In the past five years, the term “grievance politics” has been used frequently in the predominantly English-language literature on political sociology. Opportunities to translate it into Greek are limited: “the politics of complaints” and “the politics of worry” are probably the available translations. Regardless of the terminological affiliation, it can be understood as a generic concept that includes separate related concepts: political protest, conflict politics, regression politics (regression politics), reaction politics (retaliation politics), nativism/indigenism, reactionary, politics. resentment.

However, the concept of “complaint” is not new to the study of collective action. In the 1980s, it was used in the analysis of socio-political movements to refer to moral demands and objections to the “system” by which people mobilize in public space when they feel they are being treated unfairly. Thus, in a sense, any demand and protest can be characterized as an expression of a policy of discontent. But this is not how the term is used in recent politico-sociological and politico-psychological studies.

While there is no universally accepted definition, “grievance politics” more or less refers to idiosyncratic grassroots political participation from the bottom up, as well as a kind of top-down exercise of power driven by moralism, negative and hostile feelings, strong personification (figurative charisma), and subsequent party narrowing. as organs of organization, mediation and representation of the public interest. The introduction of this concept is welcome, as it offloads “populism”, which is ultimately used as a category basket in which we place many components of “grievance politics” and much more.

In the context of the treaty under consideration, using propaganda tools, a horizontal axis of political and cultural polarization is formed, so that, on the one hand, public opinion is divided on the most controversial issues of public life, and on the other, incompatible ones. “moral tribes”, whose members perceive political reality in diametrically opposite ways. Hence the “alternative” realities and “alternative truth” of Donald Trump (in the relevant literature, “Trumpism” more fully illustrates the “politics of grudges”). This horizontal axis is intersected by the vertical axis of social-class inequality and superimposed crises that generate intolerance and discomfort, but instead of being directed at the “power elite”, they are transferred to target groups (immigrants, refugees, LGBTI communities, etc.). . ).

Four interpretations of the phenomenon can be distinguished: a) Spatial, according to which the advantages of (big) cities and the great life opportunities they offer arouse the envy of the inhabitants of the countryside. b) Political and cultural, which focuses on the reaction of older ages to the emancipatory values ​​and freedom of the younger ones. c) Socio-economic, which emphasize income inequality and multiple social exclusion. d) Demographics, which interprets this on the basis of population movements and the negative attitude of the natives towards new arrivals, who necessarily absorb some of the available resources (an attitude known in Greece).

Obviously, in varying proportions, the politics of discontent is (also) formed through the indoctrination of offended subjects by demagogic elites through social networks. This is where miserabilism flourishes: a constant sense of discomfort and resentment at the actions of one’s political opponent, usually the government. It is an attitude that despises but basically rejects everything positive that happens, on the one hand, because its generous acceptance would abolish it, and on the other, because it nourishes and arranges “the worse, the better.”

It is a previously canceled satisfaction from the positive aspects of social life. It stems from pervasive resentment and culminates in narcissistic victimization, where poverty and unhappiness become objects of pleasure. Escalated during the pre-election period, this attitude is expressed in the use of derogatory moral language, such as, for example, Mr. Polakis, Mr. Velopoulos, as well as the KKE, where the words “filth”, “filth”, “greed”, “negligence” predominate. ”, “shame”, “squalor”. Words we often hear these days.

With regard to “demand”, an important predictor is the emotional energy that is collected and released by those who engage in political grievance and/or concern processes. Their frustration and resentment are caused by a real or imagined degradation of their social status and an irresistible need for recognition, that is, for dignity. As a reminder, restoring dignity was a key component of SYRIZA’s speech in the 2015 elections. But even now, dignity and a just society are the values ​​that Greeks look forward to in 2040, according to a very recent poll (March 2023). ) European Commission and ITE Joint Research Center (https://ourfutures.dashboard.voicesthatcount.net/).

When a person feels like a “stranger in his own country” – a seven-year-old book of the same name by Arlie Hochschild, an authority on the sociology of emotions – he rightfully demands that his hearth, emotional cradle be owned and respected. The question is whether this search will take an authoritarian or a democratic path.

*Nikos Demertzis is Professor of Political Sociology and Communications at EKPA.