is a good thing, against the backdrop of racist persecution Roma in France, has opened a theoretical reflection on racism. It is far from obvious that if I know enough (about what produces and supplies and, before that, about what racism is) to respond up to its devastating effects and prospects. Interventions by Etienne Balibar and Jacques Rancière on the poster have shed light on relevant aspects. The first focused on the relationship between citizenship and exclusion, highlighting as it also acts as part of the European community, the second stressed the artificial nature (not spontaneous) of racism on the initiative of 'political entrepreneurs'.
Both share a political perspective-centric and deserve explanation: in particular Rancière seems hasty to get rid of social wellspring of fear (and anger), which feeds and directs the political intervention against groups of people portrayed as dangerous. But space is running out and, rather than dedicate an internal comparison, you should use it to broaden the discussion, suggesting different and complementary hypothesis, focusing on social dynamics responsible for the production of stereotypes inferiorizzanti: a case for saying this member -centric.
When we talk about racism we used to think the margins of society or foreign populations. Racism is a matter of common sense on the 'other', the 'different' (Or 'deviant'), non-short people living the periphery (physical or moral) of our metropolis. Of course this way of thinking has its reasons. Today, the "races" (no matter if you rename with less unpresentable terms as 'ethnic' or 'culture') are primarily migrants, variously regarded as invaders, enemies, natural criminals, potential terrorists, barbarians, etc. connotations. Or are the Roma (and syntax), namely 'gypsies'. Or the Jews (whatever people may say, resist the damage which configures them as a "race"). In short, minorities in various ways perceived as foreign to the body (healthy) community. As exceptions (Pathological) than normal and normality. However, if we want to remain a prisoner of racism, we can not just browse the catalog of human groups turned into "races", we must also ask what for them racism "razzizza.
In all likelihood, the goal is to legitimize discriminatory treatment and persecution that can reach up to destruction. The violence that the company would agree to be difficult, it is tolerable (reasoned and right) if it hits a group portrayed as bearer "by nature" of a moral stigma. That violence is seen as legitimate defense because is related to the characteristics attributed to perverse that group. In a word, racism is the factory of the negative identity, in an active site that anthropological, producing stereotypes (that is, literally creating the "races"), continuously turning out useful arguments to justify the violence that some of the other companies get it on the weakest and various subordinate title.
If so, should ignore the look of the finger (the specific topics - all, without distinction, pretentious - put forward by the racist round) and ask the moon that it indicates that the deep root this violence. Should seek the source of "structural" discrimination dell'insaziabile hunger that haunts our society, because the only way you can understand why two or three centuries in this part of the capitalist West can not help but invent "races" inferior infected parts of the social bodies who deserve to be cauterized or even amputated. And only by adopting this perspective one can understand why racism systematically back into vogue in the acute phases of economic and social crisis, when the reproductive dynamics exacerbate its hierarchical connotation, mobilizing a surplus of violence and brutality.
The point is that the "inferior race" (one of whom - according to the racist myths - steals or rapes incoercible propensities for 'natural' or 'naturally' refractory to civilization) embodies and enacts not only the reasons for its discrimination, but also, more importantly, the legitimacy of discrimination as a general mechanism of social relations. Sure, the violence that is unleashed against the Roma chased away by a rat-infested swamp to another, avoided like plague victims on buses and trains, and finally deported across the border in the name of safety and health of society, is different from that Italians (or French) doc - how many of them are working under a boss or even fail to find a job - are forced to endure. These are (still) protected by any law. But there is a common denominator, and is dependent on the arbitrariness of others. It is therefore important to assist the expulsion of Roma, show extremely instructive that recalls (and is as a condition inemendabile) their radical subordination.
What they learn, to look good, by this spectacle that affects the margins of society but is directed to the bulk of the population, the "mechanical people" not got the good fortune of noble birth? They learn the terrible lesson of modernity: their condition homines Oeconomica, by individuals alone, forced to fight at their own risk and peril, the daily war of individual selfishness. What racism is responsible for carrying out staging the fate of the last is, in other words, the atom and the eradication of social solidarity, anti-modern factor by definition, incompatible with the unleashing of the "animal spirits" of capitalism.
In this sense - as paradoxical as it may seem - if we want to understand what role racism plays on the European scene (and why it still plays a very important function), it is essential correctly read stories like those of Pomigliano and Melfi, in which the owner declares explicitly denying any rights to those who survive are forced to sell their life time. The workers must be brought back into things, rising from the head to be, and above all, members of a collective subject. And that means the music, nothing is more useful than showing them what happens to those with which the good society is really angry.
But if the fate of the margins is to educate the middle, then the problem is the reaction of the center. It is not about whether racism is or is not spontaneous, some that it is not. The point is that racism is common sense, although inculcated from above, until the social bodies assimilate the lesson it imparts docility: the merits of social hierarchies, the legitimacy of violence that they decree, the morality of reducing things to subordinates . Today, just as in the last century, the problem therefore calls into question precisely the "common man", often implicated, more or less unaware of racist violence. Alberto Burgio
0 comments:
Post a Comment