While I agree that the texts of Laclau and Mouffe are crucial in the study of political theory, their project is not as 'radical' as it claims to be. In fact, their socialist strategy maintains quite a conservative trend emphasized with their desire for the preservation of 'liberal-democratic' institutions. Moreover, like most 'post-structuralist' political thought they presuppose an antagonistic conception of human nature, which in my estimation much be overcome.
I agree that for them the liberal-democratic regime is a limit that is not overcome by Mouffe and Laclau. But as Laclau said to Zizek, what is the alternative? In addition, I think that socialism and lib-dem may be able co-exist. Although, I think that they would contest your notion that antagonism is inherent to human nature, since they deny that human 'nature'/subjectivity exists prior to discourse; indeed, their whole project is elucidate how humans can be constantly re-articulated.
uru86: I shouldn't have used the term nature, I am quite familiar with their work and agree that their project centres on constant re-articulation achieved through the process of hegemony, with a particular content 'suturing' (to use Lacan's term) itself to the empty place which is the universal. Nevertheless antagonism for them is constititive of identity - this is especially illuminated in Mouffe's appropriation of Carl Schmitt's work on the political.
She, along with Ernesto Laclau, should be seriously taken into consideration for a counter-hegemonic project to bring us forth to a truly democratic-socialist regime. If we on the left do not unite in that 'war of position', there is no hope.
@uru86 Man I don't know what world you`re living in. Guess you must have missed the spirit of time. Nobody can take your words seriously. There is a pack of some poor misleading hound dogs who wanna unite and to change the world by erecting a so called democratic-socialist regime. That's higly ridiculous. I feel so sorry for your guys. You know, most of the people don't even realize you excist. I wish you all good luck guys...
Loving Chantal as I subscribe to her type of social constructionist, non-deterministic thinking. Her critique and I suppose re-appariasal of Marx is enjoyable to listen to.
was für ein scheiß-englisch, Madame Mouffe!!!!
carlosvilla74 7 months ago 2
sie spricht in deutschland ein englisch mit extremen französischem akzent... schräg!
kann sie kaum verstehen....
TheMoccafaux 1 year ago
While I agree that the texts of Laclau and Mouffe are crucial in the study of political theory, their project is not as 'radical' as it claims to be. In fact, their socialist strategy maintains quite a conservative trend emphasized with their desire for the preservation of 'liberal-democratic' institutions. Moreover, like most 'post-structuralist' political thought they presuppose an antagonistic conception of human nature, which in my estimation much be overcome.
ebauer 2 years ago
I agree that for them the liberal-democratic regime is a limit that is not overcome by Mouffe and Laclau. But as Laclau said to Zizek, what is the alternative? In addition, I think that socialism and lib-dem may be able co-exist. Although, I think that they would contest your notion that antagonism is inherent to human nature, since they deny that human 'nature'/subjectivity exists prior to discourse; indeed, their whole project is elucidate how humans can be constantly re-articulated.
uru86 2 years ago
uru86: I shouldn't have used the term nature, I am quite familiar with their work and agree that their project centres on constant re-articulation achieved through the process of hegemony, with a particular content 'suturing' (to use Lacan's term) itself to the empty place which is the universal. Nevertheless antagonism for them is constititive of identity - this is especially illuminated in Mouffe's appropriation of Carl Schmitt's work on the political.
ebauer 2 years ago
She, along with Ernesto Laclau, should be seriously taken into consideration for a counter-hegemonic project to bring us forth to a truly democratic-socialist regime. If we on the left do not unite in that 'war of position', there is no hope.
uru86 2 years ago
@uru86 Man I don't know what world you`re living in. Guess you must have missed the spirit of time. Nobody can take your words seriously. There is a pack of some poor misleading hound dogs who wanna unite and to change the world by erecting a so called democratic-socialist regime. That's higly ridiculous. I feel so sorry for your guys. You know, most of the people don't even realize you excist. I wish you all good luck guys...
Suva1987 1 year ago
Loving Chantal as I subscribe to her type of social constructionist, non-deterministic thinking. Her critique and I suppose re-appariasal of Marx is enjoyable to listen to.
MartianManhunter1987 2 years ago