El Ciudadano
Original article: Entrevista con Sandro Mezzadra: «La conflictualidad, en términos maquiavelianos, es la energía política, la cual puede dar empuje a la izquierda»
Sandro Mezzadra is a political theory professor at the Alma Mater University in Bologna, Italy. Politically, he notes a strong influence from Italian Operaismo in his academic background: «My work continues along the same path as that theoretical current, considering both the new developments defining our present and the need to problematize the theoretical paradigm of operaismo.»
For years, he has worked through broad networks of international collaboration. Recently, he has co-authored more than solo work, particularly with Brett Nilsson for over 20 years. Together, they have written three books:
- The first, Border as Method, was published in 2013.
- The second book is titled The Politics of Operations, released in 2019.
- The third and most recent, The Rest and the West: Capital and Power in the Multipolar World, will be available in 2024.
In this last book, he attempted to grapple with what was happening globally while they were writing, a context heavily marked by war and profound global fractures.
Another significant collaboration he highlights is with Michael Hardt. In recent years, they have written various articles addressing the global crisis. He fondly remembers his «extremely» important relationship with Toni Negri, with whom he was a companion and friend, especially during the last 15 years of Negri’s life.
The conversation begins with a reflection on the meaning of operaismo, both historically and in its contemporary relevance:
«Operaismo is fundamentally a method. To put it simply, it is rooted in the prioritization of struggle, of resistance practice as a privileged viewpoint for analyzing the development of capitalism. This method is also associated with a style of work, particularly the idea of co-investigation, which always suggests linking theoretical work with tangible field verifications.»
This method is both practical and activist, shaping Mezzadra’s approach to building alliances with social movements and progressive governments since the start of the century.
This extends to progressive figures in Latin America, where he emphasizes the region’s critical significance to him. In fact, alongside Toni Negri and Michael Hardt, he exchanged ideas in Venezuela in 2006, Ecuador in 2012, and Bolivia, where he cites Alvaro Garcia Linera as a key reference in discussions.
In this context, Sandro Mezzadra addresses a classic question that has historically confronted the left: What should be done in response to present political and social transformations?
«I think this question is asked by many militants and intellectuals in various parts of the world today, in a situation that is objectively very challenging. For the left to become a politically and materially effective force again, it must undergo profound renewal. This, although general, is an evident statement.»
«Now, the paths this renewal might take are naturally diverse depending on the contexts. In relation to my research and pedagogical work, I have concentrated significantly on the question of the world order and not only on the crisis of the international system, but also on the crisis of the global market—a crisis involving not just states, but also major capitalist players…»
«The left today needs a radical rethinking of how it conceives the relationship between the global dimension and internal dimensions that are often national in nature. This is a fundamental problem that is not new in history, as seen in the major debates on imperialism at the beginning of the last century. One reason to remember Lenin is that he provided an effective answer to the need to renew communist political coordinates in light of imperialism, breaking away from Eurocentrism. It is true that today’s situation is very different from that of the early 1900s.»
For Mezzadra, this new internationalism represents a method, a way of thinking, how to organize a party, and how to construct political discourse. This method must consider experiences from various contexts in each country.
The party dimension must be cautious of overly general discussions, assuming it is possible to think of a formula applicable to all leftist parties. At the same time, care must be taken regarding positions that assert that the party-form is an outdated formula from the 20th century.
«Of course, I believe that looking at the lessons of recent decades, the party-form faces growing difficulty in positioning itself as the privileged and exclusive actor in a transformation process… I find the perspective outlined in a book by Rodrigo Nunes—neither vertical nor horizontal—compelling.»
«I find this perspective intriguing as it invites us to rethink the actions and political organization in an ecosystemic dimension, examining how different actors can contribute to defining a model of political organization and action that is effective in transforming power relations, class relationships, and how the very reflection on the party can nourish that ‘perspective’, centering on the problem of the relationship between the party and what lies outside the party.»
«Therefore, without dismissing the party in general terms, I emphasize the importance of this issue—the relationship of the party with its many external relationships—as central in rethinking the very structure and action of the party.»
The discussion regarding what actions to take also extends to the positioning of a «new» right in the global political landscape. Discussing the far-right government in Chile, Mezzadra highlights that as social policies are slashed, there is also an equally significant cut or outright elimination of memory policies (as seen with the Search Plan in Chile). In this regard, the left must swiftly contribute to building a robust social struggle and opposition.
«History never repeats itself,» he notes, referring to his interactions with three taxi drivers who cast votes for Kast, who predict that the current government’s policies could lead to a new social explosion. Mezzadra outlines that these predictions of a new political and social mobilization in response to governmental reforms will not occur spontaneously. There is an unavoidable task of constructing conflictuality, which cannot be postponed or simply relegated to parliamentary procedures.
«I think that the problem of Chile in the coming years will be how to organize that conflictuality. The left must not be timid regarding this; it should then seek ways to enact that… but conflictuality, in Machiavellian terms, is political energy that can empower the left.»
Regarding migration, he points out that it is a complex phenomenon present in multiple countries, where various right-wing groups, both traditional and emerging, have gained political influence by opposing immigration.
«Migration is a key issue for all the rights we are facing today, whether more or less new, more or less fascist… Clearly, the left needs an alternative policy on migration. To approach this solely from an electoral standpoint, chasing the right, as the Italian left has done for 25 years, is ineffective. If the arguments are those of the right, people convinced by those arguments will vote for the right, not for those who propose them in a slightly milder manner. Thus, a new migration policy is indispensable. And, as always should be… this policy must be developed contextually.»
Chilean Reality
Mezzadra closely follows Chilean politics and notes that although he hasn’t participated directly, he has kept informed through friends and colleagues: «Last month (March) in Santiago, there was a public event with Boric’s Deputy Minister of Economy (Claudia Sanhueza). It was an extremely interesting discussion, starting from the themes of this book written with Brett, The Rest and the West.»
«Returning to what I said earlier about the left’s perspective, it seems to me that Boric’s government has not been able to innovate significantly in how the government’s left must understand the global dimension of politics. I believe it has been substantially aligned with U.S. policies during Biden’s time, and particularly failed to recognize what I consider the fundamental issue for reinventing the left in a region like Latin America—a perspective extending beyond borders, new forms of integration.»
«Without this, I don’t think anything can be done, whether in a country like Chile or in a country like Italy. And especially in the first decade of the century, under particular conditions, the commodity boom had prompted some attempts. It was one reason why what was happening in Latin America seemed very interesting to me and us.»
«Naturally, when I speak of integration processes, I don’t think of the European Union as a model, which—to put it humorously—doesn’t work particularly well. How can one deal with China without pooling powers? If you are the left, this is a problem.»
The Concept of Multitude
The dialogue then shifts to the concept of multitude, prompted by a reflection on the failure of the Chilean constitutional process and the possibility of interpreting this phenomenon through certain contemporary theoretical categories.
In particular, the discussion raises whether the appeal to a plurality of subjects—where multiple identities and demands seek simultaneous representation—could relate to the notion of multitude, understood as a form of political articulation that privileges diversity over homogenization.
The discussion begins with the hypothesis that one problem of the constitutional process was precisely the difficulty in constructing a common synthesis from that plurality. In other words, the appeal to diverse actors and political sensitivities may not have achieved consolidation into a unit capable of articulating a shared horizon.
From this perspective, it raises the question of whether the notion of multitude is insufficient for addressing political processes requiring some degree of cohesion or collective articulation.
Regarding this, Mezzadra states: «When I began to visit Latin America at the beginning of the century, I was very much aware of this opposition between the multitude and the people, and in the initial discussions I had, I proposed it. Later, I realized that it didn’t make much sense due to the diverse political traditions in Latin America, where terms like people and popular carry different meanings. It was then that I began to think about the political importance, beyond the conceptual, of the issue of translation, as articulated, among others, by Antonio Gramsci in a fascist prison.»
«Particularly, from discussions with the Situaciones collective in Buenos Aires, which are very significant for me, I began to question this stark opposition and to seek a way to translate the concept of multitude so it could resonate with traditions that are firmly established in Latin America—in the end, the political use of the concept of the people.»
Thus, the failure of the process wouldn’t be attributable to the concept of multitude itself; rather, it would describe the actual diversity of social and political actors that manifested during the constitutional process and the preceding cycle of mobilizations. The multitude would allude to the coexistence of various subjects, demands, and forms of political participation, without reducing them to a homogeneous identity.
«I believe, nonetheless, that the events of recent years have affirmed the significance and productivity of the concept of multitude. If we think about a process like the social explosion in Chile, but also about the other significant social eruption in the region—the Colombian one of 2021—I find that the multitude concept captures the composition of the movements. It reflects the constitutive heterogeneity of movements, which also signifies the constitutive heterogeneity of what we can technically call living labor under contemporary capitalism.»
«Following this, it’s not that a normative theory about how the multitude should be organized emerges. It reveals a composition—returning to the classical term of Italian operaismo—broad and heterogeneous, where indigenous movements hold fundamental importance; distinct, as in Colombia, where indigenous presence is much more pronounced, even statistically. Again, I think the issue of the multitude remains with us.»
This intervention touches the core of contemporary political problems and, interestingly, returns us to Spinoza’s physiology: the challenge is not just to ‘unite,’ but to unite without erasing difference.
«Its organization can occur in various forms; what remains, in my view, as a fundamental theme is that this organization must not annul heterogeneity. On the contrary, we must seek—though I recognize it is a dilemma—how to transform this heterogeneity into power, into capacity to act.»
«Clearly, the concept of multitude has been constructed in opposition to that of the people, and therefore, also in opposition to that of the nation. I think of course it is important to return to this subject, but what is even more essential today, regardless of the word used, is to build a mass critique of nationalism—a mass critique of the idea of the nation as the exclusive horizon of politics. Starting from the fact that later, as I mentioned, in a large part of the states and nations existing in the world today, the margins of effective autonomy and action are extremely limited.”
The Situation in Italy
Lastly, the interview turns toward the political situation in Italy. Here, it is relevant to directly quote the academic, whose reflections broadly address the contemporary Italian scenario and its political tensions.
“Giorgia Meloni faces a series of limits and difficulties. The ‘no’ victory in the justice referendum has been significant from this perspective, but it’s not just that. Today, Meloni is in serious trouble due to what is happening in Iran, the internal economic repercussions, the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, and a war driven by the U.S. president Donald Trump, with whom Meloni has tried to position herself as a privileged interlocutor.”
“More generally, I think it’s interesting to observe Meloni’s government policy, right from her accession to power in 2022, considering the relationship between domestic and international politics. Because Meloni has tried, with undeniable intelligence and some skill, to use international politics to consolidate her internal position.”
“Giorgia Meloni has produced, in terms of Italian domestic policy and public discourse, a significant shift: she has introduced the themes of nation and nationalism as dominant in public discourse. If you pay attention, she never says ‘our country’; she always refers to ‘our nation.’ This is not a trivial detail. In Italy, it had never been said ‘our nation’; today everyone says ‘our nation.’ She has managed to provoke a displacement within the order of public discourse.”
“On the other hand, this nation is quite divided, fragile inwardly, and by itself holds little weight internationally. Precisely for this reason, Giorgia Meloni, with some intelligence, has sought to use international politics to project an appearance of national power. And she has primarily done this in Europe, with a turn away from the traditional far-right approach in Italy toward a more Atlanticist direction.”
“From the start of her mandate, she has supported Zelensky against Russia and NATO. She has tried to build relationships with right-wing governments, particularly in Eastern Europe. A transformation of the European Union into a union of peoples and States is a historical goal of the Italian and European right. This means marginalizing the European Commission and transnational elements within the EU’s own institutions, and centralizing the Council—that is, the States.”
“This worked for a time, but then changes in Eastern Europe, particularly in Poland, complicated matters. At the same time, Meloni has continued to support a neofascist—or more precisely, a neofranquist—force like Vox in Spain, believing that a government, not necessarily of Vox, but of the Popular Party supported by Vox, would be conducive to this project.”
“Things evolved, Trump was elected, and Meloni continued pursuing her goals, trying to position herself as a fundamental and privileged interlocutor of Trump in Europe, continuing the idea that the trend is towards a disintegration of the European Union or its transformation into a union of peoples and States. In this regard, she attempted to form an alliance with Merz, the German chancellor. When war broke out in Iran, Trump informed Merz but not Meloni. This was a slight for Meloni, as it showcased Italy’s minimal relevance on the international stage. This occurred while the referendum campaign advanced.”
“The defeat in the referendum linked with this slight contributes to generating a currently fragile situation. At the same time, the referendum has shown that there is social opposition in Italy. All analyses emphasize the fundamental participation of a young electorate politicized by the large demonstrations against genocide in Gaza between September and March. There was a demonstration in Rome two Saturdays ago, this ‘No Kings’ demonstration, echoing American ones, which was a significant mobilization; consequently, things are shifting. It will be essential to see what capacity institutional left has to influence this movement.”
The Citizen
La entrada Interview with Sandro Mezzadra: «Conflictuality, in Machiavellian Terms, is Political Energy that Can Propel the Left» se publicó primero en El Ciudadano.
🔥 Ver noticia completa en ElCiudadano.cl 🔥
