alle radici della violenza nell'era della globalizzazione

Sto leggendo un bel libro edito da Melteni, casa editrice che produce molti titoli di studiosi postcoloniali, dal titolo "Sicuri da morire, la violenza nell'epoca della globalizzazione" di Arjun Appadurai. La tesi a me pare inteessante: il fallimento del progetto di globalizzazione anche dentro le democrazie occidentali ha portato all'insorgere di spinte contrapposte delle maggioranze contro le minoranze "etniche, linguistiche religiose". E' quindi la spinta identitaria alimenta conflitti generati dal senso di frustrazione ed incompiutezza delle promesse di benessere del modello neoliberista. A mio parere però il discorso è ancor più complesso. Nella politica della postmodernità identità e violenza sono precipitazioni che cercano di ricostruire senso di apprartenenza, ethos e tessuto sociale. Per quanto abominevole questo sia. Di seguito  trovate un estratto di articolo di Appadurai che riassume il suo punto di vista. Mi pare una lettura utile. 

da "New Logics of Violence" (2001)

But minorities do not come preformed. They are produced in the specific circumstances of every nation and every nationalism. They are often the carriers of the unwanted memories of the acts of violence that produced existing states, of forced conscription or of violent extrusion as new states were formed. And, in addition, as weak claimants on state entitlements or drains on the resources of highly contested national resources, they are also reminders of the failures of various state projects (socialist, developmentalist and capitalist). They are marks of failure and coercion. They are embarrassments to any state-sponsored image of national purity and te fairness. They are thus scapegoats in the classical sense.
But what is the special status of such scapegoats in the era of globalization? After all, strangers, sick people, nomads, religious dissidents and similar ‘minor’ social groups have always been targets of prejudice and xenophobia. Here I suggest a single and simple hypothesis. Given the systemic compromise of national economic sovereignty that is built into the logic of globalization, and given the increasing strain this puts on states to behave as trustees of the interests of a territorially defined and confined ‘people’, minorities are the major site for displacing the anxieties of many states about their own minority or marginality (real or imagined) in a world of a few mega states, of unruly economic flows and compromised sovereignties. Minorities, in a word, are metaphors of the betrayal of the classical national project. And it is this betrayal – actually rooted in the failure of the nation state to preserve its promise to be the guarantor of national sovereignty – that underwrites the worldwide impulse to extrude or to eliminate minorities. It also explains why state military forces are often involved in intra-state ethnocide