L'autore analizza nel particolare la riforma del sistema universitario italiano in prospettiva comparata con particolare riferimento al contesto europeo e della globalizzazione.

ABSTRACT: The aim of this paper is to analyze the scientific approach to the analysis of political processes in Antonio Gramsci’s and Charles Tilly’s works. The attempt to compare the work of two culturally different scholars may seem unorthodox, but it is not. Gramsci and Tilly are two thinkers working in different historical contexts and from different cultural perspectives, nevertheless their intellectual elaborations have several points of contact that allow us to build a theoretical framework that may be useful for a systematic analysis of political change. Gramsci was a Marxist intellectual and political leader working in fascist Italy, in a context of crisis of democratic institutions; Tilly, on the contrary, was a liberal scholar working in the United States of the second half of the twentieth century, but both are united by a common attention to the dynamics of conflict and by their commitment to produce theories that might be rooted in historical processes. Scholarly attention has focused largely on the political originality of the work of Gramsci, yet, in our opinion, his categories may also be a useful analytical tool within a sociological framework. Gramsci, on the one hand, developed a critical attitude towards evolutionistic and determinist conceptions of history by focusing on the historical relevance of the collective will of popular masses in a dialectical relationship with the system of power. Tilly, on the other hand, reacted to the functionalistic and synchronic sociology, which was in part a product of the Durkheimian structuralist approach, by focusing on the relevance of the elaboration of a historically grounded social theory. Both of them elaborated a theory in the study of contentious dynamics by adopting a historical comparative methodology.

L'autore presenta i dati di una ricerca empirica su militanti e correnti interne al partito della rifondazione comunista

With this special issue of PACO we try to contribute to setting some new directions in political sociolo-gy. In particular, Virginie Guiradon focuses on the new frontiers of citizenship in a multicultural Europe, Do¬natella della Porta on the cycles of protest and the consolidation of democracy, Hans-Joerg Trenz and Asimina Michailidou on European Integration, democracy and crisis in a mass media perspective, Carlo Ruzza on the ideology of New Public Management and associational representation in the context of the glo¬bal financial crisis, Ettore Recchi and Justyna Salamońska on the important topic of the European identity in the context of the Euro-Crisis, Juan Dìez Medrano on the individual and collective responses to crisis by providing an analytical framework for the study of social resilience, Klaus Eder on the so-called paradox of political participation that can equally produce civil and uncivil outcomes. The issue will be concluded with my article on the logical structures of comparison in social and political research.

L'autore analizza le condizioni sociali della modernità a partire dalla soggettività dei nuovi movimenti

Our aim is to identify the characters of a real political sociology as a «connective social sci-ence» that studies political phenomena by creating fruitful connections with other perspectives. Modern politics may be defined as the set of activities designed to regulate human coexistence in a given social context through a prearranged establishment of a certain order. Such an order can only be guaranteed if a social group is able to acquire the power guaranteed by the exclusive use of force. From this point of view, modern politics, to be explained, must be observed in its complexity. Reasoning on the relationship be-tween social and political structures (and between sociology and political science) is not enough. Political analysts should also pay attention to other dimensions, aware that politics is not made only of social and political-institutional relations. It is also made of individuals, cultures, economic arrangements, territories. For this reason, political sociologists should also consider the typical explanatory variables of psychology, anthropology, economics and geography. The classic topics of political sociology are well known. It is a dis-cipline that, through different approaches, has historically focused on the forms and relations of power wi-thin the territorial dimension of the nation state. The trans-nationalization of social processes, the fre-quent financial and economic crises, the explosion of new war zones, the crisis of classical political actors have led to new studies on the relationship between society and politics in a global society, redefining the boundaries of political sociology. The issues are always the same, but the lens through which they are investigated is different.

Abstract. The aim of this paper is to propose a theoretical reflection on the possible transformations of democracy in globalized societies. In this direction, the Author outlines the classical approaches to the analysis of democracy and then proposes a criticism of the static picture offered by the liberal conception. In the wake of Charles Tilly, a process-oriented and dynamic conception is proposed, by declining democracy in terms of democratization (and potential de-democratization). In this paper the different theoretical challenges to liberal democracy are also proposed, starting from the participatory conception that assumes the core of the democratic political process in contentious action of organized civil society. Special attention is also paid to the challenge of deliberative democracy in its two versions, liberal and deliberative. The paper then tries to figure out how to adapt these theoretical proposals to the new conditions of trans-local societies, from a rethinking of the concept of democratic citizenship in a post-national key. The paper ends with a reflection on cosmopolitan democracy and the opportunities offered by the major challenge of rethinking global governance in a democratic and participatory way.

Discutere oggi di democrazia impone una riflessione su quel processo di sostanziale transnazionalizzazione dei processi sociali, politici ed economici che la letteratura internazionale ha da tempo battezzato con il nome di globalizzazione. Tale processo comporta inevitabili cambiamenti sul modo in cui politica e democrazia sono state concepite, con evidenti ripercussioni sul concetto stesso di cittadinanza democratica che si è configurato originariamente nella dimensione storica degli Stati nazionali. La crescente interdipendenza dei processi sociali e la mobilità transnazionale di beni, servizi ed esseri umani implicano un ripensamento del concetto stesso di politica oltre a una riconfigurazione non solo teorica, su scala sovra e sub-nazionale, dei processi governance. Prima di dare inizio alle nostre riflessioni occorre specificare cosa intendiamo in questa sede per globalizzazione che di tali configurazioni rappresenta la cornice sociale. Per «globalizzazione» intendiamo quel processo sociale di strutturazione di un sistema mondiale in cui nessun evento è assolutamente isolato, cioè circoscrivibile a un’unica area geopolitica; anche quei processi che hanno origine a livello locale producono effetti sul normale corso degli eventi in altri sistemi locali. Siamo stati tra l’altro testimoni di un uso spropositato di tale termine. La globalizzazione è infatti da tempo oggetto di dibattito politico e giornalistico, attirando un’attenzione ora apocalittica ora apologetica. Come scrivono Robertson e Khondker (1998, 26), la situazione della globalizzazione è il tipico esempio di come i concetti e le teorie si sviluppino in contesti scientifici per essere successivamente utilizzati nel «mondo reale» in un modo che finisce col mettere in pericolo la loro capacità analitica. Così il concetto di globalizzazione assume un carattere peggiorativo o migliorativo a seconda delle convenienze. Senza dubbio, prendendo solo parzialmente spunto dallo sforzo analitico di Beck (2000), dobbiamo quanto meno distinguere la globalizzazione dal globalismo: Con «globalizzazione» intendiamo quel processo in seguito al quale le singole sovranità nazionali vengono differentemente condizionate da attori transnazionali, soprattutto economici, ma anche politici, culturali, o semplicemente donne e uomini che, pur avendo come riferimento stabile un’entità territoriale, agiscono e pensano in maniera globale, contribuendo alla determinazione di una crescente interdipendenza tra Stati e società nazionali. Il «globalismo» indica invece quel processo di sviluppo di un mercato globale che rimuove fino a sostituire l’azione politica degli Stati, nel nome di un’ideologia neoliberale che fonda le sue basi sull’idea del dominio dell’economico sul politico. Attraverso di esso si riconduce la multidimensionalità della globalizzazione all’unica dimensione economico-finanziaria, sfociando in ideologia totalizzante che liquida forse la più importante distinzione dell’epoca moderna, cioè quella tra economia e politica strutturate nelle forme del potere economico e del potere politico. In base ai dettami del globalismo assistiamo a un’economia che delocalizza i processi produttivi e crea capitali attraverso una sua radicale finanziarizzazione di fronte a una politica sempre meno capace di regolamentarne i percorsi. Finanziarizzazione e de-politicizzazione dell’economia sono dunque gli effetti più evidenti del globalismo (Engelen et al. 2011; de Nardis, Salento 2013). Da ciò emerge il carattere irreversibile della coesistenza di diverse logiche particolari (economica, politica, ecologica, culturale, ecc.) che interagiscono su scala planetaria costruendo una rete di contatti e interdipendenze che definiamo «trans-locali». A rendere possibile questo processo è la concomitanza di diversi fattori, dal commercio internazionale al progresso delle tecnologie della comunicazione e all

Is it any use to compare two nations such as Spain and Italy? Why not extend it to other nations? Or, conversely, why not dwell on one of the two cases by analyzing it in depth? These three simple questions require a careful reflection on the logic of comparison in the social sciences. In the construction of a research design, the comparatist must in fact solve some methodological tangles by establishing: 1) the «unit (or units) of analysis» on which the research should be oriented; 2) The space-temporal context in which the research ranks; 3) the conceptual definition of properties (or variables). These three operations have some methodological implications which require an effort of conceptualization and classification necessary for a proper comparative research. In addition, researchers must make a clear strategic choice with respect to their empirical path. After determining the research field, it is necessary to cope with the problem of choosing the most appropriate units to be selected as a sample. The choice to compare two countries similar in many respects and historically connected such as Spain and Italy assumes the use of the so-called strategy of “most similar systems design”. It is useful to solve the problem of the “diffusion” and to reduce the unwanted historical associations. Starting from these reflections, the aim of this paper is to analyze the methodological implications of the comparison between the two countries under study.

ABSTRACT: In Italy during the last years It’s been possible to observe the structuring and then the partial de-structuring of a close bond between the movement for a global justice (and other local movements) and the Refoundation Communist Party (Prc). Since 1999, Prc started to debate some principles of classic Leninism through a critic re-reading of the communist experiences of the XX century and the consequent consciousness of the communist no-self-sufficiency. After this, the leaders of the party could throw out the new strategy of an horizontal link to social movements. The relationship between Prc and social movements seem to go on without particular problems until the participation of Prc to the center-left govern in a moderate coalition. This paper intend to analyse the dynamics of this relationship by using, on one hand, the data from a survey carried out during the last four European Social Forum regarding the attitude of Italian movement activists on their relationship with traditional political institutions; on the other hand, we will analyse the interior debate of the Refoundation Communist Party by using documents published in occasion of the 7th National Congress with particular regard to the articles published on the party’s newspaper “Liberazione” for the tribune of the Congress. All the documents will be analysed with a specific computer program for content analysis.

Both at the end of the 20th and at the beginning of the 21st century, it became evident that new, qualitatively different kinds of social movements were emergent. They seemed diffused and unstructured, being made up of a multitude of associations whose cultural values were heterogeneous: socialist, anarchist, Catholic, human right-oriented, Union-based, environmentalist. Unlike other movements in the past, the internal divisions were seen as a source of strength rather than a weakness, so to be defined as a “movement of movements”, that is a polychrome subject situated in globalized societies. Moreover, the rapid emergence and worldwide proliferation of the Global Justice Movement (as it was said because its opposition to neoliberal globalization and its associated militarism) raised a number of questions that require rethinking social movement theory. Since the rise of democratic social mobilizations in the 18th and 19th century, technologies of communication became integral moments of their constituency, up to define the idea of modernity itself. Habermas argued that printed books, pamphlets and letters provided wide access to the ideas, critiques and social imaginaries of the Enlightenment. People gathered together in the bourgeois “public spheres”, i.e. salons, pubs, restaurants where citizens met each other to debate and negotiate consensual truths regarding politics and public affairs. Nowadays, the Global Justice Movement owes its existence to the linkages built up by Internet. Moreover, new forms of online social movement actions, cyber-activism, and cyber-politics seems to shape an opposition to neoliberal globalization strictly mediated across electronic networks. They clearly allow unprecedented opportunities for the exchange of information (outside the flows by main-stream media), but do they include all forms of contentious action? Does the future belong to the “electronically mediated network society” and to the mobilization enabled by computer-mediated communication (CMC)? The aim of the present work consists of showing the case of an European public sphere built up by collective mobilization and not limited to the virtual context: the European Social Forum. Still in the 21st century activists, associations and unions gather together once a year to discuss and debate about politics. They shape an “imagined” political community led to plans and strategies to realize alternatives to neoliberal globalization. They use Internet to reinforce the net of associations and to valorize the exchange of information, but they still prefer an “actual” meeting to an on-line forum. Because, as Marx proclaimed, neoliberal domination fosters material resistance.

ABSTRACT: All political sciences share the same logic and methods as the empirical social sciences and therefore produce perceptive knowledge. Empirical knowledge is based on a specific kind of observation driven by a set of theoretically developed concepts related to clearly observable social phenomena. Not all the concepts, however, are readily amenable to observational terms. We usually need to proceed to their operationalization. The formulation and the operational definition of the empirical concepts does not ex-haust the analytic process. It is also necessary to observe how the phenomenon occurs in the reality, pro-ceeding to classification or typological constructions and, sometimes, to the production of multi-dimensional models. Only after this process will the formulation of hypotheses be possible. They will later be verified through the use of methods of empirical control. The most frequently used activity in political sociology is comparison, which is the main method of any social science according to most scholars. Com-parison can be carried out both among a certain number of cases or within a single case by comparing it in its historical development. The temporal dimension becomes crucial when one wishes to produce historically rooted generalizations and theories, therefore confined to a spatial and temporal dimension. Before proceeding with the comparison we must make sure that the cases selected are actually comparable and that they possess at least one property in common. The objective of this paper is therefore to describe forms and styles of comparison within the logic of social and political sciences.

Una svolta fondamentale promossa dal Movimento 5 Stelle è stato il ritorno alla partecipazione attiva degli iscritti a una formazione politica. Il movimento è riuscito a coinvolgere nella vita politica molte persone, utilizzando in modo innovativo sia il web sia le relazioni e le mobilitazioni offline. Per capire questo fenomeno è stata condotta un’indagine sul campo in sedici città, sono state realizzate numerose interviste agli attivisti e analizzati Meetup, assemblee cittadine e incontri periodici con gli eletti. Presentazione del volume Il successo del Movimento 5 Stelle (M5S) nelle elezioni del 2013 ha scompaginato gli schemi della politica italiana, dominata negli ultimi venti anni dalla competizione fra centrodestra e centrosinistra. L'interesse si è concentrato quasi esclusivamente sui risultati elettorali del movimento, sui discorsi e sulle iniziative di Beppe Grillo e dei parlamentari eletti. Poca o nessuna attenzione è stata rivolta agli attivisti, cittadini che dedicano alla politica - spesso per la prima volta - tempo, risorse personali e impegno. Non è stata colta così un'altra svolta fondamentale promossa dal M5S: il ritorno alla partecipazione attiva degli iscritti a una formazione politica. Il movimento ha rappresentato un'esperienza in controtendenza perché è riuscito a coinvolgere nella vita politica molte persone, utilizzando in modo innovativo sia il web sia le relazioni e le mobilitazioni offline: si è infatti creata un'area di attivisti che dedica una parte del proprio tempo alla politica senza essere motivata da incentivi materiali, possibilità di carriera o ideologie acquisite in precedenza. Esistono alcune analogie con la partecipazione ai movimenti sociali o ai partiti di massa del passato, ma sono molte le novità introdotte dal M5S. Per capire e spiegare questo fenomeno è stata portata a termine un'estesa indagine sul campo in sedici città, distribuite in tutte le aree del paese, dal Piemonte alla Sicilia, sono state realizzate un gran numero di interviste in profondità agli attivisti e, grazie all'osservazione partecipante, sono stati analizzati Meetup, assemblee cittadine e incontri periodici con gli eletti. Oltre a esperienze e pratiche molto diverse dalle forme dominanti della politica, sono emersi anche problemi, difficoltà e divergenze che si manifestano all'interno di un movimento nato da pochi anni. Un movimento che tutt'ora discute e cerca di sperimentare nuove pratiche e forme organizzative a livello locale e regionale. La rete e le attività dei militanti a 5 stelle dimostrano in ogni caso come si possano mantenere stretti collegamenti fra cittadini, attivisti ed eletti nelle istituzioni politiche, cambiando i rapporti fra partecipazione, rappresentanza e democrazia.

The aim of the paper is to analyze the work of Werner Sombart starting from his criticism of capitalism and of the bourgeois spirit. In the course of the paper we focus on the so-called conservative turn of Sombart and his gradual distancing from Marxist literature with which he had previously interacted intensively. Our intention is mainly to understand the relationship between the thought of Sombart and some key concepts, such as socialism, liberalism and democracy. As Sombart is essentially a scholar of economics, more than one interesting element can be found in his work in relation to his conception of the ethical state and organic community. We conclude the paper with an attempt to historically contextualize the thought of Sombart who is absolutely a product of his time. In the years when Sombart wrote and worked, the crisis of liberalism and individualism was a fact, discussed in the international scientific community by various scholars of socialist and social-democratic leanings but also by the theorists of liberalism, as well as by authors such as Schmitt and Gentile who explicitly joined Nazi-fascism.

Abstract The paper deals with the analogy between the concepts by which Gramsci, in his Prison Notebooks, analyzes the post-war crisis of democracy and the contemporary crisis of representative democracy. Gramsci’s analy-sis is centered on the crisis of political parties, transformism, the crisis of the authority of republican institu-tions, the spread of apoliticism in the social body, the decline in the prestige of Parliament, as well as on Cae-sarism. Today’s political sociologists are once again interested in the study of the same set of phenomena: crisis of mass-based parties, antipolitics and antiparliamentarism, transformism, crisis in the authority of the political class, prevailing corporate interests within republican institutions, and populism. In the light of a cyclical recurrence of the same phenomena, which suggests the presence of a systemic correlation with to-day’s democracy, the theoretical instruments used to investigate such phenomena in Gramsci’s Notebooks, seem to provide relevant interpretative tools still today. In the present paper, we try to identify the usefulness that the categories employed by Gramsci to analyze the crisis of parliamentary democracy may provide in analyzing today’s crisis of representativeness, within the more global Gramscian understanding of political modernity.

ABSTRACT: This Issue collects contributions on the theme of the De-Politicization of [representative] politics in the era of neoliberalism. We consider De-politicization as a set of changes in the ways power is exercised. These modes downgrade the political nature of decision-making and, through representation, give legitimacy to actors apparently less able to bear witness to the presence of the “political”. Politics appears less responsible for the decisions that affect the regulation of society and the impact of their costs and failures on economic and cultural processes. Political choices conditioned by the market acquire the character of necessity and inevitability. The attempts to legitimize the investigation of public choices through deliberative arenas governed by non-political parameters, based on information and knowledge, are not external to this aspect of de-politicization. A discursive de-politicization determines the convergence of preferences into a single, albeit diverse, cognitive construction of reality (frame for public actions). It is no coincidence that the prevailing paradigm in the contemporary liberal political economy has been narrated in the form of a “single thought” demonstrating a clear cultural hegemony of the trans-nationalized and financialized capitalism. Policies become inevitable responses lacking rational alternatives to the limits of development set by previous responses, with which contradictions and conflicts had previously been appeased. De-politicization is probably one of the causes of the growing distance between institutional politics and civil society in Western countries and, unavoidably, it determines certain consequences. We think that, on the social side, some of the consequences can be found in the political indifference on the part of citizens (political apathy) and, by contrast, in growing forms of non-institutional social and political participation through the practices of social resilience and resistance; on the political side, we think that one of the consequences is the birth, everywhere in Europe, of populist parties and movements that, in their rhetoric, emphasize the intention to give back sovereignty to the people. The aim of this issue is to highlight these phenomena which, also in a critical, provocative way, can contribute to the description of the many aspects of this process through both theoretical and empirical work.

Abstract: Starting from Caruso’s attempt to criticize the utility of the Political Opportunity Structures approach to the study of local mobilizations, in this paper we try to contextualize the discourse on the relationship between social movements and political institutions and actors within the broader phenomenon of the de-politicization of politics. With this concept we mean a set of changes in the ways power is exercised. These modes downgrade the political nature of decision-making and, through representation, give legitimacy to actors apparently less able to bear witness to the presence of the “political.” In particular we focus on the various ways through which de-politicization has been consolidated. In the European context, a “government,” a “discourse,” and a “social” de-politicization have, for example, been observed. If the political decisions are determined by extra-political actors, the target of social movements also moves elsewhere, since the goal of social movements is still to influence the decision-making process. Political parties of the depoliticized politics are no longer promoters of policies, but rather translators of decisions taken outside the bodies of political representation. This condition makes them impervious to social issues and a good relationship between parties and movements become very difficult. In these context is normal that the basis on with POS approach has been elaborated are also changed.

Il testo analizza la logica e gli stili della comparazione in scienze sociali. Ne affronta i nodi problematici, ripercorrendo i diversi approcci all’analisi comparata in ambito sociologico, antropologico e politologico. Vengono riportati numerosi esempi di ricerche empiriche, auspicando che questo possa contribuire a far riscopri-re il gusto per la lettura di quegli autori che sono ormai diventati classici. I diversi a-spetti della comparazione sono affrontati a partire da autori come Tocqueville, Marx, Durkheim e Weber, proprio attraverso l’analisi dei loro più celebri studi com-parativi, per poi passare all’analisi dei cosiddetti classici contemporanei. Si ripercorrono quasi due secoli di studi comparati, con particolare attenzione alle ri-cerche socio-politiche, facendo emergere punti di forza e criticità logiche e meto-dologiche, dalla formazione dei concetti alla ormai nota contesa tra scienze sociali e scienze storiche. Per fare questo, si analizza l’opera di quegli studiosi che si sono confrontati scientificamente con il problema del mutamento sociale e politico in prospettiva storica e comparata. Ne fuoriesce un libro denso di contenuti e ideale sia per la didattica che per l’approfondimento scientifico. INDICE: Prefazione 1. La comparazione nelle scienze sociali 1.1. La comparazione tra vita quotidiana e scienza 1.2. La comparazione di sistemi complessi 1.3. I diversi stili di comparazione 1.4. Comparazione e ricerca comparata 1.5. I canoni logici di John Stuart Mill 2. Gli studi comparati di Tocqueville, Marx, Durkheim e Weber 2.1. L’analisi comparata in Alexis de Tocqueville 2.2. Materialismo storico e comparazione in Karl Marx 2.3. La comparazione in Durkheim eWeber 2.4. La sociologia comparata di Émile Durkheim 2.5. La sociologia comparata di Max Weber 3. I nodi metodologici della comparazione 3.1. Le tecniche di controllo delle fonti di variazione 3.2. Le unità di analisi e il problema della classificazione 3.3. L’ambito: dal campionamento alla comparazione controllata 3.4. La definizione concettuale e il problema dell’equivalenza 4. Gli approcci alla comparazione 4.1. Gli approcci orientati a proprietà e stati 4.1.1. L’approccio nomotetico 4.1.2. L’approccio a medio raggio 4.1.3. Dai limiti delle generalizzazioni alla formazione dei concetti 4.2. Gli approcci orientati agli oggetti 4.2.1. L’approccio idiografico 4.2.2. L’approccio interpretativo 4.2.3. L’approccio diffusionista 5. La comparazione storica in scienze sociali 5.1. La riscoperta della sociologia storico-comparata 5.2. La pratica storica in scienze sociali 5.3. La sociologia storico-comparata di Charles Tilly 5.3.1. La critica alla sociologia tradizionale 5.3.2. I modelli di comparazione storica 5.3.3. L’analisi storica dei macro-processi strutturali 5.3.4. L’azione collettiva in Francia e Inghilterra 5.4. La sociologia storica di Antonio Gramsci 5.4.1. Il marxismo critico di Gramsci 5.4.2. La critica alla sociologia evoluzionista 5.4.3. L’analisi storica nelle scienze sociali 5.4.4. Filosofia della praxis e sociologia comparata 6. Mutamento sociale e comparazione storica 6.1.Teoria sociale e comparazione storica 6.1.1. Il panorama storico-sociale di Marc Bloch 6.1.2. Karl Polanyi e la scienza sociale olistica 6.1.3. La sociologia storico-comparata di Barrington Moore jr. 6.2. Comparazione storica e struttural-funzionalismo 6.2.1. La sociologia storica (configurazionale) di S.N. Eisenstadt 6.2.2. Reinhard Bendix tra concetti generali e specificità storiche 6.3. Comparazione storica e marxismo critico 6.3.1. La storia totalizzante di Perry Anderson 6.3.2. L’analisi dei processi storici in E.P. Thompson 6.3.3. La teoria del sistema-mondo di Immanuel Wallerstein Bibliografia

DALLA PREFAZIONE: La politica è importante, la politica è bella. Essa rappresenta il tentativo degli esseri umani di organizzare la loro vita insieme, secondo un principio di ordine e armonia. È sulla base di questa convinzione che abbiamo pensato di produrre un testo che, nel nostro auspicio, possa fornire gli strumenti concettuali e teorici per comprenderne le dinamiche e gli sviluppi. Mentre scriviamo queste righe, il mondo è martoriato da numerose guerre che colpiscono soprattutto le popolazioni più povere. Ancora sembra lontana una via d’uscita pacifica a quella spirale violenta che, dopo gli attentati dell’11 Settembre 2001, sembra aver ridefinito i parametri di un nuovo ordine internazionale fondato sullo scontro tra civiltà. Al contempo, una pesante crisi economica e finanziaria affligge il mondo occidentale facendo traballare la fiducia cieca verso i dettami di una globalizzazione neoliberale che si è configurata attorno alla convinzione della capacità dei mercati di produrre ricchezza e benessere senza il bisogno di un sistema di regole che solo la politica può fornire. Proprio nel momento in cui si cerca di esportare manu militari la democrazia in quei paesi che ne sono privi, essa sembra entrare in crisi in quei contesti in cui è stata elaborata e si è consolidata, almeno nel¬la sua variante liberale. Si assiste in Occidente a una crisi di rendimento delle isti¬tuzioni democratiche rappresentative cui fa seguito un tendenziale allontanamento dei cittadini dall’impegno pubblico, se non nelle forme non istituzionali dei nuo¬vi movimenti di protesta. Le classi politiche sembrano impreparate al nuovo corso postideologico e faticano a immaginare una società del futuro, limitandosi alla difficile quanto asfittica gestione dell’esistente. La crescente incertezza, che è parte di una crisi sociale generalizzata, accende un po’ ovunque le sirene di nuovi po¬¬pulismi che si alimentano di sentimenti individualistici e antipolitici. L’arte nobi¬le della politica è ridotta, nella rappresentazione mediatica, a un fenomeno di costume che barcolla tra il gossip e lo scandalismo. Di fronte a questo quadro poco roseo, decidiamo di intraprendere il faticoso com¬pito di riconsegnare alla politica la complessità che le è propria, cercando di problematizzarla da un punto di vista sociologico. Il nostro obiettivo è dunque quel¬lo di rendere conto del reale impatto della politica sulla società e della società sulla politica, senza per questo negare l’autonomia del politico dal sociale. A questo fine, il merito dell’editore, sta nell’aver scommesso su un testo che non sia una semplice introduzione alla sociologia politica, ma che, in controtenden¬za rispetto alle regole informali che da anni sembra essersi dato il mercato editoriale, cerchi di analizzare i processi politici nel profondo, toccandone tutti, o quasi tutti, gli aspetti salienti. Ne è fuoriuscito, speriamo, un testo abbastanza completo, che non solo può rappresentare un utile strumento didattico nei corsi di area sociologica e politologica, ma anche un importante strumento di approfondimento per quei dottorandi e ricercatori che si accingono all’affascinante studio dei fenomeni politici.

The global economic crisis of 2008 has fostered a new wave of de-politicization intended as the shifting of national policy making from the public political arena to the field of extra-political supranational and international actors. The public policy making has become tightly linked to criteria that are much more economic than political. This change has provoked a consequent mutation in the nature and behavior of social movements which has result in different kinds of crossbreeding. Traditional social movements with their State-addressed requests have given way to new forms of social conflict that do not directly address to the national government. These new forms of mobilization act primarily in the form of direct social actions aimed at impacting directly on the economy and the environment. The common element of such experiences can be identified in the mix of resilience and resistance that they express.

ABSTRACT: This Issue collects contributions on the theme of the De-Politicization of [representative] politics in the era of neoliberalism. We consider De-politicization as a set of changes in the ways power is exercised. These modes downgrade the political nature of decision-making and, through representation, give legitimacy to actors apparently less able to bear witness to the presence of the “political”. Politics appears less responsible for the decisions that affect the regulation of society and the impact of their costs and failures on economic and cultural processes. Political choices conditioned by the market acquire the character of necessity and inevitability. The attempts to legitimize the investigation of public choices through deliberative arenas governed by non-political parameters, based on information and knowledge, are not external to this aspect of de-politicization. A discursive de-politicization determines the convergence of preferences into a single, albeit diverse, cognitive construction of reality (frame for public actions). It is no coincidence that the prevailing paradigm in the contemporary liberal political economy has been narrated in the form of a “single thought” demonstrating a clear cultural hegemony of the trans-nationalized and financialized capitalism. Policies become inevitable responses lacking rational alternatives to the limits of development set by previous responses, with which contradictions and conflicts had previously been appeased. De-politicization is probably one of the causes of the growing distance between institutional politics and civil society in Western countries and, unavoidably, it determines certain consequences. We think that, on the social side, some of the consequences can be found in the political indifference on the part of citizens (political apathy) and, by contrast, in growing forms of non-institutional social and political participation through the practices of social resilience and resistance; on the political side, we think that one of the consequences is the birth, everywhere in Europe, of populist parties and movements that, in their rhetoric, emphasize the intention to give back sovereignty to the people. The aim of this issue is to highlight these phenomena which, also in a critical, provocative way, can contribute to the description of the many aspects of this process through both theoretical and empirical work.