A contribution to participatory political discussions: Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak and subalternity

The problem of representation in democratic politics has led to various controversies between liberals and those coming from Marxist (or left) tradition. The focus of the discussions is on the lack of a fair functioning of the current representative politics. In this context, participatory politics approaches the problem in the context of the sharing of power of social subjects. By the way, it accepts that the path to political subjectivity is open to every segment. Thus, it deals with the reproduction of public spaces as places where the public is formed and represented, and the expansion of representation in this context. In addition to this, it is based on the notion that the parliamentary regime alone causes to a crisis of representation because it is an obstacle to participatory politics. And pluralist approaches that emphasize a participatory politics are emphasized. The common denominator of these approaches is that they provide practical suggestions that allow more individuals to participate in political processes. It is that they also recommend that identity policies are rearranged to include social diversity. Thus, citizenship structures should be open to all who wish to participate in political processes. The concept of subalternity, which refers to the singularity (heterogeneity) of experiences, points to the exclusionary aspect of the essential relationship established between them as social subjects are brought to power. Subalternity aspects of social, but subjects falled off the map in the political sphere reveal the impossibility of representation. So much so that, the reproduction of public spaces cannot cure the problem of representation until it becomes a political subject and the position of the subaltern is eliminated. In this sense, the Indian academician and activist Spivak's approach and studies to the concept of subaltern can be included in the discussion of democracy with the idea that it can contribute. Spivak says that the cognitive development and intellectual production of the conditions in which they are born are hampered, silenced, but that there is no institutional equivalent of what the subalterns say (resisting) with the consciousness of a subaltern. Because they do not have a substructure to make their resistance understandable in discourse. This study states that while subalternity views indicating the presence of social economic problems are on the agenda, participation debates cannot really contribute to democracy. In this context, Spivak's ideas, which draw attention to the need to increase the discourse areas before the public spheres, were considered as a criticism and contribution to the discussions of political participation.