Questo saggio affronta la dottrina politica di S.N.H. Linguet, analizzando l’uso sistematico dei paradossi al suo interno. La critica dell’ideologia fisiocratica consente a Linguet di individuare il nesso tra scienza e politica quale fondamento dell’ideologia della società e della sua critica. La costellazione concettuale formata da proprietà, appropriazione, patrimonialismo e patriarcato stabilisce le coordinate della sua teoria politica dei concetti sociali. La categoria di rapporto sociale non esprime la coordinazione tra soggetti indifferenti, ma la subordinazione di alcuni individui al potere (...) sociale dei proprietari. La critica di Montesquieu, del suo concetto di legge e di dispotismo asiatico, conduce Linguet ad affermare la necessità di uno Stato burocratico che, grazie al suo diritto positivo sia in grado di governare i movimenti della proprietà che per Linguet è il centro reale del sistema politico. (shrink)

The thematic section of this issue of «Scienza & Politica» is focused on the problem of ideology. It is assumed that, though in the last decades its end has been repeatedly announced, ideology is still alive. Within the processes of globalization, the references to ideology and its critique regain a central place both in historical research and in political theory. Ideology and its critique seems to be strictly bounded with each other since the origin of the concept, which aimed to (...) pave the way for a new understanding of the world and of the language adopted to name it. The critique of ideology, therefore, has historically been a contestation - performed by particular subjects - of a way of interpreting the world scientifically, thus legitimating the existing relationships of power. (shrink)

The experience of the post-colonial State underlines the transformations of the modern State. In fact, some features of the post-colonial State which were regarded as being overcome or at least inconsistent with the constitutional, democratic and rational form of the State, are now emerging also in those States that never made experience of colonization, or have been colonizers. The essay analyses the transformations of the modern State aiming to articulate the concept of Global State. In this case, the question of (...) origins does not represent a principle of legitimation, as it was with the doctrine of social contract. Rather, the symbolic and historical discontinuity defines a cut between the origin and the functioning of the State, corresponding to a transformation of the legitimating sources of the State itself. Within the global State, sovereignty is not anymore a monopoly, but a widespread practice enacted by several social structures. (shrink)

Starting from the doctrine of ideology proposed by Destutt de Tracy in the late eighteenth century, the paper reconstructs its historical relationship with the social science, of which it was originally meant to be the ultimate expression. The historical necessity of ideology as a political science of the social is found in its ability to mediate and legitimize power relationships. It is not for chance that the Marxian critique of ideology is a radical critique of the constitution of power in (...) a capitalist society. The attempt of the social science to neutralize the problem of power through the abandonment of the value judgments leads instead to the declaration of the end of ideologies. In the last part, the paper analyses the way in which ideology, after its identification with the forms of total domination, returns as a neoliberal tool of legitimizing market as a society without history. (shrink)

The essay maintains that, despite the significant successive transformations, a ordoliberal moment operates within the neoliberal program. Ordoliberalism establishes a specific political anthropology based on the centrality of economic action and on an a-revolutionary temporality that enhances the normative continuity of the tradition. Even against the specific configurations that the State can assume, especially the democratic one, it also aims at the constant reactivation of a political as a fundamental decision in favor of the economic.

This introduction opens the monographic issue starting from 1968 and arriving to neoliberalism as its most articulated answer, without the claim to give a complete picture but in order to illuminate the complexity and radicality of this caesura. In this reconstruction 1968 starts well before, so that it is not possible to establish a precise starting date and place. The contestation of authority, the questioning of patriarchy, the activation of heterogeneous and often “unexpected” subjects: the fierce critique of the current (...) state of things produced a crisis of legitimacy that involves the State, society, capitalism and science. In this sense 1968 was an unaccomplished and therefore never finished revolution. (shrink)