René Girard's Mimetic Theory (Studies in Violence, Mimesis & Culture)

“The principal source of violence between human beings is mimetic rivalry, the rivalry resulting from imitation of a model who becomes a rival or of a rival who becomes a model”

Girard expressly praises Sartre’s insistence on man’s “insurmountable” religious nature, in the wake of Nietzsche’s proclamation of the death of God.

As long as social difference or any other form of differentiation is present to channel mimetic desire, its conflictual dimension remains contained.

For over two decades, religions—especially those giving rise to fundamentalist groups—have played an increasingly important role on the global stage. The year 1979, in particular, comes to mind, when Ayatollah Khomeini declared Iran an Islamic theocratic state.

Not every instance of mimetic behavior, however, results necessarily in conflict. As long as desire is directed at an object that can be shared—learning a language, reading a book, listening to a piece of music, etc.—mimesis poses no problems. As soon as the object of desire can no longer be shared—as with objects of sexual desire, social positions

The French social philosopher Jean-Pierre Dupuy, in response to Girard, describes advertising very rightly as an intrinsic “paradox.” For, Dupuy says, the “paradise of non-imitation” can only be achieved “thanks to imitation.”

The mimetic theory is first and foremost a theory of religion. It describes the “religious” dimension of interpersonal relations—the idolatry of models or sexual partners—just as it explains the origins of archaic religions and the qualitative difference between these and the Judeo-Christian tradition.

As the metaphysical distance between desiring subject and model diminishes—the key component of internal mediation—the potential for rivalry and violence increases.

Kierkegaard and Girard consciously place their work in the context of the Christian tradition. For both thinkers, the biblical account of the Fall of Man takes on central significance, whereas Sartre rejects this framework.