




版權(quán)說(shuō)明:本文檔由用戶提供并上傳,收益歸屬內(nèi)容提供方,若內(nèi)容存在侵權(quán),請(qǐng)進(jìn)行舉報(bào)或認(rèn)領(lǐng)
文檔簡(jiǎn)介
1、SOCIAL RESEARCH. Vol. 66. No. S (Fall 19M)SOCIAL RESEARCH. Vol. 66. No. S (Fall 19M)SOCIAL RESEARCH. Vol. 66. No. S (Fall 19M)SOCIAL RESEARCH. Vol. 66. No. S (Fall 19M)BY CHANTAL MOUFFEBY CHANTAL MOUFFEDeliberative Democracy or Agonistic Pluralism?As testified by the increasing Miccess of (he extrem
2、e right in wv eral countries, western societies are witnessing a growing disaflec- tion with deinocralic institutions. Such a disaffection may have serious consequences for die future of democracy. Unfortunately liberal democratic sociEir are ill-prepared to confnini the present challcngct since rhe
3、y are unable to grasp its nature. Onr of the main muons for【his inability lies in the type of political iho ory currently in vogue dominalrd as it is by an indmdiialhtic. uni- vcrsalistic. and rationalistic framework. Such a framework erases the dimension of the political and impedes envisaging in a
4、n adequate manner (hr nature of a pluralistic deinocralic public sphere.This paper examines the most reerni paradigm of liberal demo cratir theory: Udrlibenuive leni(Kmcy;v in order to bring to the fore its shoncomings. Then, I put fbnvard some elements for the elaboration of an altemathr model that
5、 I propose to call aagonijr tic pluralism?To be sure, the aim of (he theorists who advocate lhe different versions of deliberative democracy* is commendable. .Xgainst the interest-based conception of democracy, inspired by econoiiiicn and skrplical about die nrtues of political panicipation9 they wa
6、nt to inlHMlucr questions of morality and justice into politics* rhey are looking for new meanings of tniditional demK:rati( notions like autonomy popular sovereignty, and equality. Their aim is to refbnnulalc die classical idea of the public sphere, giving it a central place in the democratic pnijc
7、ct. Howerert by proposing to SOCIAL RESEARCHscnsus portwcf!i legitimacy and ralionalit); finally resolving the tension that exists in drmocmcy betwen die collective will and the will of all. Bui this is to transform pluralist democracy into a sclf-reftiting ideal, since the moment of ita realization
8、 would also be lhe moment of its (lisiiUcgralion.Tliis is why an approach that reveals the impossibility of establishing a consensus without exclusion is of fundamental impor- lance for democratic politics. By warning us against the ilhiMon dial a fully achieved democracy could ever be instantiated,
9、 it forces us to keep the democratic contestation alive. An agonistic* democratic approach acknowledges the real nature of its frontiers and recognizes die forms of exclusion that thry embody, instead of trying to disguise them under the veil of rationality or morality. -Awareness of the fact that d
10、ifTrrence allows us to constitute unity and totality while siniuitaricousK providing essential limits is an agonistic approach dial conlributrs in the subversion of the cvcr present temptation tlut exists in democratic MKietirs to naturalize their frontiers and essentializc their identities. Such an
11、 approach would, therefore, be much more receptive than the deliberative democracy model to the multiplicity of voices that a pluralist society encompasses, and to the complexity of the power structure that this network of differences implies.ReferencesBrnhaNk Seyia. Touard a leliberative Model of D
12、rmcxrratic l-rgiti- macy. in Drmocran and Diffrnicr, Brnhabib, Sryla. rd. (Princeton: Princeton University Press. 1966).(lavell, Sian ley, Comhlum Handsomt and Unhandsome (Chicago: Chi ago I ni(m( PreiBt 1990).Habermas. Jurgen. -Further Reflections on the PuNic Sphere,* in Habrr- mas anti thr PublK
13、Sphm. Calhoun. Craig, rl (Cambridge: The MIT FH*bermas. Jurgen, MReconciliHion through the Public Use of Reason. Remarks on John Rawls*i Political Liberalism.* TM Journal of Philos- irphy (March 1995h XXC1I:3.758SOCIAL RESEARCHLaclau. trnesto and Moutte, Chantal, Hegemony and Socialist StraUf. Tmifa
14、rds a Rmlwal DrmtHratu P(4Uics (London: Verso, 1985).Rawls. John. A Thrtny of Justice (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1971).Wittgenstein. Ludwig, Philowphual Inwstigalums (Oxford: Basil Black- well, 1953).Wiltgestein, Ludwig. On Ortatnty (New York; Harper Torchlxxiks, v 1969).Zizek, Slavoyt Enjoy Your Symptom (London: Routledge. 1992).Copyright of Social Research is the property of New School for Social Research. The copyright in an individual article may be maintained by the auth
溫馨提示
- 1. 本站所有資源如無(wú)特殊說(shuō)明,都需要本地電腦安裝OFFICE2007和PDF閱讀器。圖紙軟件為CAD,CAXA,PROE,UG,SolidWorks等.壓縮文件請(qǐng)下載最新的WinRAR軟件解壓。
- 2. 本站的文檔不包含任何第三方提供的附件圖紙等,如果需要附件,請(qǐng)聯(lián)系上傳者。文件的所有權(quán)益歸上傳用戶所有。
- 3. 本站RAR壓縮包中若帶圖紙,網(wǎng)頁(yè)內(nèi)容里面會(huì)有圖紙預(yù)覽,若沒(méi)有圖紙預(yù)覽就沒(méi)有圖紙。
- 4. 未經(jīng)權(quán)益所有人同意不得將文件中的內(nèi)容挪作商業(yè)或盈利用途。
- 5. 人人文庫(kù)網(wǎng)僅提供信息存儲(chǔ)空間,僅對(duì)用戶上傳內(nèi)容的表現(xiàn)方式做保護(hù)處理,對(duì)用戶上傳分享的文檔內(nèi)容本身不做任何修改或編輯,并不能對(duì)任何下載內(nèi)容負(fù)責(zé)。
- 6. 下載文件中如有侵權(quán)或不適當(dāng)內(nèi)容,請(qǐng)與我們聯(lián)系,我們立即糾正。
- 7. 本站不保證下載資源的準(zhǔn)確性、安全性和完整性, 同時(shí)也不承擔(dān)用戶因使用這些下載資源對(duì)自己和他人造成任何形式的傷害或損失。
最新文檔
- 鉍基石墨烯氣凝膠的制備及光催化活化過(guò)硫酸鹽性能研究
- 2025年人力資源管理師專業(yè)技能考核試卷:人力資源招聘與配置策略模擬綜合試題
- 2025年專升本藝術(shù)概論考試模擬卷:藝術(shù)審美心理在藝術(shù)史研究中的啟示試題
- 2025年大學(xué)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)期末考試題庫(kù)-統(tǒng)計(jì)推斷與檢驗(yàn)實(shí)驗(yàn)設(shè)計(jì)解析
- 2025年消防安全設(shè)施維護(hù)員初級(jí)職稱考試題庫(kù)
- 2025年職業(yè)指導(dǎo)師專業(yè)能力測(cè)試卷:職業(yè)指導(dǎo)師專業(yè)能力提升試題集
- 2025年專升本藝術(shù)概論模擬試卷:藝術(shù)教育實(shí)踐案例創(chuàng)新應(yīng)用
- 部編人教版二年級(jí)下冊(cè)綜合實(shí)踐活動(dòng)復(fù)習(xí)計(jì)劃
- 一年級(jí)科學(xué)內(nèi)容整合教學(xué)計(jì)劃
- 2025年護(hù)士執(zhí)業(yè)資格考試題庫(kù):護(hù)理質(zhì)量管理與評(píng)價(jià)高頻考點(diǎn)解析試題
- 《小學(xué)生新能源科普》課件
- 熱處理崗位職責(zé)
- 牙種植手術(shù)術(shù)前評(píng)估
- 咨詢服務(wù)質(zhì)量保證體系及保證措施
- 《快遞運(yùn)營(yíng)》課件-項(xiàng)目四 快件分撥處理
- 護(hù)理組長(zhǎng)經(jīng)驗(yàn)交流
- 企業(yè)垃圾分類課件
- 強(qiáng)制性條文監(jiān)理執(zhí)行計(jì)劃
- 2024-2025年江蘇專轉(zhuǎn)本英語(yǔ)歷年真題(含答案)
- 山東科技大學(xué)離散數(shù)學(xué)復(fù)習(xí)題
- 【MOOC】航空發(fā)動(dòng)機(jī)結(jié)構(gòu)分析與設(shè)計(jì)-南京航空航天大學(xué) 中國(guó)大學(xué)慕課MOOC答案
評(píng)論
0/150
提交評(píng)論