A political Theory of Indignation: Structure, Variation, and Translation of Grievance in Contemporary Democracies

Abstract

This article offers an initial formulation of a political theory of indignation, understood as a structural form of conflict in contemporary democracies. Rather than conceiving it as a moral or psychological reaction to an unjust event, it is approached as a composite occurrence that articulates facts, signs, emotions, and processes of reinscription. From an aesthetic and affective perspective, the article argues that harm does not constitute a prior moral given, but rather a political construction that defines what can be experienced as intolerable. Building on this premise, the article identifies three social logics of indignation—collectivist, individualist, and libertarian-anomic—which configure distinct affective regimes of grievance. Each gives rise to specific forms of politicization: the first oriented toward structural redress and the expansion of social bonds; the second toward the restoration of moral and meritocratic order; the third toward disengagement and the negation of the common bond. Finally, the article examines how these grammars of indignation condition the political efficacy of processes of reinscription, leadership, and institutional mediation, proposing a reading of democracy as a field of contestation among heterogeneous sensibilities rather than as a stable system of representation.