“What does it mean to be a ‘political subject’?”

Our lives are determined by the past and present of the state politics. How we are perceived by the others depends on the policies of our native country, making human beings subordinates to the state affairs. The view of Sheldon S. Wolin (1994) that “politics is continuous, ceaseless, and endless” (p.11) made me think that people, without realising, become the subjects of constant oppression and domination of the structure they are living in. My personal realisation of the inability to escape the political oppression begun after starting education in England. Indirect expressions of prejudice, based on a stereotypical image of the Slavic nation, was becoming more noticeable and more open. My experience sympathises the claim made by Sheldon S. Wolin (1994) that “boundaries proclaim identity and stand ready to repeal difference. They may signify exclusion, ‘keep out!’, or containment, ‘keep inside!’” (Sheldon S. Wolin 1994, p.11). For me, being political subject is not possessing free will to build my own identity. Instead, it is the politics of the state that decides who we are.

The politics of my country created a barrier for me to understand the mentality of the other people as well as them to accept me into their society. Despite avoiding any self-projection of patriotism or even any sort of nationalism, I was not seen as “citizen of the world” (Diogenes Laertius, Life of Diogenes the Cynic, quoted in Martha C. Nussbaum,1994), but as a product of the policies of the country I come from. This might be partially true if taking into consideration the theory of false consciousness explained by Louis Althusser. Althusser (1970) suggested that state institution from early stages “indoctrinate” their subjects “of its subjection to the ruling ideology” or “of the practice of that ideology”. This allows the state system to secure the obedience of its citizens and avoiding any chance of being questioned about the conduct of the policies, making them being puppets on the strings. The theory of false consciousness called into question whether the system that operates in the country of my origin might or might not obscure the reality of governmental domination over its citizens. However, it is not as easily noticeable to those who live within that system in comparison to those who stay outside.

Each society has its regime of truth, its “general politics of truth”: that is, the types of discourse which it accepts and makes function as true; the mechanisms and instances which enable one to distinguish true and false statements… (Foucault, quoted in Rabinow 1991)

I became eager in searching the truth whether we are identified not by our personal characteristics, but by the politics of your country.

The politics of different time leave a different impact on its “subject”. In the line with this, H. Liu and Denis J. Hilton, 2005 stated that history conditions “the construction of identity, norms, and values” (James H. Liu and Denis J. Hilton, 2005, p.1). To see the contrast between politics of the modern Russia versus the post-Soviet era, I introduced myself to a number of Aleksei Balabanov films, in particular, “Dead Man’s Buff” or “Zhmurki” (2005). The film produces a realistic atmosphere of the “wild 90s” where the politics were made on the basis of the interests of rising oligarchies and criminal groups. The politics of instability and despair resulted in the formation of profit-seeking and brutal society which is perceived by Western nations as barbaric. The films I watched about post-Soviet Russia arose my consciousness about powerless of people to be free from the politics. This is because human behaviour is shaped in accordance with the agenda set by the state politics and its past. As Wolin claimed, “the State encourages identification of the self with the power of the state, the surrogate of participation and the subordinance of self-interest” (Sheldon S. Wolin 1994, p.13).

Furthermore, being political subject appeared to me not only as being a guinea pig of the state’s actions but also as a scapegoat of its policies. As International Politics student, I am seeking to work within the global political arena. This became a turning point of realisation of being constrained by the politics. The key international political institutions appear to be as an “elite club” which excludes the rest, leaving no chance to individuals if they come from unrelated faction. However, if taking into consideration that the foreign “diplomatic and military personnel” in the 19th century was more acceptable among “monarchical employer” in comparison with modern exclusiveness (Hans J. Morgenthau, 1948), the question about the cause of such change arises. Nowadays, fluctuation from government to government, as Morgenthau claimed, is regarded by modern political institutions as “invitation to treason”. Looking at the past, I noticed that the distinction between the groups began as a result of more individualistic politics. This comparison made by Morgenthau (1948) convinces me that people depend on the politics of specific time phase, making them subject of political dictation.

On the grounds of historical comparison and use of academic literature, I have become aware of own incapacity to decide upon the course of my life. Politics of specific eras produce different effects on its subjects. However, the results stay the same: we are “subjects” of politics.

Bibliography

1. Althusser, Louis (1970) Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses Notes towards an Investigation). Lenin and Philosophy and Other Essays, Monthly Review Press 1971, pp.132–133
2. Foucault, Michel (1991) The Foucault Reader: An Introduction to Foucault’s Thought. Edited by Paul Rabinow – Accessed on 20.10.2017 at http://www.powercube.net/other-forms-of-power/foucault-power-is-everywhere
3. Diogenes Laertius, Life of Diogenes the Cynic, quoted in Martha C. Nussbaum (1994). Accessed on 17.10.2017 at /http://bostonreview.net/martha-nussbaum-patriotism-and-cosmopolitanis
4. H. Liu, James and J. Hilton, Denis (2005) How the past weighs on the present: Social representation of history and their role in identity politics, published by British Journal of Social Psychology, p.1
5. Morgenthau, Hans J. (1948) The Twilight of International Morality, published by The University of Chicago Press, pp.91–92
6. Wolin, Sheldon S (1994) Fugitive Democracy. Published by Constellations (Oxford, England) (1351–0487)

Filmography

Dead Man’s Bluff, or Zhmurki (2005) [Film]. Directed by Aleksei Balabanov. Russia: STV Cinema Companym