Against authoritarian condescension

One of the moral characteristics of the political and social times we live in Catalonia, and perhaps throughout the world, is the triumph of condescension. It is the weapon that explains the current and effective demobilization of the independence movement, as well as accounting for the lack of reaction to the most serious forms of social and economic exploitation. The strategy of condescension, well described by the sociologist Pierre Bourdieu, consists of the powerful symbolically and temporarily renouncing their dominant position, simulating a fleeting closeness in their relationship with the dominated subject. With this brief gesture, the powerful achieve that the subordinate docilely and gratefully recognizes their subordinate position. And it is that only those who hold power can be condescending — to put it plainly, it is they who can spare your life — and, in a textbook case of symbolic denial of their position (Jean Baudrillard), they paradoxically achieve recognition of their strength. Who does not remember the symbolic effectiveness of the case of that "campechano" king to make himself admired?

This is a recurrent political strategy that has the virtue, at the same time, of reaffirming a position of dominance and of avoiding, or even diluting, direct confrontation. One of the most brilliant cases I recall is the inauguration of the Olympic Games in Barcelona in 1992. Faced with the risk of an anti-monarchist protest, with great cunning, it was decided to play the anthem of Els segadors just as the king entered the stadium, as background music — without any solemnity, however — and then have the monarch use Catalan in his first words of greeting. Only the Marcha Real was heard as the true national — Spanish — anthem. That initial gesture of condescension managed to silence the planned protest.

We now live in similar times. The political discourses of those who govern us here and there are full of words that simulate a position of equality in their relationship. From the old, skeptical and resigned conllevancia" by Ortega y Gasset, we have moved to the new rhetoric of "retrobament", reconciliation

, normalization and, even, of loyalty and institutional collaboration.

That is to say, condescending language is used that masks the objective inequality of a relationship of structural dependence. Words are used that symbolically deny the reality of dependence in order, ultimately and almost invisibly, to make the abuse —fiscal, linguistic, cultural— be accepted with docility.

However, the strategy of condescension is not only present in the sphere of political domination and submission, but is also resorted to in many situations of social conflict, either to relativize it or to stifle it directly. Nowadays, it is common to find large doses of condescension in the language used to talk about immigration and public safety, about the violent behavior of certain social groups; in general, one speaks condescendingly of all groups considered “vulnerable” or at risk of being so. These are well-intentioned lies that, while not always lacking good faith, aim to extinguish conflict.

Condescension works because it conceals two characteristics inherent to any relationship of domination. Firstly, the person who deigns to condescend places themselves in a position of moral superiority. That is, they establish a relationship in which they look down on the subject, treating them with a leniency that rests on this moral, cultural, or intellectual supremacy. The other characteristic of condescension is its authoritarianism. An authoritarianism that masks —whether with good intentions or perversely— the objective relationship of unequal dominion. Condescension, in my opinion, is one of the most undignified and dishonest forms of authoritarianism, because it is exercised with dissimulation and with the aim that the dominated do not become aware of it. A masked authoritarianism that is present in certain types of religious devotion, in diglossic linguistic exchanges, in many workplace relationship dynamics, or in the establishment of false camaraderie in teaching relationships, among others. And also, of course, in certain relationships between parents and children, where the former, rather than acting as parents, want to influence their children without showing their hand and making it seem like they are their friends.

Unmasking the forms of condescension in which power wants to trap us is necessary in any process of personal or collective emancipation. And, obviously, it is the first step to take in any process of national liberation.