Mimetic Politics: Dyadic Patterns in Global Politics

Studies in Violence, Mimesis, and Culture (SVMC)

by Roberto Farneti

War, violence, and the disruption of social orders are critical areas of focus in mimetic theory, and a mimetic perspective applied to the study of politics illuminates social processes and phenomena over and beyond typical explanations offered by mainstream political science. Unlike traditional political science ontology, the mimetic perspective highlights neither individuals nor groups, but “doubles,” or “mimetic twins.” According to this perspective, in order to grasp the fundamental rationales of political processes, we need to concentrate on the distinctive propensity of either individuals or groups to engage in mimetic contests resulting from their unreflective disposition to imitate each other’s desire. This disposition has been strikingly described by the French-American anthropologist Rene Girard: “Once his basic needs are satisfied (indeed sometimes even before), man is subject to intense desires, though he may not know precisely for what.” Via mimetic theory, Farneti highlights phenomena that political scientists have consistently failed to notice, such as reciprocal imitation as the fundamental cause of human discord, the mechanisms of spontaneous polarization in human conflicts (i.e., the emergence of dyads or “doubles”), and the strange and ever-growing resemblance of the mimetic rivals, which is precisely what pushes them to annihilate each other.

193 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2015

Reviews

[Andrew Marr · Rating 4 out of 5]

An approach to political science via mimetic theory is quite welcome. Farneti is very helpful when he applies René Girard's concept of mimetic doubles to elucidate conflicts in the political arena. He demonstrates successfully that although matters of land and economic strength are relevant to political struggle, the rivalry for the sake of rivalry as Girard analyzes it tends to fuel conflict beyond any reasonable goals. Most valuable is Farneti's approach to conflict resolution where those involved in conflict have to be made conscious of the mimetic element of the conflict so that they have a chance to back off of that. Otherwise, settlements such as land apportionment will not do much to stop a conflict. Toward the end of the book, farneti brings in what he calls a theology of the Ascension. He means by this a de-sacrilization of the world in the wake of Christ leaving the world at his Ascension. That the world is de-sacralized in modern times is true and Christianity does have a lot to do with that, but I think de-sacralizilng nature is the meain reason for that and lmore important the de-mythologization that the Gospel has brought about. Farneti's notion of Ascension is a serious misinterpretation of the doctrine. Christ's Ascension was a distancing of Christ from the world in one respect but the Ascension leads to the sending of the Holy Spirit who offers guidance and God's presence through the Sacraments. The challenge to become conscious of falling into rivalry as a mimetic double is a difficult one and it requires all the spiritual help we can get to meet this challenge. For those who do not believe, a humanistic discipline may be the best one can do but I suspect that even then the Holy Spirit works in such people to strengthen them.