Autenticità non è (mai stata solo) trasparenza. La spettacolarizzazione dell’io, fra populismo illiberale e liberalismo impopolare
The predominant meaning of the word ‘authenticity’ serves as a litmus test for the transformations that have affected Western subjectivity. Its repeated use outlines an individual who perceives their identity as socially independent and prioritises social interactions that showcase their «true self»...
保存先:
| 出版年: | URI:https://journals.openedition.org/tp, |
|---|---|
| 第一著者: | |
| フォーマット: | Article ou chapitre numérique |
| 言語: | Italien |
| 出版事項: |
Teoria politica
2026
|
| 主題: | |
| オンライン･アクセス: | Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM |
| 要約: | The predominant meaning of the word ‘authenticity’ serves as a litmus test for the transformations that have affected Western subjectivity. Its repeated use outlines an individual who perceives their identity as socially independent and prioritises social interactions that showcase their «true self». One of the main theses of this paper is that this ‘real self’ coincides with the immediate externalisation of the individual’s emotional and cognitive interiority. First, I will reconstruct the three stages that have characterised the modern history of authenticity. This backward journey will enable us to highlight the gradual shift in the concept of authenticity, from an introspective focus to the exhibition of the self, in which the social world – rather than the individual – becomes the primary recipient of the self’s truth. This flattening of the onerous concept of authenticity onto the notion of identity illustrates the constitutive tension between the current social diffusion of the transparency myth and any form of psychological hypocrisy. It will also demonstrate tension with the concept of self-transformation, which is the reverse of the notion of identity. Subsequently, I will analyse the primary political implications of the unquestioned triumph of the contemporary ideal of transparency. As well as addressing various forms of illiberal populism, these implications also concern unpopular liberalism fuelled by the ethical transparency and democratic hypocrisy of institutional actors willing to justify violence and domination in the name of democratic promises of equal freedom. |
|---|