Claude Lefort's Political Philosophy

Table of Contents

1. Frontmatter

2. Chapter 1. Introduction

   Mattia Di Pierro

   Abstract

   This introductory chapter highlights an attempt to break away from the most popular interpretations of Lefort’s work. Through the phenomenological method and the concept of institution, the French philosopher’s thought moves against any difference between constituent and constituted and against any theory of immanence. His thought therefore moves in a different direction from Michel Foucault and Jacques Rancière, but also from Hannah Arendt and Miguel Abensour. The second part of the chapter describes the main elements of the interpretation that this study aims to propose: the importance of the phenomenological method, the “discovery” of the symbolic through anthropology, the concept of institution, and the opposition to any dualism in the analysis of the social, the interest in democracy, history, and modernity.

3. Chapter 2. Socialisme ou Barbarie

   Mattia Di Pierro

   Abstract

   This presentation of Socialisme ou Barbarie (SouB), a group founded by Claude Lefort and Cornelius Castoriadis in 1949, serves as an introduction to the French philosopher’s ideas. The chapter begins with a discussion of the critique of the Soviet Union and the theory of bureaucracy developed by both authors in the late 1940s and early 1950s, which established the idea of the proletariat as an autonomous class, before outlining their denunciation of all forms of economism and mechanism. Next, Lefort’s most original theoretical contribution to SouB, an idea of the proletarian experience that reveals the phenomenological foundations of his thought, is explored. The chapter concludes by considering the tensions between Castoriadis and Lefort, which ultimately led to the latter’s departure from SouB in 1958.

4. Chapter 3. The Symbolic Dimension of the Social

   Mattia Di Pierro

   Abstract

   The third chapter delves into Lefort’s interpretation of Marx, which is conducted through the phenomenology of Maurice Merleau-Ponty. During the 1950s, Lefort attempted to purge Marx’s texts of all overhanging thought, positivism, or essentialism, and was also increasingly drawn to anthropology. He drew on the studies of Marcel Mauss, Abram Kardiner, Gregory Batson, and Edward Evans-Pritchard to transcend some of the limitations of Marxism. This led him to see society as a symbolic institution, that is, as a continuous self-interpretation of itself. After leaving SouB, Lefort further developed this theory, explicitly stating that every society is the result of an interpretation of itself and of a political choice. As the chapter explains, this concept of institution is also derived from phenomenology and from Merleau-Ponty.

5. Chapter 4. A Sociology of a Divided Society: Alienation, Ideology and a Project for a Study of Democracy

   Mattia Di Pierro

   Abstract

   The fourth chapter discusses Lefort’s project for a sociology of democracy, which he developed in the early 1960s after leaving Socialisme ou Barbarie. His analysis of the new configuration of society and production led him to develop a new concept of ideology, to redefine alienation and, most importantly, to reconsider his conception of political subjectivities. In this new framework, the proletariat, which was once seen as the sole driving force of history and truth, is replaced by the people, a dispersed and differentiated subject that is internally divided and never fully present to itself. The May 1968 movements provide a prime example of this new political subject, bringing with them a new idea of power, revolution, and society.

6. Chapter 5. The Modern Symbolic Change

   Mattia Di Pierro

   Abstract

   This chapter begins by clarifying the basic tools of Lefort’s thought and the phenomenological references that inform it. It then delves into his theory of modernity. The first section shows how, in the 1960s, the French thinker dedicated himself to a reinterpretation of the emergence of modernity from a symbolic perspective. This led him to read modernity, through the works of Marx and Kantorowicz, as a disincorporation and loss of the religious foundation, and as the reference to an unquestionable otherness capable of determining the physiognomy of the social. Based on this reading, Lefort identified the beginning of modernity in the work of Dante Alighieri and the Florentine civil humanism of the fifteenth century.

7. Chapter 6. Niccolò Machiavelli

   Mattia Di Pierro

   Abstract

   After addressing Lefort’s idea of modernity, his reading of Dante Alighieri’s Monarchia, and his thoughts on Florentine humanism, the remainder of this chapter is devoted entirely to his interpretation of Niccolò Machiavelli’s work. Through his careful analysis of The Prince and the Discourses on Livy, the French philosopher identifies an almost hidden discourse addressed to the youth of Florence that criticized the dominant humanist ideology and presented a novel idea of politics and community. With Machiavelli, in short, the fundamental features of modernity fully emerge, including the absence of foundation, conflict, and ideology, and the impossibility of reconciling the subject and interpretation, or, we might say, the signifier and the signified. This dynamic defines the relationship between political subjectivities, and the connection between them and the symbolic pole of power, offering a clear definition of the dynamics of the institution of the social.

8. Chapter 7. The Political and the Institution of the Social

   Mattia Di Pierro

   Abstract

   Before considering Lefort’s theory of democracy and totalitarianism, the seventh chapter aims to fully comprehend the theoretical context within which Lefort’s ideas and his theory of the institution of the social developed, from the 1950s to the 1970s. After outlining the French philosopher’s critiques of structuralism, of the works of Lévi-Strauss and Louis Althusser, the chapter will present his assessment of Michel Foucault’s thought. This will help clarify two fundamental elements of Lefort’s reflection: the theory of interpretation and the idea of institution, both of which are distinguished from structure. Finally, the chapter will analyze Lefort’s critique of post-structuralism and the theories of immanence developed by Foucault, Deleuze, and Marcuse.

9. Chapter 8. Democracy

   Mattia Di Pierro

   Abstract

   The last chapter begins by presenting Lefort’s definition of democracy as a “form of society” rather than a political regime or set of rules. This way of understanding, shaping, and staging the social is reflected first and foremost in the representation of the sphere of power. The chapter then explores the relationship between democracy and modernity, before turning to totalitarianism. Lefort presents the totalitarian form of society as a response to the modern democratic symbolic institution, an attempt to re-establish a foundation for society. The chapter concludes by analyzing Lefort’s position on revolution and highlighting some internal tensions in his idea of democracy.

10. Backmatter