(aTE Catalogue essay. Published in the Fourth Today’s Documents ‘Stitch in Time’ Catalogue. Today Art Museum Beijing, 2019. Gudrun Filipska).
'At my old age I am not afraid of anything'.
Ernest Laclau, last interview.(1)
Ernest Laclau made the statement above in his last interview with La Nación in 2014. Diego Sehinkman questions Laclau on Cristina Kirchner's political model in Argentina, in relation to his ideas of political antagonism, citing an example where, during a protest in 2011, the Argentinian congress invited passers-by to spit on photographs of controversial journalists (2). Laclau concedes that this was perfectly possible.
The act of spitting here, as an example of a tipping point toward violence, is one that has been replicated recently by a number of contemporary western governments. Donald Trump has incited his followers to violence on a number of occasions, notably against Muslim Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (3). The Polish government continues its anti-women, anti-gay rhetoric, the Hungarian government has incited hate against Jews and migrants through numerous billboard and propaganda campaigns, and 'Operation Vaken' a British government anti-illegal immigrant propaganda campaign, involving slogans written on 'patrol' vans, fuelled racism and distrust of immigrants and asylum seekers creating the atmosphere which contributed to the United Kingdom’s decision to leave the European Union (Brexit) (4). Other Latin American leaders including Hugo Chávez in Venezuela, have used these techniques of incited violence, as did European fascists in the 1930s.
For Laclau, division is necessary. Tension is essential as a component of an effective political system, particularly as seen in his writing with Chantal Mouffe in Hegemony and Socialist Strategy published in 1985. But crucially for Laclau these are 'administered antagonisms' (5) overseen and contained by institutions and bureaucratic frameworks. In a technological age where state bound democracy as a 'holding' concept is no longer as valid as perhaps it once was – the tipping points and moments of government licensed antagonism (the spitting incident included) need some re-thinking.
The new political order of things, characterised by the de-industrialization of the economy and the attendant powers of global technology companies opens up a space to re-look at a number of Laclau's ideas. Firstly his view of the working class as the non a priori agents of radical change and revolution (a controversial idea amongst 'traditional' Marxists) (6) has in all probability been accelerated over the last decade through the use of social media and smart technologies which – under the guise of creating a bifurcation of choice actually homogenise and stultify – poses a problem for Laclau's positioning of 'populism'as I will explore, regarding governments dis-ability to pull back from violent tipping points and contain moments of violence and antagonism that emergent populisms may contain.
Laclau was criticised in his later years for writing and commenting on the left wing governments of South America, Argentina particularly, from his 'armchair' in England where he was Professor of Political Theory at the University of Essex – these criticisms by young theorists point to a wider dichotomy between younger generations and the ‘post second world war generation’ of which Laclau was part. The idea of an older generation of left leaning academics no longer having fear, seems rather jarring and speaks to a panic in younger generations, not to be abandoned to the ravages of climate change, to a rising right wing, increasing food prices and higher property prices. Younger generations do feel abandoned and betrayed. The proliferation of new social movements fighting and advocating for equality/ justice in terms of race, gender and the environment proceeding from an open Laclau-ian social discursiveness – and the setbacks these movements have recently and often abruptly suffered due to the populist move to the right in the US and Europe – is evidence that the contemporary western political world does not offer an even playing field (7).
Laclau's comment, “At my old age I am not afraid of anything”, may suggest a number of things. He had been around long enough to expect any eventuality, he cared less because he wouldn't be around for too much longer, or perhaps he had seen enough governmental revolutions and cyclical changes to no longer fear them. In this essay, however, I am less interested in his motives and more in the idea of fear itself. What does it mean to be scared or not to be scared now? In our contemporary political climate – from where I write this in Europe – fear is an interesting and very present motif.
Read More…
