Actualizing the Concept of ‘Authoritarian Agitation’: Symbolic Economies and the Role of Social Media Audiences

Similar to various historical authoritarian agitators, current far-right populist actors rely on advertising themselves as representation of ‘the people’ online. They successfully exploit a rhetorical style evocative of socioeconomic positioning on the devalued side of the social hierarchy. Yet at the same time, they seem to find support across social strata and are not to be mistaken as a political articulation of working classes. Rather than echoing explanations exclusively relying on socioeconomic devaluation or ignoring socioeconomic aspects for far-right support altogether, the Frankfurt School pioneered studies of (historical) fascism that were rooted in socio-psychological considerations and focused on the affective manipulations used by agitators: Analyzing forms of agitation in the USA of the 1930s and 1940s, Theodor W. Adorno and Leo Löwenthal described various rhetorical devices and themes that are characteristic of what they identified as authoritarian agitation. Due to the conflicting nature of the rhetorical style of current far-right populism and the diverse social belonging of far-right supporters, the insights on authoritarian agitation noted by Adorno and Löwenthal are of renewed importance, as they survey discursive strategies of agitation that override rationality and directly tap into various tumultuous affective states in individuals that are linked to their imagination of their social fate. Since current forms of far-right agitation are situated in the digital sphere and are particularly prevalent on social media sites, it has to be noted that some aspects in the Frankfurt School’s description of authoritarian agitation lack actuality. While their account of agitation allows to trace the functionality of far-right social imagery (and its affective undercurrents) with regard to situating an ethnic in-group against various dehumanized or vilified 'others', it is lacking in two aspects: 1) There remains a blank space concerning the symbolic aspects of current economies in the Frankfurt School’s understanding of the matter, including the changing symbolic capital around gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, etc. 2) Adorno’s and Löwenthal’s insights assume a more passive role of the audience, thereby failing to recognize both the audience’s active participation in digital social spaces and the appeal of 'othering' as an active, self-aware process employed by the audience in order to restore social value for their in-group. In my contribution, I would like to point out the vital importance of including these aspects in order to understand the affective undercurrents of contemporary far-right support. Furthermore, I will address how these blank spaces could be remedied by including additional theoretical insights from Bourdieuian and feminist thought traditions.