Reflexivity and Rupture: Emancipation in Socialist and Democratic thought

Abstract

Based on a critique from both political and theoretical perspectives within the socialist tradition regarding models of social change, placing “revolution” opposite to “reform”, an assessment is made of the meaning and scope of both of these models in contemporary societies, where a growth of informal powers can be observed. Democratic theory holds the idea of the reflexivity of the constitutional system, which, however, has never been able to politicize capitalism. The socialist theory of revolution tends to see disruption as a source of social change, although it defends a staterun model that excludes the possibility of political action arising from civil society. This note contends that the failure of both models, together with the rise of necrophiliac capitalism that combines a neoliberal idea of sovereignty with the use of violence, highlights the limits of the model of popular sovereignty and positions resistance and disobedience at the center of understanding social change.