What is at stake in what I call the ‘agonistic’ struggle,[4] which I see as the core of a vibrant democracy, is the very configuration of power relations around which. The Belgian political theorist Chantal Mouffe, on the other hand, arrived at Mouffe called this kind of respectful conflict “agonistic pluralism” in contrast to both. Agonistic. Pluralism? / BY CHANTAL MOUFFE l’s testified by the increasing success of the extreme right in sev- eral countries, western societies are witnessing.

Author: Shakazuru Meztisida
Country: Brunei Darussalam
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Science
Published (Last): 6 November 2009
Pages: 291
PDF File Size: 20.62 Mb
ePub File Size: 11.2 Mb
ISBN: 876-5-95764-514-7
Downloads: 63690
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Doulabar

Chantal Mouffe, Deliberative Democracy or Agonistic Pluralism? – PhilPapers

It accepts a permanent place for such conflict, but seeks to show how people might accept and channel this positively.

You can make it easier for us to review and, hopefully, publish your contribution by keeping a few points in mind. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. This does not agonistkc, though, as some seem to believe, that they could alone realize the transformations needed for the establishment of a new hegemony.

Art & Research : Chantal Mouffe

This is due to the existence, on the left of the Socialist party, of several groups with a more radical agenda. Despite the differences in their respective approaches, I therefore believe that Arendt, like Habermas, envisages the public sphere as a place where consensus can be established. However, it is not enough to disturb the dominant procedures and disrupt existing arrangements to radicalise democracy. There mofufe alternatives, however, and we should not accept the current situation as the final way of articulating liberalism and democracy.

I am convinced that the variety of extra-parliamentary struggles and the multiple forms of activism are valuable, not only to raise consciousness and to bring to the fore issues that are neglected, but also to provide a realm for the cultivation of different social relations.

Top of next column. Routledge,pluralist democracy is characterised by the introduction of a distinction between the categories of enemy and adversary. Of course this is an illusory hope founded on false premises and on unacceptable mechanisms of exclusion in agohistic xenophobia usually plays a central role.

  HP 1740A PDF

Keep Exploring Britannica Fascism. Sign in Create an account. Can all antagonisms be transformed into agonism? According to the agonistic approach, critical art is art that foments dissensus, that makes visible what the dominant consensus tends to obscure and obliterate.

There is an aesthetic dimension in the political and there is a political dimension in art. In an agonistic politics, however, the antagonistic dimension is always present since what is at stake is the struggle between opposing hegemonic projects that can never be reconciled rationally, for one of them needs to be defeated.

This article needs additional citations for verification. It is in this sense that one has to differentiate the social from the political. The frontier between the social and the political is essentially unstable and requires constant displacements and renegotiations between social agents. The typical liberal understanding of pluralism is that we live in a world in which there are indeed many perspectives and values and that, due to empirical limitations, we will never be able to adopt them all, but that, when put together, they constitute an harmonious ensemble.

It all depends on how the adversary is defined. Sedimented social practices are a constitutive part of any possible society; not all social bonds are put into question at the same time.

London, Basil Blackwell, The experience of progressive governments in South America in the last decade proves that it is possible to challenge neo-liberalism and to re-establish the priority of democratic values without relinquishing liberal representative institutions. It is a real confrontation, but one that is played mokffe under conditions regulated by a set of democratic procedures accepted omuffe the adversaries.

The right state of things would be free of it: From the point of view of the theory of hegemony, artistic practices play a role in the constitution and maintenance of a given symbolic order or in its challenging and this is why they necessarily have a political dimension. Disentangling Diversity in Deliberative Democracy: Agonistic respect constitutes for him the cardinal virtue of the type of pluralism he advocates and he considers it the most important political virtue in the pluralist world we live in today.


Especially during the s and s, many people, academics included, subscribed to a roughly Marxist analysis. What is the best way to envisage democratic politics? At the bottom of the article, feel free to list any sources that support your changes, so that we can fully understand their context.

Chantal Mouffe: Agonistic Democracy and Radical Politics

Before addressing this question I want to stress that I do not see the relation between art and politics in terms of two separately constituted fields, art on one side and politics on the other, between which a relation would need to be established. Politics in its conflictual dimension is deemed to be something of the past and the type of democracy that is commended is a consensual, completely depoliticized democracy. What is needed in order to fight against moufff wing populism is the formation of a left-wing populism, a populism in which the adversary is not constructed in a xenophobic for example, anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim way, but as a collective will aiming at an alternative to neo-liberal globalization whose adversary is constituted by the forces behind this project, for instance, the multinationals, the financial corporations.

By this I mean that, although she insists a good deal on human plurality and conceives politics as dealing with the community and with reciprocity between different beings, she never recognises that this plurality is at the origin of antagonistic conflicts.

This incapacity to think politically, is to a great extent due to the uncontested hegemony of liberalism. When the agonistic dynamics of pluralism is hindered because of a lack of democratic forms of identifications, passions cannot be given a democratic outlet and the ground is laid for various forms of politics articulated around essentialist identities of a nationalist, religious or ethnic type, and for the multiplication of confrontations over non-negotiable moral values, with all the manifestations of violence that such confrontations entail.

Therefore, there is no more reason for their emergence.