Democracy is a system of power. So far ... But it is a power "to" do something or "on" someone? The democratic power, in short, is a means to an end (power as a tool, as a means) or to determine the actions of the person who suffers it? Going on the concrete: the Russian is a democracy? and Turkish, Hungarian, or even Italian?
Define what democracy is very difficult, it is the flexibility of the concept to cause the perversion. Ugo Spiritodiceva: "There are various forms of democracy as there are elites that work." So behind every democracy there is a group of power? But then democracy is a cover of an elite group that needs, in certain historical moments, the capacity of democracy to legitimize itself. A teatrocrazia? And 'what happens in many places of our old continent. Perhaps one of the elements dell'attuali European crisis, a crisis is not only economic.
The relational power and the ideological
In teatrocrazia pressures claiming greater individual freedoms (Gobetti for the fight was very essence of democracy) become struggles between power groups who use the masses. The manipulation of the masses can occur through several mechanisms of persuasion today the most effective is certainly inherent in the control of the media system. Norberto Bobbio outlines a typology of power, that "ideological", which defines an official truth and acts of individuals considered as "minor" or "children" controlling minds through mechanisms of persuasion and being the holder of the truth. Today, the ideological power is, with good evidence, no more than the truth of religious or political dogma but the "power of the media."
It is no coincidence Orban in Hungary, the government tries to control the media, even in Bosnia was a candidate for president Fahrudin Radončić, magnate information; in France, the President of the Republic courting big media tycoon; in Italy one of these tycoons is even assumed the role of prime minister; in Russia the government control on the press is strong and the deaths of journalists "uncomfortable" are there to prove it. In Russia itself the alternative voices representing the interests of the political and business establishments lobby: the respected newspaper Novaya Gazeta (the one where Anna Politkovskaya worked) is controlled by oligarch Alexander Lebedev and former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev. In this case, we find ourselves in front of the clash of two elites and not, as it may sound, democracy versus authoritarianism.
Through control of the media can be activated rhetorical inductive behavior that would not otherwise would achieve.
So democracy on the one hand slides toward subjectivity, towards what is called the "privatization of public power" which is concentrated in a few hands. On the other hand exposure to ideological rhetoric on the part of citizenship makes her, in spite of himself, underling. The problem is complicated when the oligarchic elites in power ideological (the media), the political and the economic. A monster triceps. A teatrocrazia authoritarian?
The teatrocrazia, a danger for Europe
We intend to define a teatrocrazia: power that expresses the interests of the oligarchies disguised as democracy behind. But even despotic power, since (as we are taught Aristotetele) despotism is, literally, the power of the master (despot) on the slaves, then where people are treated as things. In our society, individuals are considered by economic science "things" or "means" of production, exchange and consumption. If the teatrocrazia is an expression of economic interests then we are faced with a despotic regime. If then the oligarchy that runs political power, and holds economic interests, also holds the control of media power, here we are in the triumph of teatrocrazia.
Do without Spartacus
The teatrocrazia, or the simulacrum of democracy, the monkey of individual freedom, is now widespread in Europe. All three elements can coexist or may manifestarsene one, what is certain is that their presence undermines the possibility of real democracy. But how to define, positively, the "real" democracy? Perhaps we could put it as one that "does not need to Spartacus." A system of balance of powers which, when the wind is blowing toward tyranny, has a rudder that shows the correct route without upsetting the boat.
Blame it on the democracy
Citizens who do not give up yet to claim spaces of freedom are, however, to fight a simulacrum, sometimes accusing democracy (such as the power system) of coercion and abuse when the first coercita to be abused and it is democracy itself. The risk is delegitimizing democracy and the ability to leave the field open to new systems of power authoritarian populism masked freedom sloganistiche.
our fault
The precondition for a functioning democracy is the existence of a good number of good democrats. Democracy has, however, a continuing need of the school: a school of democracy and a democratic school. Let's look at where the school is weak, and we'll see where tomorrow (if not already) will govern the regime of teatrocrazia. We pay attention to where people fall asleep in front of the daily removal of rights, and we will find the real culprits. Very often in these columns, we focused on populist, radical, fundamentalist, falsely progressives, highlighting them as bad for democracy. But they are healthy carriers of the disease. The disease is us. We Europeans, happy leash.
Matteo Zola
Source :http://www.eastjournal.net/editoriale-la-teatrocrazia-e-noi-felici-marionette/11994
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento