Some organizations in Colombia requested the State to recognize a different cultural identity in 2013. This request was born, historically, because of the way the peasantry has been named from a political, economic and legal point of view. As Carlos Salgado and Esmeralda Prada (2000) state, the representation of a productive subject played a fundamental role in the formulation of political and economic measures aimed at solving rural conflicts, especially during the governments of the 1980s and 1990s. The authors show that this image contributed to the constitution of a hegemonic identity of the peasantry that recognized it only as: <<agricultural worker>>. Taking this aspect into account, in this text, I show how the liberal reforms proposed by Alfonso López Pumarejo -in the 1930s- began the configuration of this image, in addition to showing its effects on the peasantry. From a philosophical approach, I carry out an analysis of the legal field of enunciation that was configured in the decade of the thirties. It is important to point out that according to Michel Foucault (2010) the field of enunciation has to do with the conditions of possibility that, from the point of view of the discourse, can be said and imagined, in addition to determining the position that the subjects have in this type of speech. From a performative analysis, I recognize that language generates effects, as John Austin (1962) has shown, that is, that words and statements can generate certain effects, in the social context in which they are used. offer In this sense, I believe that legal and political texts reveal a symbolic projection that evidences the perception people have of the subjects and the political, social, economic and legal position assigned to them. In this case, I propose that to understand the processes of subjectivation, one must bear in mind the symbolic and affective meaning of the categories that are used in political-legal regulatory frameworks and that refer to people and social groups. I suggest, on the one hand, that the representations reflect the cartographic reconstruction that the law elaborates to regulate reality, in a context, where social relations are established, especially those established between the State and social groups. These representations show who are citizens and in what way they are; on the other, the affects reveal the forms of power that guide social practices and hierarchies, that is, the position assigned to subjects in a social context. The Symbolic-affective Representation category is a notion that implies, on the one hand, the symbolic constructions that subjects appeal to or create to justify and interpret their relationships and social practices. Understanding the symbolic as that meaning or indirect sense (Todorov, 1986) that people give to words or sentences in a specific context, in this sense, they depend on the field of enunciation from where they are expressed; while the affects reveal what drives the body to carry out certain actions or to resist in a certain context. I suggest the category of symbolic-affective representation to account for these two aspects, since in the field of enunciation not only categories with a symbolic charge circulate, but also affects that fulfill, among other functions, the consolidation of the Symbolic Representations. Although it is interesting to point out the symbolic effects of the law, an element that must be considered are the <<affects>>, since they account for the symbolic trajectory that political regimes have given to the categories used in their discourse. The symbolic-affective representations condense, from the hegemonic political-legal discourse, the way in which subjects are recognized, needs are managed and assigned.
