1 Hegemony and Socialist Strategy

Laclau, Ernesto; Mouffe, Chantal

doi:10.1515/9781474472593-004

Cited by 380 publications

(589 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

355

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A discourse analysis guided by Laclau and Mouffe's (2014) discourse theory was undertaken on data extracted from Twitter during Autism Awareness/ Acceptance Month, April 2018. Laclau and Mouffe's discourse theory considers that social phenomena is never fixed, that knowledge, identity and social relations are all contingent, shaped by communication (Laclau & Mouffe, 2014). Laclau and Mouffe's poststructuralist theory positions the aim of discourse analysis to explore how one construction of meaning and reality undergoes a discursive struggle to become dominant and thus provided a theoretical construct for this research study.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An Analysis of Twitter Discourse Regarding Identifying Language for People on the Autism Spectrum

Shakes

Cashin

2019

Issues in Mental Health Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Analysis of Twitter Discourse Regarding Identifying Language for People on the Autism Spectrum

Shakes

Cashin

2019

Issues in Mental Health Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Young agreed with Mouffe on agonistic pluralism as the basis of democracy today. He quoted Mouffe that democracy does not question their right to their ideas on the distinction between "enemy" (enemy) and "enemies" (adversary) (Laclau & Mouffe, 1985) (Mouffe, 2011). In the context of the whole political community should be understood that the opposite should be considered not as an enemy to be destroyed but as adversaries whose existence legitimate and should be tolerated.…”

Section: Transformation Between Approval and Strugglementioning

confidence: 99%

Deconstructing Minorities in Deliberative Democracy

Hikmawan

2022

IJD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It was a project from the inception of democracy to put all people on an equal footing with the rest of society. But in actuality, both in the state and in everyday political practice, segregation between citizens is an unavoidable fact of life that cannot be ignored. This research investigates how the political reality of soundness is viewed within the framework of political theory when it comes to the daily practice of democracy in the context of political theory. This research, which takes a phenomenological perspective, not only explains how the reality of civic politics is in the fight for accessibility and equality of citizens, but it also attempts to comprehend it as a collaborative endeavor to overcome the segregation that exists in everyday civic politics. This study also takes into account cultural discourse in the development of equal citizenship politics.Keywords: minorities, deliberative, recognition, democracy AbstrakIde dalam menempatkan warga negara kedalam posisi yang setara merupakan projek sedari awal dari demokrasi. Namun pada praktiknya dalam bernegara dan praktik politik keseharian segregasi antar warga menjadi realitas yang tidak dapt di hindari. Riset ini menulusur bagai mana realitas politik kesehatian dalam kerangka teori politik dalam melihat praktik demokrasi keseharian. Dengan pendekatan phenomelogy, penelitian ini tidak hanya menjelaskan bagaimana realitas politik kewargaan dalam memperjuangkan aksesibilitas dan kesetaraan warga namun lebih jauh mencoba memahaminya sebagai upaya Bersama dalam menanggulangi segregasi yang ada dalam politik kewargaan sehari-hari. Penelitian ini juga menawarga diskursus kultural dalam membangun politik kewargaan yang setara.Kata Kunci: minoritas, deliberative, rekognisi, demokrasi

show abstract

“…Let me at the outset distinguish between two forms of the critique. A more skeptical version has it that discursive democracy fails on its own terms because it is a “conceptual impossibility” that discourse can ever be free of “power and antagonisms,” which have an “ineradicable character” (Laclau & Mouffe, ; Mouffe, , p. 752). As a variant of this position, Ian Shapiro argues that “the Habermasian enterprise [that is, getting rid of unequal power relations] consists of setting as preconditions for democratic politics the very issues that give rise to the need for them” (Shapiro, , , p. 313).…”

Section: Four Objections Consideredmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discursive democracy and the limits of free speech

Bhatia

2017

Constellations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the most contested issues in modern democracies is the regulation of speech and expression. The U.S.A., Canada and European countries (to take a few examples) adopt different approaches to the problem. European countries legislate and enforce hate speech codes, whereas the U.S.A. does not. Consistent with the European Convention of Human Rights, many European countries outlaw certain forms of pornography. On the other hand, a narrowly drawn pornography statute, regulating only sexually explicit material that constituted subordination, was struck down by an American appeals court. The difference in legal approach tracks differences between academics. Liberals and feminists fall out over pornography legislation, and liberals and critical race theorists over hate speech codes. But feminists also divide over pornography regulation, and liberal scholars disagree over hate speech codes.This essay approaches the controversy from an unexplored perspective: that of discursive, or deliberative, democracy. Within the framework originally formulated by Jürgen Habermas, and then explored further by Seyla Benhabib and Nancy Fraser, among others, it aims to locate the place of free speech, and limitations upon free speech, in a discursive democracy. It does so by specifically analyzing the controversy surrounding the regulation of pornography.Through this analysis the essay aims to accomplish three goals: first, to provide fresh insight into free speech and constitutional law, by examining the issues within a different analytical model (that of discursive democracy); second, by applying the framework of discursive democracy to a specific constitutional controversy, to analyze how its abstract principles play out in concrete circumstances; and third, by examining how discursive democracy could deal with social inequalities and hierarchies, to respond to scholars such as Ian Shapiro and Chantal Mouffe, among others, who argue that its inability to incorporate differences of power renders it both theoretically incomplete, and practically undesirable.The essay is divided into six sections. The following section discusses Habermas's abstract conception of discourse ethics. Section 3 examines how Habermas, and some of his interlocutors, instantiate discourse ethics through the structuring institutions of a constitutional democracy, with a specific focus on free speech. Subsequently, section 4 changes tack and analyses one type of feminist argument against the practice of pornography. Section 5 brings together the two strands of the article to answer the basic question: how ought discursive democracy deal with pornography? It concludes that there are good reasons to regulate certain forms of pornography. Section 6 examines four possible objections to the argument, three of which are internal arguments from within discursive democracy, while the fourth (the power-based objection) is an external critique.

show abstract

1 Hegemony and Socialist Strategy

Cited by 380 publications

References 0 publications

An Analysis of Twitter Discourse Regarding Identifying Language for People on the Autism Spectrum

An Analysis of Twitter Discourse Regarding Identifying Language for People on the Autism Spectrum

Deconstructing Minorities in Deliberative Democracy

Discursive democracy and the limits of free speech

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About