The nocturnal body of democracies

Ricardo Pagliuso Regatieri; Patrícia da Silva  Santos

doi:10.15448/1984-7289.2022.1.14851

Authors

Ricardo Pagliuso Regatieri Universidade Federal da Bahia (Ufba), Salvador, BA, Brazil. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0625-8275
Patrícia da Silva Santos Universidade Federal do Pará (Ufpa), Belém, PA, Brazil. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1266-1311

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15448/1984-7289.2022.1.14851

Keywords:

Democracy, Authoritarianism, Critical Theory, Coloniality, Exception

Abstract

This article engages with the contemporary debate about de-democratization and authoritarianism, arguing that these phenomena cannot be properly understood without discussing the roots of modern democracy in colonial capitalism. In the first half of the twentieth century, some voices in social theory drew attention to possibilities for regression inscribed in Western civilization. Nonetheless, the prevailing tone of the postwar era was one of optimism regarding democracy, democratization and democratic consolidation. It was only more recently that discussions about regressive tendencies were placed on the table once again. Though we consider that these analyses have helped to shed light on such tendencies, we argue that they overlook the fact that the bright side of democracy – proudly exhibited in the core countries – was achieved at the cost of a concealed side, which has now returned to haunt the world.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Ricardo Pagliuso Regatieri, Universidade Federal da Bahia (Ufba), Salvador, BA, Brazil.

PhD and M.A. in Sociology, Universidade de São Paulo (USP), São Paulo. SP, Brazil. Professor at the Department of Sociology and at the Graduate Program in Social Sciences at the Universidade Federal da Bahia (Ufba), Salvador, BA, Brazil.

Patrícia da Silva Santos, Universidade Federal do Pará (Ufpa), Belém, PA, Brazil.

PhD and M.A. in Sociology, Universidade de São Paulo (USP), São Paulo, Brazil. Professor at the Faculty of Social Sciences and at the Graduate Program in Sociology and Anthropology at the Universidade Federal do Pará (Ufpa), Belém, PA, Brazil.

References

Adorno, Theodor W. 2003a. Democratic leadership and mass manipulation. In Gesammelte Schriften, edited by Rolf Tiedemann, vol. 20, 267-286. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

Adorno, Theodor W. 2003b. Freudian theory and the pattern of fascist propaganda. In Gesammelte Schriften, edited by Rolf Tiedemann, vol. 8, 408-433. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

Adorno, Theodor W. 2019. Aspekte des neuen Rechtsradikalismus. Berlin: Suhrkamp.

Adorno, Theodor W., Else Frenkel-Brunswik, Daniel J. Levinson, and Nevitt Sanford, 1950. The authoritarian personality. New York: Harper and Row.

Ballestrin, Luciana. 2018. O Debate pós-democrático no século XXI. Revista Sul-Americana de Ciência Política 4 (2): 149-164. https://doi.org/10.15210/rsulacp.v4i2.14824.

Benjamin, Walter. 1991. Über den Begriff der Geschichte. In Gesammelte Schriften, edited by Rolf Tiedemann and Hermann Schweppenhäuser, vol. 1.2, 691-704. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

Bhambra, Gurminder K. and John Holmwood. 2021. Colonialism and modern social theory. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Brown, Wendy. 2006. American nightmare: neoliberalism, neoconservatism, and de-democratization. Political Theory 34 (6): 690-714. https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591706293016.

Césaire, Aimé. 2004. Discours sur le colonialisme. In Discours sur le colonialisme suivi de discours sur la négritude, 7-74. Paris: Présence Africaine.

Cesarino, Letícia. 2020a. Como vencer uma eleição sem sair de casa: a ascensão do populismo digital no Brasil. internet & sociedade 1 (1): 91-120.

Cesarino, Letícia. 2020b. How social media affords populist politics: remarks on liminarity based on the Brazilian case. Trabalhos em Linguística Aplicada 59 (1): 404-427. https://doi.org/10.1590/01031813686191620200410.

Comaroff, Jean. 2009. The politics of conviction: faith on the neo-liberal frontier. Social Analysis 53 (1): 17–38. https://doi.org/10.3167/sa.2009.530102.

Crouch, Colin. 2004. Post-democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Dutra, Roberto and Marcos Abraão Ribeiro. 2021. Existe um autoritarismo brasileiro? Uma interpretação alternativa à tese da singularidade política nacional. Revista Brasileira de Sociologia 9 (22): 246-273. https://doi.org/10.20336/rbs.692.

Elias, Norbert. 1983. Die höfische Gesellschaft: Untersuchungen zur Soziologie des Königtums und der höfischen Aristokratie. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

Elias, Norbert. 1997a. Über den Prozeß der Zivilisation: soziogenetische und psychogenetische Untersuchungen, vol. 1. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

Elias, Norbert. 1997b. Über den Prozeß der Zivilisation: soziogenetische und psychogenetische Untersuchungen, vol. 2. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

Fernandes, Florestan. 2019. Apontamentos sobre a “teoria do autoritarismo”. São Paulo: Expressão Popular.

Foa, Roberto S. and Yascha Mounk. 2016. The danger of deconsolidation: the democratic disconnect. Journal of Democracy 27 (3): 5-17. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2016.0049.

Foa, Roberto S. and Yascha Mounk. 2017. The signs of deconsolidation. Journal of Democracy 28 (1): 5-15. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2017.0000.

Fraser, Nancy. 2016. Progressive neoliberalism versus reactionary populism: a choice that feminists should refuse. NORA – Nordic Journal of Feminist and Gender Research 24 (4): 281-284. https://doi.org/10.1080/08038740.2016.1278263.

Freud, Sigmund. 1924. Zeitgemäßes über Krieg und Tod. Zürich: Internationaler Psychoanalytischer Verlag.

Gandesha, Samir, ed. 2020. Spectres of fascism: historical, theoretical and international perspectives. London: Pluto.

Gilroy, Paul. 1993. The black Atlantic: modernity and double consciousness. London: Verso.

Grosfoguel, Ramón. 2008. Para descolonizar os estudos de economia política e os estudos pós-coloniais: transmodernidade, pensamento de fronteira e colonialidade global. Revista Crítica de Ciências Sociais 80: 115-147. https://doi.org/10.4000/rccs.697.

Horkheimer, Max. 1987. Vernunft und Selbsterhaltung. In Gesammelte Schriften, edited by Alfred Schmidt and Gunzelin Schmid Noerr, vol. 5, 320-350. Frankfurt am Main: Fischer.

Horkheimer, Max and Theodor W. Adorno. 1947. Dialektik der Aufklärung: philosophische Fragmente. Amsterdam: Querido.

Levitsky, Steven and Daniel Ziblatt. 2018. How democracies die. New York: Crown.

Linz, Juan J. 1990. Transitions to democracy. The Washington Quarterly 13 (3): 143-164. https://doi.org/10.1080/01636609009445400.

Lipset, Seymour M. 1959. Some social requisites of democracy: economic development and political legitimacy. The American Political Science Review 53 (1): 69-105. https://doi.org/10.2307/1951731.

Löwenthal Leo and Norbert Guterman. 1949. Prophets of deceit: a study of the techniques of the American agitator. New York: Harper & Brothers.

Mbembe, Achille. 2003. Necropolitics. Public Culture 15 (1): 11-40. https://doi.org/10.1215/08992363-15-1-11.

Mbembe, Achille. 2016. Politiques de l’Inimitié. Paris: La Découverte. Kindle.

Moore Jr., Barrington. 1974. Social origins of dictatorship and democracy: lord and peasant in the making of the modern world. London: Penguin.

Morelock, Jeremiah. 2018. Introduction: the Frankfurt School and authoritarian populism: a historical outline. In Critical Theory and authoritarian populism, edited by Jeremiah Morelock, XIII–XXXVIII. London: University of Westminster Press.

Neumann, Franz L. 1957. Anxiety and politics In The democratic and the authoritarian state: essays in political and legal theory, edited by Herbert Marcuse, 270-300. New York: Free Press.

O’Donnell, Guillermo. 1973. Modernization and bureaucratic-authoritarianism: studies in South American politics. Berkeley: University of California.

O’Donnell, Guillermo. 1994. Delegative democracy. Journal of Democracy 5 (1): 55-69. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.1994.0010.

Prado Júnior, Caio. 1996. Formação do Brasil contemporâneo: colônia. São Paulo: Brasiliense.

Pye, Lucian W. and Sidney Verba, eds. 1965. Political culture and political development. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Przeworski, Adam. 2019. Crises of democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Przeworski, Adam and Fernando Limongi. 1997. Modernization: theories and facts. World Politics 49 (2):155-183. https://doi.org/10.1353/wp.1997.0004.

Quijano, Aníbal. 2000. Colonialidad del poder y clasificación social. Journal of World-Systems Research 6(2): 342-386. https://doi.org/10.5195/jwsr.2000.228.

Rosanvallon, Pierre. 2000. La démocratie inachevée : histoire de la souveraineté du peuple en France. Paris: Gallimard.

Santos, Wanderley Guilherme dos. 2017. A democracia impedida: o Brasil no século XXI. Rio de Janeiro: FGV Editora.

Silva, Lucas T. da. 2020. Governamentalidade autocrática: repensando as racionalidades de governo em diálogo com Florestan Fernandes. Revista Brasileira de Sociologia 8 (19): 254-291. https://doi.org/10.20336/rbs.542.

Streeck, Wolfgang. 2017. The return of the repressed as the beginning of the end of neoliberal capitalism. In The Great Regression, edited by Heinrich Geiselberger, 184-199. Cambridge: Polity. Kindle.

Traverso, Enzo. 2019. The new faces of fascism: populism and the far right. London: Verso. Kindle.

Wong, Diana. 1999. Die “Zukünfte” der Globalisierung: Überlegungen aus der Perspektive Südostasiens. In Zukunftsentwürfe. Studienausgabe: Ideen für eine Kultur der Veränderung, edited by Jörn Rüsen, Hanna Leitgeb, Norbert Jegelka, 53-61. Frankfurt am Main: Campus.

Zakaria, Fareed. 1997. The rise of illiberal democracy. Foreign Affairs 76 (6): 22-43. https://doi.org/10.2307/20048274.