ISSN: 2184-2205 ISBN: 978-989-99864-5-9 © 2018

WHY THEY STILL FIGHT LIKE THIS? ARCHEOLOGICAL NOTES ABOUT

"MILITANTES" AND THEIR SUBJECTIVITIES

André Sales 1, Flávio Fontes 2, & Silvio Yasui 1

1
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Psicologia, Universidade Estadual Paulista (Brazil)
2
Faculdade de Ciências da Saúde do Trairi, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (Brazil)

Abstract

Using Michel Foucault's archaeological and genealogical tools, we reviewed texts, discourses, and
practices developed under the planning and execution of the Russian Revolution. The main point is to
explicit how this event plays a crucial role in the current subjectivation process of some protestors and
social movement participants in Brazil. The analyzed data stress three anchor points to the understanding
of militant subjectification process: a) Government democratic centralism; b) economic Stakhanovism e
c) cultural Zhdanovism. We concluded that it is possible to establish a relation between soviet
dictatorship practices at the beginning of the twentieth century, and the rigid ways of feeling, thinking and
acting of many contemporary subjects while they militate to change social norms.

Keywords: Psychology in politics, subjectivity, militancy, social movements.

1. Introduction

Since June 2013, some crucial changes have happened in the way Brazilian collective action to
contest social norms presents itself. Scrutinizing the meanings of the words "militância" and "ativismo,"
this research explores the hypothesis that militancy and activism are different methodologies to gather
people engaged in collective action, and that they can be related to socialist and anarchist political
traditions respectively. In this paper, we are going to talk about "militância" by pointing out some events
occurred that took place in Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). By doing this, we intend to
explicit how these events still work as anchor points to the rigid ways of feeling, thinking and acting of
many contemporary subjects who militate to change social norms.

2. Methodological framework and procedures

This is a theoretical research which analyzes and interprets results achieved by a range of
significant studies about collective action in Brazil from 1980 to 2015 and also examines documents,
papers and historical facts that took place in the USSR from 1914 to 1957. Brazilian studies about social
movements and collective action provide the basis to characterize the "militante". Data from the Soviet
Union provided insight about experiences underpinning "militante" identity. The framework used to build
the analytical model was Brazilian Social Institutionalist Psychology (BSIP) (Rossi & Passos, 2014).
Schizoanalysis was proposed by Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari and it stands for an
ethic-aesthetic-politic paradigm whose aim is to elucidate the fundamental relations between the capitalist
system of production, the production of desire, and the regimes of power exercises. In close connection
with the Schyzoanalytical framework, BSIP is concerned with the public, shared and collective dimension
of subjectivity. BSIP approach has developed analytical tools that challenge the dualism between
conceptions of the subject either as a self-centered and fully autonomous being, or as entirely governed
and determined by structures such as language, culture, historical process and social norms. This field of
Brazilian Social Institutionalist Psychology has been querying the essentialist conceptions of subject and
claiming that the subjectification process is a phenomenon which happens between the bodies.
From Michel Foucault studies, BSIP employs the notions of archeology and genealogy to
investigate the historical and path-dependent condition of human subjectivity. Archaeological
investigations analyze the unconscious rules involved in the emergence of regulation discourses in human
sciences. Genealogical studies explicit the necessary relationship between a regime of truth production
and a particular technology of power embodied in social practices. "Archeology proceeds along the truth

190
 Psychological Applications and Trends 2018

axis, analyzing discursive conditions of existence. Genealogy travels the power axis, examining culturally
true discourses' insertion into institutional and other no discursive practices" (Mahon, 1992 p.105).
Brazilian Social Institutional Psychology combine these ideas and concepts to build a framework
in which the research of subjectivity involves the thorough examination of forces, movements, intentions
and historical facts in order to create a better understanding of how these elements produce specific
modes of existence. In that spirit we have scrutinized the history of Soviet Union from 1917 to 1957
looking for facts, papers, documents, political decisions, habits and concerns, which could be related to
the rigid ways of being of Brazilian "militantes".

3. The Brazilian "militante"

The word "militante" as well as it's derivations "militância" and "militar" are frequent
expressions in left wing Brazilian political parties discourses, in students movement speeches and even in
papers from Brazilian Social Movement scholars. Reviewing and analysing the papers from Sociology of
Social Movements and from Political Science journals published in Brazil between 1980 and 2015, the
words appear frequently. However, there is not much concern in conceptualizing them (Sales, Fontes,
Yasui, Forthcoming). What do we mean when we talk about "militante"?
In Brazil, the "militante" could be described as someone who is articulate, has strong and clear
views, and has the ability to talk others into their own beliefs. The "militante" may also be seen as one
who does not get out of character and is, at all times, defending the causes of their militancy. This
exaggerated picture may well be why we generally think of militants as boring and annoying.
Furthermore, militant persons are often portrayed as forceful, and in movies and songs appear as people
who would die before denying their own beliefs.
Analyzing the relations between identity formation and commitment of militant persons,
Naujorks e Silva (2016) conclude that "the militant identity uses the identity match as feedstock and the
interpretative frames as the substance which give meaning to militant identity itself"(Naujorks e Silva,
2016, p. 148)1. This identity match includes a collective dimension, related to the ideas, principles and
values shared with other militants; and also an individual one related to the manners through which these
principles and values are used as models and life guides to be followed by the militants. Evaluating the
role exercised by this rigid identity match, Rolnik (2014) argues that this rigidness works as a power force
because it sponsors the militant in the place of a conscious and aware person able to work properly in the
direction of the cause he fights for. Another function of the identity match is to recognize the ones who do
not share his beliefs as enemies, as people who need to be combatted or saved.
Understanding how some force vectors have shaped our subjectivity can be useful to
comprehend the reasons why militant persons fight like they do. In this work, we are going to propose
genealogically some anchor points in which militant subjectivity is underpinned. Proceeding like this “I
make no claim to be producing an objectively correct or universally valuable narrative. Rather, I want to
track an emergence that I find interesting and compelling due to my own ethico-political commitments
and theoretical interests” (Day, 2004, p.720).

4. The anchor points

A historical study carried out by Macedo and Silva (2009) concluded that regarding political
militancy, the Communist Militant is the perfect embodiment of an ideal militant. The results achieved by
Valverde (1986) in a genealogical investigation about these issues not only stand for this conclusion but
also point out the relevance of theories, ideas, and facts that took place in the Soviet Union from 1914 to
1980 as crucial to understand the construction of militancy and militants.
The USSR, by expanding socialist ideas, values and principles, and by fighting against capitalist
social norms, has exported a theoretical background and a methodology to contest social norms grounded
in ideas of Karl Marx, Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin), and Josef Stalin. These exported principles have
created some tactical aims, contestation repertoires, and fighting tools which have been acquired by
nonconformists all over the world (Hobsbawm, 1995, 2011). To this day, protests and social movements
find themselves influenced by these ideas. Building on the concepts mentioned above, we examined the
USSR experience to better understand the militant subjectification process. In doing so, we reveal
significant forces that have shaped the ways of thinking, feeling and acting in current Brazilian militancy.
Hence, we employed the following criteria to determine the forces at stake: the role they have in
preserving the Communist Party governability; the extension they have reached in influencing day life

All translations from Portuguese papers were made by the authors.

191
ISSN: 2184-2205 ISBN: 978-989-99864-5-9 © 2018

activities in USSR; and, finally, their role in producing the will for a communist way of life: “ruled,
guided, and corrected by the critical thought” (Trótsky, 2007, p.178).
The socialist experience in USSR had Marxist-Leninist tradition as its scientific and theoretical
background. In this framework, the Party was elected as a means to centralize power, to rule behaviors
and to govern proletarians' wills and wishes. One of the most important duties of this war machine was to
produce the revolutionary will in the masses. Lenin is fairly clear about this: "By educating the workers'
party, Marxism educates the vanguard of the proletariat, capable of assuming power and leading the
whole people to socialism, of directing and organizing the new system, of being the teacher, the guide, the
leader of all the working and exploited people in organizing their social life without the bourgeoisie and
against the bourgeoisie" (Lenin, 1918, s/n). In light of the above, this paper argues that militant
subjectivity has its anchor points in: a) government democratic centralism; b) economic Stakhanovism
and c) cultural Zhdanovism. In the following lines we will describe summarily each one of them.
In a text written on April of 1918, in which he lists the immediate tasks of Soviet Government,
Lenin summarizes his ideas about how to act in order to build a communist society: "unquestioning
subordination to a single will is absolutely necessary for the success of processes organised on the pattern
of large-scale machine industry" (Lenin, 1918, s/n). Figueirêdo (1993) considers the issues about will a
crucial point related to the militant subjectivity. "The common ground between distinct militancies is a
concern about the will. De-alienating the will and/or raising the will? Commanding the will and/or
interpreting it?" (Figueirêdo, 1993, p. 211).
Analyzing "The Russian Social-Democratic Party and its Immediate Tasks" (Stalin, 1901) and
"What should be done?"(Lenin, 1902), Sevè (1999) explains that democratic centralism was the solution
to the organization of peasant masses problem. It was produced once the Party leaders realized a "radical
incompatibility between the proletarian revolution as a strategic goal and the spontaneity as an
organizational methodology" (Séve, 1999, p. 63). Either a democratic or an autocratic version of it, this
technology of power aims to mobilize the Russian population, win the State-power in order to establish
the proletarian dictatorship and, then, make communism possible. The proletarian masses must be
governed with rigor, because unity and homogeneity are critical conditions to achieve victory. One should
never forget that this kind of governability is also a war strategy to fight against the capitalist system, and
during a war, there is no room for dissident soldiers.
Freethinkers, workers coalitions not subordinated to the Communist Party and any individual
needs were framed by party leaders as manifestations of the enemy power, as traps from capitalistic
norms or remaining vestiges from the bourgeois culture which must be extinct. These traps were but
barriers to the time when each and everyone one would receive what they want according to their needs.
Nevertheless, a most important obstacle in satisfying everyone's needs was Russian precarious industrial
productive system.
Before October Revolution, Russia's economy was primarily based on agricultural goods.
Moving this into a robust industrial economy and improving economic increases significantly to create an
environment favorable to full human development was another essential condition to establish a
Communist System. At that time moment, in industrial modern cities in the Capitalist world, Frederick
Winslow Taylor's ideas to manage work scientifically are being spread. Moved by the urgency to make
USSR great again, combating the deleterious consequences of wars, hunger and cold, Lenin, Stalin and
the Party Central Committee created a red Taylorism: the Stakhanovism.
Stakhanovism was a movement aiming to enhance work and workers productivity. Although the
movement supposedly developed among workers, it was quickly recognized, improved and spread by
Central Committee. The principles shared with Taylor's scientific management were: constant vigilance
under the workers; scientific logic, rationality and efficiency in the labor organization; standardization of
labor routines, awardee of the best workers and financial payment proportional to item produced. It was
first implemented in the coal industry. Once it has been adopted as a central tool to New Economic
Politic, it was disseminated to transport sector and also agricultural activities. Despite Lenin's critical
views of Taylorism expressed in "The Taylor System—Man’s Enslavement by the Machine" (Lenin,
1914), some members of Soviet intelligentsia conceived Stakhanovism as their best option to transform
USSR into a prominent industrial nation. Aleksei Gastev, creator, and director of Central Institute of
Labour at that time, supported the idea of using an orthodox Taylorism not only in labor activities but also
in other realms of human life. Gastev "suggests that these principles and ideas should be used to construct
social norms and Public policies covering all fields of human life of human life, as studies, leisure and
even the most essential and basic activities" (Miguel, 2006, p.3).
During his speech at First All-Union Conference of Stakhanovites on 17 November 1935, Stalin
states right and clear the relevance of Stakhanovism for proceeding into Communist Society.
The significance of the Stakhanov movement lies in the fact that it is a movement which is
smashing the old technical standards, because they are inadequate, which in a number of cases is

192
 Psychological Applications and Trends 2018

surpassing the productivity of labour of the foremost capitalist countries, and is thus creating the practical
possibility of further consolidating Socialism in our country, the possibility of converting our country into
the most prosperous of all countries. (...) Its significance also lies in the fact that it is preparing the
conditions for the transition from Socialism to Communism (Stalin, 1935, s/n).
Ruled by Stakhanovites principles: a) the labors started to be organized according to a precise
topography; b) work and workers began to be continuously supervised and meticulously inspected; c)
work activities were now ruled by the most advanced bourgeois science; and d) the trade unions became
part of police governmental apparatus. As it may be more evident by now, due to the importance of
increasing productivity, labor activities in USSR were organized into a rigorous disciplinary power
exercise (Foucault, 2005). Beyond material goods, Stakhanovism principles were also trying to produce
the Soviet worker as a compliant, subservient and engaged citizen able to give his best efforts to bring
Communism into reality. In order to disseminate communist values, the Party also made its presence felt
in the cultural sphere.
In 1905, while writing about the Party's literature, Lenin classified this literature as a powerful
tool to be used in the fight against bourgeois habits and traditions. "Literature must become part of the
common cause of the proletariat, ‘a cog and a screw’ of one single great Social-Democratic mechanism
set in motion by the entire politically-conscious vanguard of the entire working class (Lenin, 1905, S/N).
According to Lenin's ideas, Literature must be developed as part of the Party's work. These ideas
reverberate in the speech by Andrei Alexandrovich Zhdanov in the opening section of the First Soviet
Writers Congress in 1934. This event reinforced the core ground in which artistic manifestation should be
created in the USSR.
The task prescribed to soviet art was eradicating every single vestige or influence of bourgeois
culture over proletarian culture. Zhdanov's model conceived all forms of art as educational and
pedagogical tools which should be used to spread the Party's ideas and to produce the revolutionary
conscience. Zhdanov viewed artists as engineers of human soul and, in a speech made in 1934, he
summarized the premises and principles of socialist realism:
We say that socialist realism is the basic method of Soviet belles lettres and literary criticism,
and this presupposes that revolutionary romanticism should enter into literary creation as a component
part, for the whole life of our Party, the whole life of the working class and its struggle consist in a
combination of the most stern and sober practical work with a supreme spirit of heroic deeds and
magnificent future prospects. (Zhdanov, 1934, s/n).
The socialist realism's role was inspiring men and women to fight for a communist future. The
speech stresses the magnitude of achievements under the Communist Party's leadership and the moral
values and beliefs every citizen should pursue. Under this guidance, any individual, sentimental or poetic
expression in literature was valued as petty bourgeois, and again, as an obstacle to revolutionary success.
In the field of visual arts, this guideline resulted in big panels and posters boards praising Stalin
accomplishments. These productions were created using images from Soviet day life activities, painted
using pleasant colors, eliciting identification, pride, and hope in most of the viewers.

5. Conclusions

This research, proceeding archaeologically and genealogically (Foucault, 1989), aimed to

explore and explicit meanings, values, procedures, and beliefs that connect the USSR experience with
some practices in left-wing social movements and collective action. Much of the criticism made by
Brazilian current social movements to the traditional social movements and trade unions are concerned
with the excess or rigidity in organizational procedures, the lack of space for divergent opinions; the use
of organizational arrangements akim to military forces; the preference for hierarchical organizational
arrangements and the power and importance attributed to movement leaders.
The results from this historical investigation improve our understanding about the roots of some
preferences for disciplinary, militarized, unified and centralized organizational procedures that
characterize the way people in trade unions, academic student's directories, and other left-wing social
organizations in Brazil usually behave. If we consider the fact that most of Brazilian left wing political
movements were deeply influenced by soviet ideas, it is possible to point out the resonance of facts that
took place in USSR in the construction and development of some subjective characteristic of Brazilian
militants. That being the case, centralism, Stakhanovism and Zhdanovism work as anchor points to
"militante" subjectification processes.
Understanding subjectivity as something shaped by historical facts, cultural traditions and
strictly related to a regime of power exercise, we argue that Brazilian militants keep reproducing values,
principles and beliefs that were fundamentals in USSR experience and, by doing this, they are still being

193
ISSN: 2184-2205 ISBN: 978-989-99864-5-9 © 2018

disciplined, ruled and shaped in similar ways that people in USSR were. This is the reason why Brazilian
"militantes" behave themselves in the way they do.
We have no intention of providing the last word about this theme; in fact, we look forward for
more studies concerned with these issues, once we believe that "if our approach to the theme is not
enough to catch all the complexity involved on it, the merit of this point of view is to allow an extensive
understanding which can be used as a starting point to distinct analyses (Figueiredo, 1995, p.41).

Acknowledgements

This study was funded by the São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP nº 2015/26241-0)

References

Day, R. (2004). From hegemony to affinity. Cultural Studies, 18(5), 716-748.

Figueiredo, L., C. (1995). Modos de Subjetivação no Brasil e Outros Escritos. São Paulo: Editora Escuta.
Foucault, M. (1989). Arqueologia do saber. Rio de Janeiro: Forense Universitária.
Lourau, R. (2007). René Lourau na UERJ – 1993. Análise Institucional e Práticas de Pesquisa.
Mnemosine, 3(2), 6-115.
Mahon, M. (1992). Foucault's Nietzschean genealogy: Truth, power, and the subject (SUNY series in
contemporary continental philosophy). Albany: State University of New York Press.
Lenin, V. I. (1905). Party Organisation and Party Literature. Retrieved in January 29, 2017, from
Marxists Internet Archive, https://goo.gl/Qr1qsf .
Lenin, V. I. (1914). The Taylor System—Man’s Enslavement by the Machine. Retrieved in January 29,
2017, from Marxists Internet Archive, https://goo.gl/vuAATW .
Lenin, V. I. (1918). The Immediate Tasks of the Soviet Government. Retrieved in January 29, 2017, from
Marxists Internet Archive.Marxists Internet Archive, https://goo.gl/w2dne7 .
Rolnik, S. (2014). Cartografia sentimental-Transformações contemporâneas do desejo. Editora Sulina:
Porto Alegre. 2ª edição.
Rossi, A., & Passos, E. (2014). Análise institucional: revisão conceitual e nuances da
pesquisa-intervenção no Brasil. Revista EPOS, 5(1), 156-181.
Sales, A. L. L. S., Fontes, F. F., Yasui, S. (ForthComing). Para (re)colocar um problema: a militância em
questão. Temas em Psicologia.
Stalin, J. (1901). Speech at the First All-Union Conference of Stakhanovites? Retrieved in January 29,
2017, from Marxists Internet Archive, https://goo.gl/59Aq8y.
Zhdanov, A. A. (1934). Soviet Literature – The Richest in Ideas, the Most Advanced Literature. Retrieved
in April 12, 2017, from Marxists Internet Archive, https://goo.gl/IF2Uy1.

194