Privilege and Inclusion of Democratic Blind-spots

• In Event: Democratic State Power, Blind-spots, and Resistance

Abstract

The modern democratic state has a logic according to which it organises itself. Usually, this logic refers to existence of unified source of political authority within a certain territory; having a monopoly of coercive power and enjoying political legitimacy (see Dunleavy and Dryzek 2009, Held 1995). However, there exist groups whose members do not fit this logic. These groups and their members exist in, what I call, democratic blind-spots. They are blind-spots because people occupying these positions should be included in democratic state, but they are not. Further, democratic blind spots constitute a new logic of privilege that divides the populations into those who fit the logic of the state and who don’t. The inclusion of these groups is further necessary since the rising populist movements, usually channelling the voices of those excluded; do not channel voices of the groups outside the logic of the state. Here, the populist movements explicitly follow the lines of privilege and reinforce them.

This paper proceeds as follows. I first introduce the logic of the democratic state and point out groups that do not fit this logic. Here I zoom into the situation of the inhabitants of the informal slums, homeless, temporary workers or asylum seekers. Inhabitants of the informal settlements, asylum seekers, are not classified by the official authorities and exist in the grey sphere of strategic de-regulation (Yiftachel 2009). Homeless and temporary workers remain invisible to the state often by lack of permanent residence or residence in other state or administrative unit (Wu et al. 2014, Tonkiss 2017). Then, I argue for the new notion of the privilege that relies on fitting the logic of the state. It is privilege because it enables gaining other resources, like wealth or political influence. It further divides the populations of democratic states into two – those who have access to all the resources and can be held the state accountable and those who do not have such opportunities. I further argue for the special need for the inclusion of members of democratic blind spots. In the final section I look at the populist movements and ask if, in principle, they can be a corrective to the democratic governance and can include democratic blind-spots. I argue that it cannot because the populist movements not only do not include claims of people in the democratic blind spots but even explicitly make them the subjects of their attacks. Contrary to the claims present in the field (Müller 2015), this paper argues that populism is not anti-elitist but instead relies on and enhances the privilege defined as fitting the logic of the state. As a result, this paper core argument relies on introduction of a concept of democratic blind-spots and the necessity of their democratic inclusion. However, this paper also contributes to the debates on the link between populism and privilege.

Author

• Marta Wojciechowska, London School of Economics