A pensadora política Chantal Mouffe desenvolve sua teoria afirmando o antagonismo e o conflito como categorias centrais e essenciais do político, enfatizando deste modo a importância do dissenso como elemento fundamental da democracia. Mouffe nos direciona em suas obras à reflexão do que seria um modelo agonístico de democracia radical, onde o pluralismo político, a cidadania e o dissenso estabelecem os elementos essenciais para a constituição dessa sociedade. Os pensamentos de Chantal Mouffe (...) se apoiam em sua leitura de Carl Schmitt, desenvolvendo a partir deste uma crítica ao individualismo liberal e a uma perspectiva racionalista do político, para então enfatizar o caráter "agonístico" da disputa política e enunciar as razões pelas quais o consenso não pode ser o fim último de uma política democrática. (shrink)

O artigo investiga a proposta de releitura da teoria da democracia e do conceito do político feita pela filosofia belga pós-marxista Chantal Mouffe. O objetivo é analisar os argumentos da autora e a reabilitação do tema do conflito como constitutivo da democracia. Após a virada consensualista, procedimentos e princípios racionais passaram a reger a instituição do politico através de concepções deliberativas acerca da democracia, marcadas pela neutralização do conflito e identificação entre política e moral. Na contramão desse (...) movimento, Mouffe promove um inusitado encontro entre marxismo pós-estruturalista e algumas teses centrais da teoria política schmittiana. Em contraposição à compreensão do político como antagonismo entre amigos/inimigos, Mouffe propõe um modelo de agonismo adversarial, que segundo ela pode assumir a forma de uma democracia liberal. Pretendemos examinar sua proposta e discutir se de fato ela supera a crítica ao liberalismo feito por Schmitt. (shrink)

From the theory of ‘deliberative democracy’ to the politics of the ‘third way’, the present Zeitgeist is characterized by attempts to deny what Chantal Mouffe contends is the inherently conflictual nature of democratic politics. Far from being signs of progress, such ideas constitute a serious threat to democratic institutions. Taking issue with John Rawls and Jürgen Habermas on one side, and the political tenets of Blair, Clinton and Schröder on the other, Mouffe brings to the fore the (...) paradoxical nature of modern liberal democracy in which the category of the ‘adversary’ plays a central role. She draws on the work of Wittgenstein, Derrida, and the provocative theses of Carl Schmitt, to propose a new understanding of democracy which acknowledges the ineradicability of antagonism in its workings. (shrink)

Why should we read Carl Schmitt today? Does his friend-enemy conception of politics retain some pertinence in our “post-political” age? Do liberal democrats have something to learn from his critique of liberalism? Is his theory of sovereignty still relevant in a globalized word? These are some if the issue that Chantal Mouffe addresses in this article. The author considers that political theorists, in order to put forward a conception of a liberal-democratic society capable to win the (...) active support of its citizens, must be willing to engage with the arguments of those who have challenged the fundamental tenets of liberalism. This means confronting some disturbing questions, usually avoided by liberals and democrats alike. The intention of this article is to contribute to such a project by scrutinizing Carl Schmitts critique of liberal democracy. To bring to the fore the pertinence and actuality of Schmitt's questioning, the theme development is organized around two topics which are currently central in political theory: the boundaries of citizenship and the nature of liberal-democratic consensus. (shrink)

[Carl Schmitt and the paradox of liberal democracy].

Este documento analiza cómo se presenta la deshumanización en los conflictos armados e intenta demostrar que, en la mayoría de los casos, lo ‘discursivo’ y lo ‘violento’ coexisten de modo que el ‘otro’ es una construcción difusa que cambia según el contexto. Como consecuencia, no puede establecerse una división clara entre ‘enemigo’ y ‘adversario’, por lo que debe aceptarse que dicha relación es mucho más compleja. Para esto, se revisa la historia del conflicto armado colombiano desde mediados del siglo XX, (...) usando la teoría posestructuralista del discurso de Chantal Mouffe y Ernesto Laclau, y el concepto de lo ‘político’ de Carl Schmitt. (shrink)

Chantal Mouffe herneemt de centrale gedachte van Carl Schmitt dat de antagonistische relatie tussen vriend en vijand constitutief is voor het politieke. Anders dan bij Schmitt leidt die idee bij haar tot een links en radicaal democratisch model voor een pluralistische samenleving. Een juiste appreciatie van de niet te elimineren politieke dimensie van strijd geeft aanleiding tot een kritische evaluatie van het politieke liberalisme van John Rawls en de deliberatieve democratie van Jürgen Habermas. Tegelijkertijd werpt (...) Mouffe daarbij een nieuw licht op enkele recente politieke fenomenen, zoals de opkomst van rechtse populistische partijen in Europa en de internationale ‘oorlog tegen het terrorisme’. (shrink)

In her more recent work, Chantal Mouffe enters into what she calls a 'dialogue' with Carl Schmitt on the political. So far, interpretations of this dialogue suggest that Mouffe attempts to revise Schmitt's friend/enemy-distinction and carve out a theory of agonistic pluralism. An interpretation on these grounds, this article argues, reduces the dialogue to its analytical dimension and cannot comfortably be upheld. Mouffe indeed appropriates Schmitt's friend/enemy-distinction, but she also gets inspired by (...) the metatheoretical facet of his intellectual heritage with the result that her theory becomes organically interwoven with a polemical dimension. Rather than aiming at a post-structuralist defanging of Schmitt's conception of the political, Mouffe recontextualizes and applies it to the current academic discourse, for this allows decontesting her radical pluralist cause by establishing a we/them opposition along a political/post-political divide. (shrink)

Pensar a política como um espaço agonístico implica compreendê-la abrangendo todo o âmbito do conflito. A figura do inimigo é parte deste âmbito, mas o conflito não pode ser reduzido a tal figura. Em O Conceito do Político, Carl Schmitt estabelece um campo próprio da política que acaba por ter na figura do inimigo um ponto central. Partindo desse escrito, analisaremos a constituição de um campo próprio da política, pensada de modo agonístico,a partir da descrição da totalidade (...) do espaço do conflito. (shrink)

Resumen: Este artículo busca interrogar el sentido de lo político en el pensamiento de Karl Marx a partir de la lectura de Carl Schmitt. Aunque, por un lado, el jurista alemán considera que el marxismo subsume los problemas políticos bajo cuestiones económicas, por otro lado, destaca que Marx pensó lo político a partir de la agudización del antagonismo y de la dictadura del proletariado. Sin embargo, para Schmitt, estos dos elementos de lo político (...) en Marx están construidos sobre la base de la lógica hegeliana de la historia. En este texto se discute esta herencia hegeliana en el pensamiento político marxiano y se sugiere una alternativa para pensar la política a partir del “materialismo práctico”, en el cual se acentúa la acción contingente que emerge en medio de la coexistencia humana.: This article aims to examining the meaning of the political in Karl Marx’s thought from the perspective of Carl Schmitt’s interpretation. While on one hand the German jurist considers that Marxism subsumes political problems under economical issues, on the other hand he stresses that Marx thought politics through the deepening of the antagonism and dictatorship of the proletariat. However, for Schmitt, these two elements of the political in Marx are built based on the Hegelian logic of history. In this paper, I discuss this Hegelian legacy in Marx’s political thought and suggest an alternative to think politics appealing to “practical materialism”, in which contingent action that stems from human coexistence is accentuated. (shrink)

El artículo se centra en analizar la propuesta filosófica del italiano Giorgio Agamben y el modo en que en ella se introduce al pensador alemán Carl Schmitt. Sobre Agamben se evalúa cómo el recurso a la teoría de la excepcionalidad schmittiana, es invertido para favorecer una teoría política impersonal, expresada en una soberanía omnipresente y una resistencia altamente pesimista. Se plantea una crítica a los planteamientos de Agamben, argumentada en la necesidad de dar continuidad a la teoría decisionista (...) de Schmitt. El artículo sostiene que Agamben se basó en la faceta teológico-política de Schmitt y prestó poca atención al Schmitt que relaciona el Estado de excepción con la vida pública, lo movimientos y el antagonismo político de la realpolitik. (shrink)

본 논문은 니체에 기반한 경합적 민주주의 모델이 샹탈 무페 모델의 합리적 대안이 될 수 있는지 검토한다. 경합적 민주주의 이론은 칼 슈미트 또는 니체를 사상적 원천으로 지닌다. 한국에서 자주 논의되는 무페가 슈미트의 철학에 기반하여 자신 고유의 경합적 민주주의 모델을 구성한다. 그러나 슈미트에 근거를 두는 그녀 모델은 다음 네 비판에 취약하다. 첫째, 정당한 상대방과 적에 대한 구분이 모호하다. 둘째, 적대의 존재론적 근본성과 적대 아닌 경합을 동시에 주장하는 것은 논리적으로 비일관적이다. 셋째, 그녀가 말하는 경합은 자기 보존이라는 텔로스에 갇혀 있어 실질적으로 다원적 세계를 포착하지 (...) 못한다. 넷째, 경합 유지 수단에 관한 이론적 요소가 없고, 경합을 유지할 수 있는 갈등의 정도에 대한 설명도 없다. 무페와 달리 코널리와 오웬을 비롯한 니체주의자들은 니체에 기반하여 경합적 민주주의 모델을 구축한다. 필자는 니체의 텍스트와 니체주의자들의 논의를 분석 및 재구성한 후, 니체주의적 모델이 앞서 언급한 무페 모델의 한계들을 다소간 극복할 수 있다고 주장할 것이다. (shrink)

This article examines whether Nietzschean agonistic democracy theory can be a plausible alternative to Chantal Mouffe’s model. Agonistic democracy theory has Carl Schmitt or Nietzsche as its philosophical source. In the case of Mouffe, she constructed her model based on Schmitt. However, her Schmitt-based model is vulnerable to four criticisms. First, the distinction between ‘worthy opponents’ and ‘enemy’ is ambiguous. Second, it is inconsistent to simultaneously claim ‘the ontological fundamentality of antagonism’ and ‘agonism (...) without antagonism.’ Third, her agonism can not capture the pluralistic world, since it is trapped in the telos of self-preservation. Fourth, there are no theoretical factors to maintain her agonism, and there is no explanation for the degree of conflict that can sustain her model. Unlike Mouffe, Nietzschean like Connolly and Owen provides agonistic democracy theories based on Nietzsche. After analyzing and reconstructing Nietzsche’s text and Nietzschean’s discussions, I will argue that the Nietzschean model can overcome some thresholds of Mouffe’s model. (shrink)

This article deals with the category of antagonism as proposed by Ernesto Laclau, delving into its basal philosophies and analyzing some of their tensional aspects. We being by identifying two fields, namely, post-foundational political thought and the Lacanian left, and link them to the category of antagonism. Second, the philosophical tensions between the category and these fields are examined through two concrete exponents: Chantal Mouffe and Slavoj Žižek, reporting certain incompatibilities and criticism regarding both authors’ proposals. Finally, a (...) few open questions are raised in regard to the category of antagonism, stemming from previous discussions and Laclau’s own limitations. (shrink)

In the context of the recent proliferation of nationalisms and enemy figures, this paper agrees with the desirability of retaining some of the explanatory and motivational potential of an agonistic account of politics, but gives reasons not to accept too much of Carl Schmitt's account of citizenship. The claim as to the necessarily antagonistic exclusion of concrete others can be supported neither on its own terms nor on Derridian grounds, as Chantal Mouffe, in particular, attempts to (...) do. I then indicate that différance may nonetheless account for strong (but not necessary) tendencies toward exclusion as well as for the intrinsic contradictions of liberal universalism. (shrink)

Con la publicación de En torno a lo político, Mouffe instala su lectura de lo político y la democracia en la problemática de la política mundial del nuevo milenio. Preocupada principalmente por las posibilidades abiertas para la estructuración de un orden mundial único –posibilidades celebradas por una vasta corriente intelectual de corte liberal y progresista– y por la emergencia de una derecha populista en varios países europeos, se propone hacer una crítica a la base política que ha (...) propic.. (shrink)

O presente trabalho examina uma perspectiva hermenêutica do político presente no pensamento de Chantal Mouffe, cujo empreendimento se dá com o seu postulado em torno do que denomina por democracia radical e plural e da resultante desse postulado dentro de uma ordem cosmopolita da política e o reflexo do empreendimento dos direitos nesse sentido. A chave de leitura que orienta esta perspectiva advém da concepção do político realizada pela autora, em que o antagonismo é nuclear (...) na formação da identidade plural como forma de radicalização do político no contexto das diferenças entre o Eu e o Outro no plano político global. Aqui, os direitos devem ser considerados não do ponto de vista universal, mas das relações que são e devem ser sempre ressignificadas. Neste sentido, o político assume um caráter plural, inerente a condição mesma do social e se contrapõe ao projeto liberal de caráter universalista, racionalista e individualista, que não alcança as diferenças e com isso impossibilita uma leitura aberta do social enquanto modo de ressignificação do político. Por conseguinte, a possibilidade de sua ressignificação quanto à reinterpretação do social e também dos direitos, a partir das novas posições de sujeitos, está sempre aberta. Esse propósito tem o sentido de refletir o debate democrático em torno da relação entre o sujeito político do ponto de vista da universalidade dos direitos e a importância das diferenças nesta perspectiva. Tem-se em vista a proposta do projeto multipolar de Mouffe na construção das posições de sujeitos no âmbito cosmopolita, que não pode ser encarado de modo universal, mas da compreensão quanto a importância do antagonismo constitutivo das novas identidades. (shrink)

Bez wątpienia w historii filozofii polityki istnieją pytania, które mają pozaczasowy charakter, jednym z nich jest pytanie o to, czym jest polityka. Nie oznacza to jednak, że filozofia polityki to jedna tradycja powiązanych ze sobą idei, która rozpoczęła się w starożytnej Grecji i trwa do dziś. Istnieją bowiem w jej ramach pytania związane z duchem czasów i określoną kulturą. Także odpowiedzi na odwieczne pytania zależą od problemów danej kultury i epoki, od tez nurtu filozoficznego, z którym identyfikuje się dany myśliciel (...) czy od ogólnego trendu filozoficznego panującego w danej epoce. Nie wszystkie są tak samo dobre dla określonego kontekstu historyczno-kulturowego. Niniejszy artykuł próbuje to wykazać, na trzech proponowanych współcześnie modelach polityki. Wybrani zostali autorzy, którzy są związani z odmiennymi szkołami filozofii polityki, którzy wskazali nowe drogi myślenia i badania, których można uznać za jednych z najczęściej komentowanych filozofów w drugiej połowie ubiegłego wieku, a także i obecnie, albowiem stali się punktami odniesienia, źródłem inspiracji czy krytycznej recepcji. (shrink)

Since September 11th, we frequently hear that political differences should be put aside: the real struggle is between good and evil. What does this mean for political and social life? Is there a 'Third Way' beyond left and right, and if so, should we fear or welcome it? This thought-provoking book by Chantal Mouffe, a globally recognized political author, presents a timely account of the current state of democracy, affording readers the most relevant and up-to-date information. Arguing that (...) liberal 'third way thinking' ignores fundamental, conflicting aspects of human nature, Mouffe states that, far from expanding democracy, globalization is undermining the combative and radical heart of democratic life. Going back first to Aristotle, she identifies the historical origins of the political and reflects on the Enlightenment, and the social contract, arguing that in spite of its good intentions, it levelled the radical core of political life. Contemporary examples, including the Iraq war, racism and the rise of the far right, are used to illustrate and support her theory that far from combating extremism, the quest for consensus politics undermines the ability to challenge it. These case studies are also highly effective points of reference for student revision. _On the Political _is a stimulating argument about the future of politics and addresses the most fundamental aspects of democracy that will aid further study. (shrink)

El propósito central de este artículo consiste en realizar una exploración crítica de la idea de educación democrática. La tesis que se defiende afirma que existe una relación de complementariedad entre los modelos deliberativo y agonista de la democracia, defendidos por Amy Gutmann y Chantal Mouffe, que permite una comprensión de la educación que satisface las exigencias morales que deben integrar una concepción democrática de ciudadanía. El texto inicia con un planteamiento acerca de la relación entre política y (...) educación; seguidamente, se exponen los enfoques agonal y deliberativo de la política en la interpretación de la democracia, para finalmente identificar los puntos de intersección entre ambos modelos y proponer algunas líneas de reflexión en torno a la comprensión la ciudadanía y la praxis de la formación ciudadana. (shrink)

Deconstruction and pragmatism constitute two of the major intellectual influences on the contemporary theoretical scene; influences personified in the work of Jacques Derrida and Richard Rorty. Both Rortian pragmatism, which draws the consequences of post-war developments in Anglo-American philosophy, and Derridian deconstruction, which extends and troubles the phonomenological and Heideggerian influence on the Continental tradition, have hitherto generally been viewed as mutually exclusive philosophical language games. The purpose of this volume is to bring deconstruction and pragmatism into critical confrontation with (...) one another through staging a debate between Derrida and Rorty, itself based on discussions that took place at the _College International de Philosophie_ in Paris in 1993. The ground for this debate is layed out in introductory papers by Simon Critchley and Ernesto Laclau, and the remainder of the volume records Derrida's and Rorty's responses to each other's work. Chantal Mouffe gives an overview of the stakes of this debate in a helpful preface. (shrink)

Deconstruction and pragmatism constitute two of the major intellectual influences on the contemporary theoretical scene; influences personified in the work of Jacques Derrida and Richard Rorty. Both Rortian pragmatism, which draws the consequences of post-war developments in Anglo-American philosophy, and Derridian deconstruction, which extends and troubles the phonomenological and Heideggerian influence on the Continental tradition, have hitherto generally been viewed as mutually exclusive philosophical language games. The purpose of this volume is to bring deconstruction and pragmatism into critical confrontation with (...) one another through staging a debate between Derrida and Rorty, itself based on discussions that took place at the _College International de Philosophie_ in Paris in 1993. The ground for this debate is layed out in introductory papers by Simon Critchley and Ernesto Laclau, and the remainder of the volume records Derrida's and Rorty's responses to each other's work. Chantal Mouffe gives an overview of the stakes of this debate in a helpful preface. (shrink)

Chantal Mouffe is one of the most influential political theorists at work today. Her work has influenced political parties across Europe and continues to inform the direction of left politics. In this work, Mouffe argues that liberal democracy misunderstands the problems of ethnic, religious and nationalist conflicts because of its inadequate conception of politics.

Since September 11, we frequently hear that the struggle is between good and evil and that politics is at an end. Should we welcome or fear a 'Third Way' beyond left and right? In this timely and thought provoking book, Chantal Mouffe argues that third way thinking ignores fundamental, conflictual aspects of human nature and that far from expanding democracy, globalization is undermining the combative and radical heart of democratic life. Going back first to Aristotle, she identifies the (...) historical origins of the political. She also reflects on the Enlightenment and the social contract, arguing that in spite of its good intentions, it fatally suppressed the radical core of political life. She uses many contemporary examples, including the Iraq war, racism and the rise of the far right, to argue that far from ending dangerous extremism, the political void created by the search for consensus inflames it. (shrink)

One of the main reasons that liberal democratic societies are not ill-prepared to confront the present challenge presented by disaffection with democratic institutions, is that the type of political theory currently in vogue is dominated by an individualistic, universalistic, and rationalistic framework. This erases the dimension of the political and impedes envisaging in an adequate manner the nature of a pluralistic democratic public sphere. This paper examines the most recent paradigm of liberal democracy: 'deliberative democracy', in order to bring to (...) the fore its shortcomings. Then, the authos puts forward some element for the elaboration of an alternative model that she proposes to call 'agonistic pluralism'. (shrink)

El presente artículo es un estudio comparativo donde se argumenta la relación disonante entre las obras de Schmitt y Benjamin sobre la estética barroca. Se defiende que la diferencia entre ambos consiste en su concepción de lo político. Para Benjamin, son dos los aspectos fundamentales del Trauerspiel alemán: 1) la diferencia entre drama barroco y tragedia clásica y 2) el recurso a la alegoría como técnica de expresión. Schmitt, por su parte, encuentra lo singular del drama barroco (...) en la irrupción del tiempo histórico-político dentro de la forma estética. Para el crítico berlinés, lo alegórico debe estudiarse desde la filosofía de la historia, mientras que para Schmitt lo decisivo es lo político, ejecutado a través de la soberanía y la decisión. Tal es la línea argumental del presente estudio. This paper is a comparative study about the Works of Benjamin and Schmitt on the baroque art. It argues that the specific difference between them most be found in their concept of the political. For Benjamin there is a difference between tragedy and drama, the german Trauerspiel it is an allegorical approach to thingsand history. Schmitt argues that the singularity of baroque drama is the irruption of time in the plastic form. These are the points that the paper proposes. (shrink)

El presente artículo es un estudio comparativo donde se argumenta la relación disonante entre las obras de Schmitt y Benjamin sobre la estética barroca. Se defiende que la diferencia entre ambos consiste en su concepción de lo político. Para Benjamin, son dos los aspectos fundamentales del Trauerspi..

The themes of citizenship and community are today at the center of a fierce debate as both left and right try to mobilize them for their cause. For the left such notions are crucial in all the current attempts to redefine political struggle through extending and deepening democracy. But, argue the contributors to this volume, these concepts need to be made compatible with the pluralism that marks modern democracy. Rather than reject the liberal tradition, they argue, the aim should be (...) to radicalize it. These essays set out to examine what types of “citizen” and “community” might be required by such a radical and plural democracy. From a range of disciplines and a fruitful diversity of theoretical perspectives, the contributors help us to address the following challenge: how to defend the greatest possible pluralism without destroying the very framework of the democratic political community. Despite their differences, a vision emerges from these essays which is sharply at odds both with the universalistic and rationalistic conception to be found in the work of Habermas, and with postmodern celebrations of absolute heterogeneity. For this book is an exploration of politics—of a politics where power, conflict and antagonism will always play a central role. (shrink)

Carl Schmitt (1888–1985), Professor für Staats- und Völkerrecht, bewegt nach wie vor die Gemüter. Die Reaktion auf seine Schriften, Handlungen und Ausstrahlungen ist vielfältig; die Spanne reicht von entrüsteten, für die er der Teufel in Person bleibt, über viele Zwischenstufen bis zu jenen Lesern, die ihn für einen der subtilsten, noch keineswegs ausgeloteten Geistern dieses Jahrhunderts halten. Sein Leben lang war Carl Schmitt ein passionierter Schreiber von Briefen. Meist handelte es sich um handschriftlich verfasste, die für (...) den Schreibenden die Fortsetzung eines konkreten Gespräches mit anderen Mitteln war. Das macht das authentische und die Spontanität der Schmitt-Briefe aus. Als erste Edition einer umfangreichen Korrespondenz wird in dem Buch die Korrespondenz zwischen Carl Schmitt und Armin Mohler veröffentlicht. Der Briefwechsel umfasst die Zeit von 1947 bis 1980 und enthält 280 Briefe und Karten von Carl Schmitt an Armin Mohler. Von dem Briefpartner und Herausgeber wird in der Regel aus den eigenen Briefen nur auszugsweise zitiert, sofern es für das von Carl Schmitt Geschriebene notwendig ist. Armin Mohler (1920 bis 2003), ist einer der bekanntesten rechtskonservativen Schriftsteller, Kritiker und Historiker in Deutschland. Sein Handbuch zur Konservativen Revolution ist ein Standardwerk. In der Zeit des Briefwechsels war Mohler von 1949 bis 1953 Sekretär Ernst Jüngers, danach Korrespondent großer Zeitungen in Paris und von 1964 an Geschäftsführer der Carl Friedrich von Siemens Stiftung, in der er sehr beachtete Symposien zu aktuellen wissenschaftlichen Themen organisierte. Der Briefwechsel ist für die Deutung Carl Schmitts in der Nachkriegszeit in seinem Sauerländer "Exil" grundlegend, gleichzeitig enthält er pointierte Schlaglichter auf das politische und kulturelle Geschehen der frühen und mittleren Bundesrepublik sowie auf Werk und Leben von Ernst Jünger. (shrink)

Political conflict in our society is inevitable, and the results are often far from negative. How then should we deal with the intractable differences arising from complex modern culture? Developing her groundbreaking political philosophy of agnostics--the search for a radical and plural democracy--Chantal Mouffe examines international relations, strategies for radical politics, the future of Europe and the politics of artistic practices. She shows that in many circumstances where no alternatives seem possible, agonistics offers a new road map for (...) change. Engaging with cosmopolitanism, post-operaism, and theories of multiple modernities she argues in favor of a multipolar world with a real cultural and political pluralism. -- Publisher's website. (shrink)

This book familiarizes the English-speaking reader with the debate on the originality of Gramsci’s thought and its importance for the development of Marxist theory. The contributors present the principal viewpoints regarding Gramsci’s theoretical contribution to Marxism, focussing in particular on his advances in the study of the superstructures, and discussing his relation to Marx and Lenin and his influence in Eurocommunism. Different interpretations are put forward concerning the elucidation of Gramsci’s key concepts, namely: hegemony, integral state, war of position and (...) passive revolution. (shrink)

In light of the recent revival of the debate on radical democracy, this paper seeks to show how a critical reappropriation of Chantal Mouffe’s theory of agonistic politics can explain the structure of a conflict-based understanding of democratic orders. In explicit convergence with Mouffe, I argue that a radical democratic project by no means needs to abandon—as many absolute democracy and multitude theorists claim—the modern political paradigm. I also show, diverging from her account, that Mouffe’s defence (...) of a radical democratic project based on pluralism and agonism would have been better served by a critical reception of Arendt’s thinking rather than that of Schmitt. The relevance of this alternative strategy—so I will argue—lies in the fact that it delivers an apt design for a politico-legal order which permits true and proper conflicts, on the one hand, while simultaneously allowing that they be dealt with democratically, on the other. (shrink)

Neste artigo, analiso o modo como Carl Schmitt define a natureza política da jurisdição constitucional a partir de seus trabalhos redigidos nos anos derradeiros da República de Weimar: “O Conceito do Político” e “O Guardião da Constituição”. Tento contrastar suas respostas com abordagens algumas contemporâneas. Em especial, sua tese sobre a diferença entre a “alta política” e “política secundária” são imprescindíveis para compreender sua defesa de uma concepção de Estado de Direito respeitosa à “separação de poderes” e (...) sua posição quanto à criação judicial do direito no âmbito da jurisdição ordinária. Corretamente compreendidas, suas teses são de enorme pertinência em contextos marcados simultaneamente por crises políticas-institucionais e intensa judicialização da política. (shrink)

This article brings to the fore the shortcomings of the type of pluralism advocated by John Rawls both in Political Liberalism and in The Law of Peoples. It is argued that by postulating that the discrimination between what is and what is not legitimate is dictated by rationality and morality, Rawls’s approach forecloses recognition of the properly political moment. Exclusions are presented as being justified by reason and the antagonistic dimension of politics is not acknowledged. This article also takes issue (...) with Rawls’s ‘realistic utopia’, asserting that despite the reference to ‘decent’ hierarchical societies, it amounts to a universalization of the western liberal model. (shrink)

En Carl Schmitt en la Segunda República Española Gabriel Guillén Kalle analiza aspectos particulares de Carl Schmitt en ese periodo de nuestra nación en entreguerras. El autor reconoce que la recepción republicana fue primordialmente jurídica, mas esta perspectiva conlleva observar ese concepto de lo polítíco que atraviesa su obra entera. Guillén propone una estrategia para la relectura de Schmitt en ese periodo y para ello analiza a los principales autores que se ocuparon de él, sin (...) desdeñar a algunos menos conocidos como puede ser Zozaya. Un tema importante para nuestra nación es el control de constitucionalidad que Schmitt, siguiendo a Constant con la teoría del poder moderador, encuentra en el Presidente del Reich, y que en la segunda República española se dejó en un organismo, el Tribunal de Garantías Constitucionales que pretendía colocarse por encima de las pasiones, aunque por su composición -poco jurídica- condujo al fracaso. También es de interés cómo Medina sitúa el pensamiento schmittiano de los órdenes concretos en el idealismo objetivo necesitando de dualismos para su existencia. (shrink)

The development of the new means of communication and the overwhelming presence of the media in all realms of life represent a challenge for democratic politics. In this presentation I want to argue that such a challenge can only be grasped and met by discarding the rationalist perspective dominant in liberal democratic political thought. Indeed, such a perspective impedes us from acknowledging the nature of the political struggle and the centrality of symbols in the construction of political identities.As the recent (...) growth of right-wing populist movements testifies, new political identities are currently being created and there is no doubt that the media are playing an important role in their diffusion. It would be a serious mistake however to present the media as the main culprit, and to see such movements as a consequence of `media politics'. The success of those movements would not be possible without a political rhetoric that managed to mobilize a wide range of signifiers. Had it not been able to articulate those signifiers into a chain of equivalence against the existing order, right-wing populism could not have made such important inroads in several European countries.From a theoretical point of view, what this reveals is the utter irrelevance of the rationalist approach to politics and the importance of the so-called `post-modern approach'. It shows that, despite what authors like Habermas pretend, the critique of Enlightenment rationalism does not constitute a threat to the modern democratic project. On the contrary, it is only by taking account of such a critique that it is possible to defend and deepen democratic institutions. If there is anything that endangers democracy nowadays, it is precisely the rationalist approach, because it is blind to the nature of the political and denies the central role that passions play in the field of politics. Only by drawing out all the implications of the critique of essentialism will it be possible to understand the process of construction of collective political identities and their discursive mode of articulation. (shrink)

I agree with the critique of rationalism proposed by Spinosa, Flores, and Dreyfus in ?Disclosing New Worlds?. Today the defence of democracy requires us to understand that allegiance to democratic institutions can only rest on identification with the practices, the language?games, and the discourses which are constitutive of the democratic ?form of life?, and that it is not a question of providing them with a rational justification. My comments are developed in two directions. First, as a development of their thesis (...) concerning the centrality of practices, I suggest that in order to grasp the present crisis of democratic forms of individuality we can learn a lot from Nietzsche's analysis of ?nihilism?. Second, I point to a dimension which I consider to be missing in the perspective put forward in the article. It fails to take account of the fact that the constitution of a ?we? always requires the determination of a ?them?. This, in my view, has important consequences for the relation between solidarity and politics. I conclude by arguing for the need to introduce an agonistic element in the view of solidarity, and for the crucial role of the category of the adversary in a pluralist democracy whose aim is to transform antagonism into agonism. (shrink)