Le conflit dans la communauté pluraliste chez Chantal Mouffe

Mémoire numérisé par la Division de la gestion de documents et des archives de l'Université de Montréal

El estatuto del agonismo en la propuesta de Chantal Mouffe

Fil: Parra, Fabiana. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación; Argentina.

El estatuto del agonismo en la propuesta de Chantal Mouffe

Fil: Parra, Fabiana. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación; Argentina.

A cisão moderna entre homem e cidadão e a exclusão política do preso no Brasil : a relação entre cidadania e direitos humanos a partir de um diálogo entre Hannah Arendt, Giorgio Agamben e Chantal Mouffe

Inclui notas explicativas, bibliográficas e bibliografia.

The phenomenology of utopia : reimagining the political

This thesis argues that the end of Soviet Marxism and a bipolar global political imaginary at the dissolution of the short Twentieth Century poses an obstacle for anti-systemic political action. Such a blockage of alternate political imaginaries can be discerned by reading the work of Francis Fukuyama and "Endism" as performative invocations of the closure of political alternatives, and thus as an ideological proclamation which enables and constrains forms of social action. It is contended that the search through dialectical thought for a competing universal to posit against "liberal democracy" is a fruitless one, because it reinscribes the terms of teleological theories of history which work to effect closure. Rather, constructing a phenomenological analytic of the political conjuncture, the thesis suggests that the figure of messianism without a Messiah is central to a deconstructive reframing of the possibilities of political action - a reframing attentive to the rhetorical tone of texts. The project of recovering the political is viewed through a phenomenological lens. An agonistic political distinction must be made so as to memorialise the remainders and ghosts of progress, and thus to gesture towards an indeconstructible justice which would serve as a horizon for the articulation of an empty universal. This project is furthered by a return to a certain phenomenology inspired by Cornelius Castoriadis, Claude Lefort, Maurice Merleau-Ponty and Ernesto Laclau. The thesis provides a reading of Jacques Derrida and Walter Benjamin as thinkers of a minor universalism, a non-prescriptive utopia, and places their work in the context of new understandings of religion and the political as quasi-transcendentals which can be utilised to think through the aporias of political time in order to grasp shards of meaning. Derrida and Chantal Mouffe's deconstructive critique and supplement to Carl Schmitt's concept of the political is read as suggestive of a reframing of political thought which would leave the political question open and thus enable the articulation of social imaginary significations able to inscribe meaning in the field of political action. Thus, the thesis gestures towards a form of thought which enables rather than constrains action under the sign of justice.

Striving for the Impossible : The Hegelian background of Judith Butler

This study analyses the Hegelian roots of the subject-theory and the political theory of Judith Butler. Butler can be seen as the author of "gender performativity". Butler claims that subject's identities are linquistic "terms". Linquistic identities are performative and normative: they produce, according to cultural rules, the identities which they just claim to describe. Butler's theory of the performativity of identities is based on her theory of identities as "ek-static" constructions. This means that there is a relation between the self and the Other in the heart of identities. It is claimed in this study that Butler's theory of the relation between the self and the Other, or, between the subject and the constitutive outside, is based on G.W.F. Hegel's theory of the dialectics of recognition in The Phenomenology of Spirit. Especially the sections dealing with the relation between "Lord" and "Bondsman" set the theoretical base for Butler's theory. Further, it is claimed that Hegel's own solution for the enslaving and instrumentalizing relation between the self and the Other, reciprocal recognition, remains an important alternative to the postmodernist conception supported by political theorists like Butler. Chapter 2, on Hegel, goes through the dialectics of recognition between the self and the Other in The Phenomenology of Spirit up until the ideal of reciprocal recognition and absolute knowledge. Chapter 3 introduces two French interpretations of Hegel, by Alexandre Kojéve and Louis Althusser. Both of these interpretations, especially the Kojevian one, have deeply influenced the contemporary understanding of Hegel as well as the contemporary thought - presented e.g. in the postmodern political thought - on the relations between the self and the Other. The Kojévian Marxist utopia with its notion of "the End of History" as well as the Althusserian theory of the Interpellative formation of subjects have influenced how Hegel's theory of the self and the Other have travelled into Butler's thought. In chapter 5 these influences are analyzed in detail. According to the analysis, Butler, like numerous other poststructuralist theorists, accepts Kojéve's interpretation as basically correct, but rejects his vision of "the End of History" as static and totalitarian. Kojéve's utopian philosophy of history is replaced by the paradoxical idea of an endless striving towards emancipation which, however, could not and should not be reached. In chapter 6 Butler's theory is linked to another postmodern political theory, that of Chantal Mouffe. It is argued that Mouffe's theory is based on a similar view of the relation of the self and the other as Butler's theory. The former, however, deals explicitly with politics. Therefore, it makes the central paradox of striving for the impossible more visible; such a theory is unable to guide political action. Hegel actually anticipated this kind of theorizing in his critique of "Unhappy Consciousness" in the Phenomenology of Spirit. Keywords: Judith Butler, G.W.F. Hegel, Chantal Mouffe, Alexandre Kojéve, Postmodernism, Politics, Identities, Performativity, Self-consciousness, Other

Democratic Legitimacy and the Politics of Rights : A comparative analysis of the conceptual relationship between democracy and rights in contemporary political theories

Democratic Legitimacy and the Politics of Rights is a research in normative political theory, based on comparative analysis of contemporary democratic theories, classified roughly as conventional liberal, deliberative democratic and radical democratic. Its focus is on the conceptual relationship between alternative sources of democratic legitimacy: democratic inclusion and liberal rights. The relationship between rights and democracy is studied through the following questions: are rights to be seen as external constraints to democracy or as objects of democratic decision making processes? Are individual rights threatened by public participation in politics; do constitutionally protected rights limit the inclusiveness of democratic processes? Are liberal values such as individuality, autonomy and liberty; and democratic values such as equality, inclusion and popular sovereignty mutually conflictual or supportive? Analyzing feminist critique of liberal discourse, the dissertation also raises the question about Enlightenment ideals in current political debates: are the universal norms of liberal democracy inherently dependent on the rationalist grand narratives of modernity and incompatible with the ideal of diversity? Part I of the thesis introduces the sources of democratic legitimacy as presented in the alternative democratic models. Part II analyses how the relationship between rights and democracy is theorized in them. Part III contains arguments by feminists and radical democrats against the tenets of universalist liberal democratic models and responds to that critique by partly endorsing, partly rejecting it. The central argument promoted in the thesis is that while the deconstruction of modern rationalism indicates that rights are political constructions as opposed to externally given moral constraints to politics, this insight does not delegitimize the politics of universal rights as an inherent part of democratic institutions. The research indicates that democracy and universal individual rights are mutually interdependent rather than oppositional; and that democracy is more dependent on an unconditional protection of universal individual rights when it is conceived as inclusive, participatory and plural; as opposed to robust majoritarian rule. The central concepts are: liberalism, democracy, legitimacy, deliberation, inclusion, equality, diversity, conflict, public sphere, rights, individualism, universalism and contextuality. The authors discussed are e.g. John Rawls, Jürgen Habermas, Seyla Benhabib, Iris Young, Chantal Mouffe and Stephen Holmes. The research focuses on contemporary political theory, but the more classical work of John S. Mill, Benjamin Constant, Isaiah Berlin and Hannah Arendt is also included.

The struggle for protection of environmental refugees: who's responsibility? Discourses from the United Nations and Non-governmental organizations

This thesis identifies, examines and problematizes some of the discourses that have so far come to light on the issue of protection for environmental refugees. By analyzing the discourses produced by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and two non-governmental organizations - the Environmental Justice Foundation (EJF) and Equity and Justice Working Group Bangladesh (EquityBD), I examine the struggling discourses that have emerged about how protection for environmental refugees has been interpreted. To do this, I rely on Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe's theory and method of discourse analysis. The results show that responsibilization is the main point of struggle in the discussions on the protection of environmental refugees. As a floating signifier, it was utilized by the discourses produced by the UNCHR and the selected NGOs in contingent ways and with different political objectives. The UNHCR discourse responsibilized both the environmental refugees for their own protection and the individual states. The EJF and EquityBD, by contrast, allocated responsibility for the protection of environmental refugees to the international community. These contingent understandings of responsibilization necessitated different justifications. While the EJF discourse relied on humanitarianism for the assistance of environmental refugees, the EquityBD discourse constructed a rights based, more permanent solution. The humanitarian based discourse of the EJF was found to be inextricably linked with the neoliberal discourse produced by the UNHCR. Both these discourses encouraged environmental refugees to stay in their homelands, undermining the politics of protection. Another way in which protection was undermined was by UNHCR's discourse on securitization. In this context, climate change induced displacement became threat to developed countries, the global economy and transnational classes. The struggling discourses about who/what has been allocated responsibility for the protection of environmental refugees also meant that identities of the displaced be constructed in specific ways. While the UNHCR discourse constructed as voluntary migrants and predators, the EJF and EquityBD discourses portrayed them as victims. However, even though the EJF discourse constructed them as victims, their reliance on humanitarianism could also be interpreted as a way of giving the environmental refugee a predator like identity. These discourses on responsibilization and identity formation clashed with each other in the aim of achieving a hegemonic position in discussions and debates about the protection of environmental refugees.

The struggle for protection of environmental refugees: who's responsibility? Discourses from the United Nations and Non-governmental organizations

This thesis identifies, examines and problematizes some of the discourses that have so far come to light on the issue of protection for environmental refugees. By analyzing the discourses produced by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and two non-governmental organizations - the Environmental Justice Foundation (EJF) and Equity and Justice Working Group Bangladesh (EquityBD), I examine the struggling discourses that have emerged about how protection for environmental refugees has been interpreted. To do this, I rely on Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe's theory and method of discourse analysis. The results show that responsibilization is the main point of struggle in the discussions on the protection of environmental refugees. As a floating signifier, it was utilized by the discourses produced by the UNCHR and the selected NGOs in contingent ways and with different political objectives. The UNHCR discourse responsibilized both the environmental refugees for their own protection and the individual states. The EJF and EquityBD, by contrast, allocated responsibility for the protection of environmental refugees to the international community. These contingent understandings of responsibilization necessitated different justifications. While the EJF discourse relied on humanitarianism for the assistance of environmental refugees, the EquityBD discourse constructed a rights based, more permanent solution. The humanitarian based discourse of the EJF was found to be inextricably linked with the neoliberal discourse produced by the UNHCR. Both these discourses encouraged environmental refugees to stay in their homelands, undermining the politics of protection. Another way in which protection was undermined was by UNHCR's discourse on securitization. In this context, climate change induced displacement became threat to developed countries, the global economy and transnational classes. The struggling discourses about who/what has been allocated responsibility for the protection of environmental refugees also meant that identities of the displaced be constructed in specific ways. While the UNHCR discourse constructed as voluntary migrants and predators, the EJF and EquityBD discourses portrayed them as victims. However, even though the EJF discourse constructed them as victims, their reliance on humanitarianism could also be interpreted as a way of giving the environmental refugee a predator like identity. These discourses on responsibilization and identity formation clashed with each other in the aim of achieving a hegemonic position in discussions and debates about the protection of environmental refugees.

Tarvitaanko demokratiassa keskustelua? Julkinen alue demokraattisen legitimiteetin tuottajana

Pyrin Pro gradu -tutkielmassani hahmottamaan ne tekijät, jotka konstituoivat julkista aluetta demokraattista legitimiteettiä tuottavana poliittisena foorumina. Työni keskiössä on deliberatiivisen demokratian teorian ydinajatus, että ihmiset ja ihmisryhmät kykenevät muodostamaan mielipiteensä ja tuomaan sen esille julkisissa keskusteluissa. Hyvin argumentoitu vaade ryhmän oikeuksien puolesta kerää julkista kannatusta muualtakin kuin asianomaisen ryhmän sisältä. Tämä puolestaan saa aikaan poliittisia muutoksia. Ryhmä, jota yhdistää epäoikeudenmukaisuuden kokemus, tuo agendansa julkisuuteen ja pyrkii vaikuttamaan yleiseen mielipiteeseen ja sitä kautta poliittiseen päätöksentekoon. Oleellinen kysymys tässä kontekstissa on, kuinka paljon yleisen mielipiteen tulisi vaikuttaa poliittiseen päätöksentekoon ja minkälaisiin aiheisiin poliittisesti vaikuttava yleinen mielipide on rajattu. Keskustelun julkisen alueen demokraattistra legitimiteettiä tuottavasta voimasta käynnisti Jürgen Habermasin teos Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit vuonna 1962. Olen käyttänyt kyseisen teoksen lisäksi lähteinäni Habermasin myöhäisempää tuotantoa. Habermasin pääasiallisina kommentaattoreina työssäni toimivat John Rawls, Nancy Fraser, Chantal Mouffe ja Seyla Benhabib. Tarkastelutapani on systemaattinen. Pyrin selventämään julkisen alueen käsitettä sekä liittyen julkiselle alueelle postuloituihin funktioihin, episteemiseen asemaan, sosiaaliseen ontologiaan, ekstensioon ja sitä konstituoiviin periaatteisiin. Käyn läpi deliberatiivisen demokratian teorian, poliittisen liberalismin ja agonistisen politiikan teorian käsitykset politiikan ja julkisen alueen luonteesta. Pyrin puolustamaan deliberatiivisen demokratian mukaista näkemystä julkisen alueen funktiosta. Käyn tutkielmassani läpi myös niitä ongelmia, jotka nousevat viime vuosikymmenien aikana demokraattisen päätöksenteon kannalta oleellisissa instituutionaalisissa rakanteissa tapahtuneista muutoksista. Keskeinen kysymys on, kykeneekö habermasilainen teoria vielä säilyttämään deskriptiivisen ja normatiivisen arvonsa globalisoituneessa maailmassa. Tutkimuksessani selvisi, että demokraattinen legitimiteetti vaatii tuekseen julkisen alueen mielipiteenmuodostusta. Julkista aluetta ei kuitenkaan ole tarkoituksenmukaista hahmottaa yhtenä laajana diskursiivisena areenana vaan useiden kommunikatiivisten alueiden verkostona, joista jotkut alueet ovat kattavampia kuin toiset.

An Analysis of the Concept of Citizenship: Legal, Political and Social Dimensions

The thesis aims at analyzing concept of citizenship in political philosophy. The concept of citizenship is a complex one: it does not have a definitive explication, but it nevertheless is a very important category in contemporary world. Citizenship is a powerful ideal, and often the way a person is treated depends on whether he or she has the status of a citizen. Citizenship includes protection of a person’s rights both at home and abroad. It entails legal, political and social dimension: the legal status as a full member of society, the recognition of that status by fellow citizens and acting as a member of society. The thesis discusses these three dimensions. Its objective is to show how all of them, despite being insufficient in some aspects, reach something important about the concept. The main sources of the thesis are Civic Republicanism by Iseult Honohan (Routledge 2002), Republicanism by Philip Pettit (Clarendon Press 1997), and Taking Rights Seriously by Ronald Dworkin (1997). In addition, the historical part of the thesis relies mainly on the works of Aristotle, Immanuel Kant, Adam Smith, Quentin Skinner, James Pocock and James Tully. The writings of Will Kymlicka, John Rawls, Chantal Mouffe, and Shane Phelan are referred to in the presentation and critique of the liberal tradition of thought. Hannah Arendt and Seyla Benhabib’s analysis of Arendt’s philosophy both address the problematic relations between human rights and nation-states as the main guarantors of rights. The chapter on group rights relies on Peter Jones’ account of corporate and collective rights, after which I continue to Seumas Miller’s essay on the (liberal) account of group rights and their relation to the concept of citizenship. Republicanism and Political Theory (2002) edited by Cécile Laborde and John Maynor is also references. David Miller and Maurizio Viroli represent the more “rooted” version of republicanism. The thesis argues that the full concept of citizenship should be seen as containing legal, political and social dimensions. The concept can be viewed from all of these three angles. The first means that citizenship is connected with certain rights, like the right to vote or stand for election, the right to property and so on. In most societies, the law guarantees these rights to every citizen. Then there is also the social dimension, which can be said to be as important as the legal one: the recognition of equality and identities of others. Finally, there is the political dimension, meaning the importance of citizens’ participation in the society, which is discussed in connection with the contemporary account of republicanism. All these issues are discussed from the point of view of groups demanding for group-specific rights and equal recognition. The challenge with these three aspects of citizenship is, however, that they are difficult to discuss under one heading. Different theories or discourses of citizenship each approach the subject from different starting points, which make reconciling them sometimes hard. The fundamental questions theories try to answer may differ radically depending on the theory. Nevertheless, in order to get the whole image of what the citizenship discourses are about all the aspects deserve to be taken into account.

Jurisdição, integridade e hegemonia: novas figuras de linguagem no romance do direito brasileiro e sua implicações para a democracia e a justiça do país.

A respeito do Direito contemporâneo, é possível dizer que ele esgota a referência a antigas figuras de linguagem que o caracterizavam, ou eram fundamentais à concretização do imaginário que lhe dava suporte: a catacrese (o juiz é a boca da lei) e a prosopopeia (a lei diz que...). No entanto, do vazio que emana dessa transformação, defendo aqui que outras figuras de linguagem são capazes de emergir da teoria social de forma a cumprir satisfatoriamente a função que se espera desse tipo de teoria, isto é, contribuir para a inteligibilidade dos fenômenos sociais. Nesse caso, especificamente, contribuir com a inteligibilidade do Direito. Refiro-me à metonímia (metáfora baseada na contiguidade) e à sinédoque (substituição do todo pela parte) que irrompem da teoria do discurso de Ernesto Laclau e Chantal Mouffe, quando tratam de caracterizar a categoria Hegemonia, herdada de Antonio Gramsci. O plano sobre o qual pretendo desenrolar essa substituição de figuras de linguagem chaves na compreensão do Direito é exatamente um romance: a caracterização dada por Ronald Dworkin ao exercício da jurisdição, a que rotula de um Romance em Cadeia. E claro, como não poderia deixar de ser, a referência empírica que subjaz o experimento é esse exercício jurisdicional na democracia brasileira.

Entre César e o Demos: notas agonísticas sobre a democracia na Venezuela

A tese aqui apresentada almeja contribuir para a secular polêmica que recobre o ideal democrático. Com este propósito, buscar-se-á delinear, a partir das contribuições de Chantal Mouffe e Ernesto Laclau, o que poderia ser entendido como um modelo agonístico de democracia, operando, primeiramente, um breve resgate do espectro conceitual que o circunda, cujos extremos podem ser encontrados nas obras de Jürgen Habermas e Carl Schmitt, em relação às quais, segundo a hipótese perseguida ao longo do prólogo e do primeiro capítulo, tal modelo assumiria feições sintéticas. Em seguida, o agonismo será utilizado como ferramenta heurística mobilizada para responder à seguinte pergunta: o governo de Hugo Chávez representa uma ruptura ou uma continuidade, conquanto ao regime jurídico-político que o precedera? De acordo com este objetivo, no curso do segundo e do terceiro capítulos será construída uma narrativa que visa a atender ao desdobramento da hipótese central deste trabalho acerca da pertinência do modelo agonístico de democracia, entendido como ferramenta analítica particularmente adequada ao estudo do fenômeno chavista. Tal suposição, por sua vez, desdobrar-se-á em dois eixos intrinsecamente relacionados: um descritivo e outro normativo. No tocante ao primeiro, os esforços concentrar-se-ão na demonstração da adequação do conceito laclauniano de populismo para o entendimento do tipo de vínculo representativo estabelecido entre Hugo Chávez e seus eleitores. Quanto ao segundo eixo, espera-se ressaltar, através das considerações de Laclau mas, principalmente, Mouffe, os riscos inerentes a este tipo de representação, assim como possíveis formas de contorná-los.