摘要：This article examines certain problems related to the “antinomical” distinction, proposed by Étienne Balibar, between a majority strategy and a minority strategy. Orientated by the deleuzo-guattarian theory of “becoming-minor”, and confronting it with three different political scenes taken from Frantz Fanon, Jacques Rancière and Judith Butler, we seek to distinguish different manners of thinking the inclusion of a “cause of the other”, or of a minority point of view, in the construction of emancipatory political identities. These are different ways of problematizing a minority strategy by relating it to practices of disidentification as the very content of political subjectivation. But the hypothesis that will crystalize in the course of this confrontation is that of an internal antinomy in the idea of minority strategy itself, that intensifies when the dominant identities loose the assurance of their own “majority”, or when the difference between the majoritarian and the minoritarian becomes tendencially unassignable at the same time as it becomes more difficult to differentiate the violence of the exclusion of minorities to the violence of their inclusion.
