What best defines what I call “hypermodernity” is an advanced acknowledgement of the Self, individual or collective, as a subject – also definable as the subjectivation of the self. It is for this reason that I have insisted that all sociologists should replace the topic of “fraternity” from the famous French national motto of “liberty, equality, fraternity” – which has bolstered the most extremist stances, those of Hébertists, for example – with the topic of “dignity,” meaning the acknowledgement of subjectivation within the individual. Of course, we should not interpret subjectivation as only an individual or individualist process. As I have noted before, the topic of subjectivation might indeed be associated with “desocialization” – but one must not take this idea too far, as we must always keep a firm distance between the individual and the subject. This is not just an analytical detail, but a fundamental assertion about the very nature of subjectivation. Indeed, my main intention has always been the reintroduction into sociological analysis – strongly, and almost violently – of the notion of the subject, following a long period defined by the ideological exclusion of this concept.

Reintroducing the logic of subjectivation at an individual level is certainly a key characteristic of our post-industrial era. This element contrasts with approaches which can be defined as Marxian, and which we find in most working-class movements and particularly within communist currents that attach a great importance to the party. The significance of human rights at an individual level cannot be overestimated in terms of its importance for the topic of subjectivation.