Solidarietà e desolidarizzazione in Europa
Solidarity is a controversial concept, subject to mutually exclusive interpretations. The very nature of solidarity —its foundations, its motivations, its content, its scope and its form— is the subject of controversy, not only in the light of its different histories and trajectories but also of the...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | URI:https://journals.openedition.org/tp, |
|---|---|
| 1. Verfasser: | |
| Format: | Article ou chapitre numérique |
| Sprache: | Italien |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Teoria politica
2023
|
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online Zugang: | Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM |
| Zusammenfassung: | Solidarity is a controversial concept, subject to mutually exclusive interpretations. The very nature of solidarity —its foundations, its motivations, its content, its scope and its form— is the subject of controversy, not only in the light of its different histories and trajectories but also of the different uses made in normative vocabulary. Today it is undergoing really hard times. The political-cultural hegemony acquired by neoliberalism has drained its sources. It is a political-economic project as well as an anthropological one that requires social behavior to assimilate to a form of strategic action to be explained in terms of egocentric calculation. Its aim is the transformation of social relations into transactions of interest and utility calculations. Such hegemony is a norm of life that aims to the re-education of individuals acting as rational ones moved only by personal interests, assimilating freedom of action to the consumer’s choice and evaluating every kind of individual performance on the basis of the success and failure indicators established by the market. Indeed, it tends to make any form of selfless dedication to others superfluous. Markets, which rely on individual interest, exempt individuals from using the limited resource of solidarity. This can be clearly seen in the implicit ideology of the European Union and its governance mechanisms, which transform solidarity into an «empty signifier» easily adaptable to the most varied situations generally inspired by policies solely motivated by utilitarian interests and not also by sort of moral duty, that is to say for normative reasons. The background conception being that the different forms of social cooperation can be cast in the mold of a procedural model that only asks people to evaluate whether it is useful or rational to adopt a certain rule of conduct. Therefore, It goes without saying all this obscures the possibility of keeping the sensitivity for the vulnerable and irreplaceable individuality of the other awake and of assuming the profile of disinterest, not only in relation to a possible advantage or profit but also as regards the recipient of the solidarity act. Furthermore, the way political liberalism creates a false dichotomy between the public and private spheres leads to the form of dualism which allows homo œconomicus (governed by self-interest) and homo relationalis (governed by the sentiment of one’s neighbor) to coexist peacefully within the same person. Compassion and care remain distinctive features of the sphere of personal intimacy. On the contrary, calculation and rationality-with respect-to purpose govern the ethics that inspire public choices. Solidarity is thus replaced by charity, beneficence or compassion: practices that do not refer to the ownership of the rights of they who benefit from them: they rather underline their condition of subordination and minority. The thesis of the article is that the recovery of solidarity as a category subtracted from the reductive readings suggested by the crisis of the welfare state can contribute to making credible the idea that only its presence (in a non-opportunistic or instrumental form) makes the definition of a political system as «democratic» possible. Historical experience shows that the hard times for solidarity are the hard times also for democracy. |
|---|