The Absolutization of the Majority Will and the Transition to Authoritarianism

tarihinde gönderilmiş tarafından

An Analysis of Michela Murgia’s Book, How to Become a Fascist?
Introduction
The legitimacy of democratic regimes is often grounded in the concept of “the will of the majority.” However, in her ironic yet highly serious text, How to Become a Fascist?, Michela Murgia argues that democracy can transform into its opposite when the principle of the majority is not limited. According to Murgia, fascism is not a threat from outside democracy, but rather a pathology arising from within democracy through the absolutization of the will of the majority (Murgia, 2018).

The Rupture Between the Will of the Majority and Democratic Legitimacy
Murgia begins the transformation of the will of the majority into authoritarianism at the point where quantitative superiority is accepted as moral and political absoluteness. At this rupture, the majority is no longer merely a decision-making subject, but is positioned as the sole source of truth and legitimacy. To put it in the author’s ironic language, the proposition that “the majority is always right because it is the majority” becomes an unquestionable dogma (Murgia, 2018).

At this point, the principle of the majority breaks away from liberal-democratic checks and balances such as constitutional limits, fundamental rights, and the protection of minorities. Thus, democracy ceases to be a form of government based on pluralism and evolves into the despotism of the majority. This approach directly coincides with Alexis de Tocqueville’s early warnings about the tyranny of the majority (Tocqueville, 1835/2000).

Delegitimization and Political Exclusion of Minorities
According to Murgia, the absolutization of the majority will becomes decisive not only in decision-making processes but also in the definition of political belonging. Those who are not included in the majority are no longer coded as “those with different opinions”; they are coded as elements contrary to, or even hostile to, the national will. At this point, the opposition ceases to be a constitutive element of the democratic system and is represented as an anti-systemic threat (Murgia, 2018).

This process coincides with Hannah Arendt’s definition of “the denial of the plural” as one of the fundamental characteristics of totalitarianism. According to Arendt, authoritarian and totalitarian regimes create the illusion of a singular will by eliminating the pluralism that is the essential condition of the political sphere (Arendt, 1951/2018).

The Instrumentalization of Law and the Normalization of Exception
At the stage where the will of the majority is absolutized, law ceases to be a universal and binding set of norms; it becomes a tool that is valid only insofar as it reflects the will of the majority. Murgia presents this situation as a fundamental characteristic of the fascist mentality: Law exists not for justice, but for the benefit of “our people” (Murgia, 2018).

This approach becomes even more apparent when considered together with Giorgio Agamben’s concept of the state of exception. “Extraordinary” measures taken in the name of the will of the majority become permanent, and the suspension of the law is normalized (Agamben, 2005). Thus, the will of the majority is positioned above the law, ensuring the continuity of authoritarian rule.

From Populism to Fascism: The Homogenization of the Majority
Murgia sees the critical threshold at which populism evolves into fascism in the conception of the majority as a homogeneous and indivisible whole. “The people” are constructed around a single voice, a single will, and a single interest. This construction, as Umberto Eco points out in his concept of “Ur-Fascism,” leads to the perception of differences as a threat and the suppression of critical thinking (Eco, 1995).

At this point, the will of the majority ceases to be a democratic decision-making mechanism; it transforms into a sacred authority demanding obedience. Authoritarianism is no longer established through force, but through discourse that claims to speak in the name of the majority.

According to Michela Murgia, the will of the majority only has democratic meaning when it is limited by pluralism, minority rights, and the rule of law. When these limits disappear, the majority ceases to be a liberating principle and transforms into an oppressive force. The transition to authoritarianism occurs not in the existence of the majority, but in the acceptance of the majority as unquestionable, infallible, and absolute. Murgia’s ironic guide shows how this transformation is possible through ordinary and everyday practices, reminding us that the greatest threat to democracy can arise from within itself.

References
Agamben, G. (2005). State of Exception. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Arendt, H. (2018). Totalitarizmin Kaynakları (çev. B. Sina Şener). İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları. (Orijinal eser 1951).

Eco, U. (1995). “Ur-Fascism.” The New York Review of Books, 42(11).

Murgia, M. (2018). Istruzioni per diventare fascisti. Torino: Einaudi.

Tocqueville, A. de (2000). Amerika’da Demokrasi (çev. S. Sevinç). İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları. (Orijinal eser 1835).

82

İLGİLİ VEYA BENZER YAZILAR

  1. By creating Don Quixote, does Cervantes actually describe the desperation of man in his search for meaning? Although Miguel de Cervantes’ Don Quixote is interpreted as an ironic look at medieval chivalry at first glance, when a deeper reading is made, it is a philosophical work that exhibits the tragic loneliness and existential despair of man in his search for meaning. The...
  2. What do the descriptions of London and Paris in Dickens’s novel A Tale of Two Cities say about what an ideal society is like? Two Cities, One Question: What is the Ideal Society? Philosophical Analysis of London and Paris in Charles Dickens’s A Tale of Two Cities Charles Dickens’s A Tale of Two Cities is not only a dramatic narrative reflecting the historical atmosphere of the French Revolution; it...
  3. As an “anti-hero,” does Gogol’s character Chichikov criticize society or the individual? As an Anti-Hero, Does Chichikov Criticize Society or the Individual? Nikolay Gogol’s Dead Souls, while allegorically reflecting the bureaucratic, aristocratic and social degeneration of the Russian countryside, not only draws the portrait of an individual with the character of Pavel Ivanovich Chichikov at its center,...
  4. Does Faust’s deal with the devil show that man can consider all means permissible in his search for meaning? Goethe’s Faust, while deeply examining the philosophical dimensions of man’s search for meaning, is a meditation on the choices he makes in existential emptiness and dissatisfaction, his confrontation with these choices, and ultimately his effort to find meaning. Faust’s deal with the devil raises an...
  5. How does the ‘Iron Heel’ regime in Jack London’s work legitimise its power? The Iron Heel’s Understanding of Legitimacy: The Construction of Power Between Hegemony, Force and Ideology Jack London’s The Iron Heel is not only a literary dystopia, but also a powerful philosophical text that questions the nature of power and how legitimacy is constructed. The oligarchic...