Agonistic Critiques of Liberalism: Perfection and Emancipation

Abstract

Agonism is a political theory that places contestation at the heart of politics. Agonistic theorists charge liberal theory with a depoliticization of pluralism through an excessive focus on consensus. This paper examines the agonistic critiques of liberalism from a normative perspective. I argue that by itself the argument from pluralism is not sufficient to support an agonistic account of politics, but points to further normative commitments. Analyzing the work of Mouffe, Honig, Connolly, and Owen, I identify two normative currents of agonistic theory: emancipatory agonism, aimed at challenging violence and exclusion, and perfectionist agonism, aimed at the cultivation of nobility. From a normative perspective the former presents an internal challenge to liberalism, while the latter constitutes an external challenge to liberalism by providing a competing account of the ends of politics. Recognition of the distinction between emancipatory and perfectionist agonism is crucial in assessing the purchase of agonistic critiques of liberalism. Furthermore, this analysis draws us beyond the simple opposition between contestation and consensus. It is not simply a question of valuing genuine pluralism and therefore criticizing consensus; rather the question comes to be: what are the ends of politics?

Chantal Mouffe's Agonistic Project: Passions and Participation

“…In other words, agonists seek to empower citizens to challenge the harm endemic to their politics. 27 In order to meet the aims of emancipatory agonism, what is needed is a democratic model that is capable of achieving what the liberal rationalist's democratic model cannot -it must be able to grasp the true and unavoidable nature of Mouffe's conception of 'the political'. Accordingly, Mouffe wishes to propose a democratic model that places the questions of power, antagonism and exclusion 'at its very centre'.…”

“…However, following Fossen, I would also include Nietzsche in this list. 10 Mouffe's understanding of the political is clearly located in this second perspective. As she writes:…”

Restoring society to post-structuralist politics

“…(Mouffe, 1999: 20) The left should thus fight for democratization across all social domains, such as the workplace or the family. Power relations and acts of inclusion/exclusion may be constitutive of social and political life, but for Mouffe expansive democratization at least gives the marginalized the chance to contest these frontiers (Fossen, 2008). More controversially, some radical democrats suggest that their position sustains the more traditional left concern with redistributing power and material resources, in order to facilitate such democratic inclusion (Little, 2002;Smith, 1998).…”

Creating Space for Emancipatory Human Security: Liberal Obstructions and the Potential of Agonism1

“…Among these critiques, one finds a rather potent concern regarding a core assumption of liberal approaches generally, which is central to understanding stagnation in movements toward emancipation. This critique notes that with the emergence of a unipolar (uni-ideological) world, we have been left with ''the illusion that we can finally dispense with the notion of antagonism'' (Mouffe 1993:2;Fossen 2008). In the present era, the value of difference and of contestation have been made to disappear and replaced with a belief that we have reached a ''consensus'' (note the congruence with the peacebuilding literature) with regard to the ideal modes of human or social organization.…”

“…Discourses of power and structures that promote inequality and violence are to be dismantled, both through discourse and action. Securing individuals thus requires a consideration of how persons can be protected by (or emancipated from) what can be considered the unintended but very real outcomes of liberal programming, including “the harms, injustices or inequalities caused by exclusions and restrictions of pluralism” (Fossen 2008:377).…”