-house/

  • Hauser, Michael. “Metapopulism in-between democracy and populism. Transformations of Laclau’s concept of populism with Trump and Putin.” Distinktion: Journal of Social Theory, vol. 19, no. 1, 2018, pp. 68-87, doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/1600910X.2018.1455599/.

  • Harvey, David. The Condition of Postmodernity: An Inquiry into the Origins of Culture Change. Wiley-Blackwell, 1990

  • Hegel, Georg W.F. Aesthetics. Lectures on Fine Art, vol. I. Trans. T. M. Knox. Clarendon Press, 1975.

  • Jameson, Frederic. Postmodernism, Or, The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism. Durham University Press, 1991.

  • Laclau, Ernesto. On Populist Reason. Verso, 2005.

  • Lukács, George. History and Class Consciousness: Studies in Marxist Dialectics. MIT Press, 1971.

  • Lütjen, Torben. “As people ‛sort’ themselves, consequences for democracy.” Journal Sentinel, 25 December 2012, http://archive.jsonline.com/news/opinion/as-people-sort-themselves-consequences-for-democracy-dq818lu-184769081.html/

  • Lyotard, Jean-François. The Postmodern Condition: Report on Knowledge. University of Minnesota Press, 1984.

  • Parenti, Christian. “Listening to Trump.” Jacobin Magazin, 22 November 2016, https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/11/trump-speeches-populism-war-economics-election/.

  • Pomerantsev, Peter. “The Hidden Author of Putinism.” The Atlantic, 7 November 2014, http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/11/hidden-author-putinism-russia-vladislav-surkov/382489/

  • Rorty, Richard. “Habermas and Lyotard on Postmodernity.” Praxis International, vol. 4, no.1, 1984, pp. 32-44.

  • Standing, Guy. The Precariat: The New Dangerous Class. Bloomsbury, 2011.

  • Taggart, Paul. “New Populist Party in Western Europe.” West European Politics, vol. 18, no. 1, 1995, pp. 34-51.

  • Taggart, Paul. Populism. Open University Press, 2000.

  • Tamás, Gáspár, M. “On Post-fascism: The Degradation of Universal Citizenship.” Boston Review, 1 June 2000, http://bostonreview.net/world/g-m-tam%C3%A1s-post-fascism

  • Tenbruck, Friedrich H. Die kulturellen Grundlagen der Gesellschaft. Der Fall der Moderne. Westdeutscher Verlag, 1990.

  • Toffler, Alvin. Future Shock. Random House, 1970.

  • Traverso, Enzo. “Trump’s Savage Capitalism: The Nightmare is Real.” World Policy Journal, vol. 34, no.1, 2017, pp. 13-17.

  • Whitebook, Joel. “Trump’s Method, Our Madness.” The New York Times, 20 March 2017, https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/20/opinion/trumps-method-our-madness.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSourc=e=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-right-region®ion=opinion-c-col-right-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-rightregion&_r=1

  • Zima, Peter V. Modern/Postmodern. Society, Philosophy, Literature. Continuum, 2010.

  • Žižek, Slavoj. The Ticklish Subject: The Absent Centre of Political Ontology. Verso, 2000.

  • Žižek, Slavoj. For They Know Not What They Do: Enjoyment as a Political Factor. Verso, 2008.

OPEN ACCESS

Journal + Issues

Open Cultural Studies is a peer-reviewed journal exploring the fields of Humanities, Social Sciences and Arts. It interprets culture in an inclusive sense and promotes new research perspectives in cultural studies. The journal aims to enhance international collaboration among scholars from the Global North and the Global South and help early-career researchers. It is also committed to increasing public access to scholarship on cultural studies.

Search