With Exclusion to the Community

Recent wave of mass popular dissent reminds us that it is necessary to understand social dynamics also from the perspective of social exclusion. Landauer (1900) inquired how to create alternative community with “the inclusion of the excluded as excluded” (Agamben, 1999). Antisystem movements are the driver of this process, but they suffer from an organisational problem. They refuse vertical structuration as their exclusion itself is the result of overstructured society. So they fail to perform together against the system which hampers their effectiveness in achieving radical goals from the inside. We hypothesise that movements need to resolve the problem by abandoning programmatic similarity as a common denominator of their structuration. It has been observed that movements are usually more radical in their programs than in their operation, or vice versa. Their action-program footprints are inconsistent, unless they link with movements with symmetrical opposite footprints. This strategy of structuration reconstructs their internal consistency in a heterogeneous way that does not imperil their diversity. Three coalitions are obtained: quasi-, semi- and orto-antisystemic. They complement each other in mobilisation and production of autonomous alternatives, and in capacity to defend the boundaries of autonomy. Resolution of the organisational problem is a precondition for the emergence of antisystem structure. Now the initial antisystem conflict between society and the state is decomposed into a conflict between competing structures (system’s vs. antisystem’s) and between competing agents (interest groups; Marx). Multiplication of previously binary relation between the society and the system changes exclusion mechanisms with emergence of new sociality. Here exclusion is not concerned with dark side of society any more, but establishes itself as a starting point for reasoning about alternative social strategies