Chantal Mouffe, "Democratic Politics and Agonistic Public Spaces"

  Рет қаралды 33,924

Harvard GSD

Harvard GSD

12 жыл бұрын

A lecture by Chantal Mouffe, Professor of Political Theory and Director of the Centre for the Study of Democracy, University of Westminster, London.
"A political theorist educated at the universities of Louvain, Paris, and Essex, Chantal Mouffe is Professor of Political Theory at the University of Westminster. She has taught at many universities in Europe, North America and Latin America, and has held research positions at Harvard, Cornell, the University of California, the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, and the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique in Paris. Between 1989 and 1995 she was Directrice de Programme at the College International de Philosophie in Paris." [source]
As background reading for her lecture, she recommends her book On the Political (Routledge, 2005). For more information and samples of Prof. Mouffe's writings, visit her web page.

Пікірлер: 18
@IKnowNeonLights
@IKnowNeonLights 11 ай бұрын
{([ A Bi, Je Hi ])} This is a sentence written in a northern Albanian dialect, it's possible translation is endless but as a foundational structural meaning the sentence refers to roots, more precisely the presence of roots, it's first part is in the form of a question which is not a question, and the second part is in the form of a affirmation, a statement of sorts that is neither a affirmation nor a statement of any sorts. It is a sentence as a question and affirmation simultaneously, made of two sentences that are neither a question nor a affirmation simultaneously and a direct translation is this. ((If and when it takes roots you are in)). It is a direct linguistic representation of a constant present. What is interesting to myself, has to do with the fact of the sentence existing as an exact pronunciation on almost the other side of the word. More precisely in the Indian subcontinent the sentence exists exactly as it does in the Mediterranean sea, more to it, the sentence means a direct representation of a constant present also, translated as (right now, here). I am using this sentence because I understand the core structural foundations of the West and East to be exactly and identically the same, yet this very present similarity is hidden, denied, obscured, but most of all used as a constant barrier. The identical similarity has to do with what is known as the individualism concept, a concept which for all the wrong reasons and logic is thought to be with and within existence more on the West side of the world than that of the East side of the world. In order to make this understanding of an identical structural foundation similarly between West and East, I will place my understanding of what is known as the Ying Yang structure. Once the object which gave me such an understanding came to be, then the understanding derived from fitted perfectly with many structures in nature, including all of life. One day I was looking at a charging cable, more precisely a short head phones charging cable. As all charging cables, it had an input and an output, but in this instance, and as a consequence of technological structure advancement, the input is in the form of a USB port, and the output is in the form of not USB port. What soon became apparent, is the fact of the input and the output of the charging cable being exactly the same thing simultaneously, the only difference I thought was the type of current, yet that was also not a difference, as the current was exactly the same at either end. The only difference remaining was the stating a located point as of what purpose, (use) making it also not a difference. Then I thought of standing at the foot or the top of a mountain, which would be the input or the output there, same with a tree, river, human being, road etc etc, more or less the understanding I got suddenly from a short charging cable, fitted with any physical structure, including life. If and when applying the question of good and bad, no difference can be found either, because what would be good or bad, input or output, the foot or the top of the mountain, same with a tree, road, rive, human being, life etc etc. Although not often taken as such, highlighting and emphasising the no difference between good and bad with and within such a structure as Ying Yang, are known and existing throughout the planet as the gateless gates, meaning you know you have entered or exited one, and you also know that have neither opened or closed one, a gateless gate which as with and within a Ying Yang structure is also a representation of a constant present. There are two very distinctive structural concepts that operate throughout the constant present continuously in the whole world no matter with and within who or what. One is a purpose with a structure, the other is a structure with purpose. In the West part of the world a known story is principally occupied in elaborating all of the possible facets of each structural concept. The story is known as the Trojan war. Troy is a structure with a purpose, what has come to be known as ancient Greece is a purpose with many structures. The purpose of Troy is it's structure, it's physical being as a structure, all and any possible individuality or unity can and only exist with and within it as a structure. Kings, princes, queens, princess, priests, art, heroes, warriors, intelligence, beauty, strength, power, prosperity, safety, etc etc as of and by Troy, can only be with and within Troy. What has come to be known as ancient Greece purpose, is itself as a purpose, being a purpose to begin with, then being is it's main structure, all of its possible ways of being, this way gives it as a purpose nature and life itself as a structure to make full use off in any and all possible ways, in this instance as much of the Mediterranean area as possible. And in complete difference to Troy, all and any possible individuality or unity can and only exist with and within it as a purpose, throughout all of its possible structures, giving a much wider of anything and everything for Kings, princes, queens, princess, priests, art, heroes, warriors, intelligence, beauty, strength, power, prosperity, safety, etc etc to exist in any and all possible ways. There are two more distinctive structural concepts that are with and within the story, one is very obvious and prominent, the other is not so obvious yet even more prominent. The concepts are known as a Trojan horse, and the Leviathan. Troy is a man made Leviathan, what has come to be known as ancient Greece is a natural made Leviathan. The man made Leviathan has a very physical tangible structure, you cannot miss it. The natural made Leviathan has and has not a very physical tangible structure simultaneously, meaning you can and cannot miss it simultaneously. If and when two such structures come face to face in a confrontation, the most magnificent and powerful man made Leviathan will be destroyed by a Trojan horse, which it as a structure has no choice but to accept it, as it (the Trojan horse) is exactly in structural existence, as the man made Leviathan, any man made Leviathan. The same goes in the case of the natural Leviathan, it can only destroy itself as itself. The main difference, one that makes the West part of the world, exactly the same as the East part of the world, is the natural Leviathan has many individual Trojan horses, whereas the man made Leviathan is it and only it, a Leviathan and a Trojan horse all in one, the most powerful one that can be which if and when faced in confrontation with a natural one, the man made one will always be destroyed by a Trojan horse exactly as itself. For what is natural in being as the main purpose, each and every diety is a Trojan horse, each and every way is a Trojan horse, each and every temple is a Trojan horse, each and every sage, guru, lama, saint, prophet, priest, gate, mountain, river, animals, stars, planets, signs, symbols, meditation, chanting, prayer, city is a Trojan horse, including all of the heroes, kings, queens, princesses, princess, priests, warriors, art, and intelligence etc etc. The emphasis on such individuality that unites only for the purpose of being, is highlighted by the story that follows the Trojan war, Odisea. After all is done, and the man made Leviathan is destroyed as one, the natural Leviathan exactly as nature does, goes about each and all of its individual ways, existing only unity as a purpose of being natural life, one that can only be destroyed by itself as itself. If planet earth is not the actual sea monster, then anything else taking that place instead will be confronted with it. If anything else is being with and within existence, as alive on planet earth, and is in direct confrontation with it under the concept of man made, the confrontation will end up in a self defeat through a Trojan horse, many Trojan horses. (((Jesus way is structurally and conceptually the same, throughout the gospels the constant present is emphasized, the miracles are now, the healings are now, the preaching is now, the forgiveness is, the judgment is now, the salvation is now, the punishment is now, the crucifixion is now, the resurrection is now, everything is now, birth and death is now, the past and the future are only in the form of reference points. That is why stating that if and when there is a end of ends, being that is always natural, you do not need to worry about it, as it is always now, meaning you cannot miss it as an end, impossible to do so, factually. In the meantime take what is precious with and within you or has been given to you, and make some interest on it, invest it, increase its value, double it, triple it, just in case it is always now, as it usually always is, and as Jesus points out, the owner comes now and asks for it. Whatever goes through to wherever, goes through no matter, whatever does not, does not, being now with both is the way.))) (Rraso Vaj Sa) in my understanding and translation is a happy song, a question or a lamentation simultaneously, among an infinite other possible understandings and translations, directed (that is between a human being and), at a flat stone used to grind anything for the purpose of making oil. The East and West are not different, not different at all.
@marinaurbach8462
@marinaurbach8462 10 жыл бұрын
wonderful to see Chantal with one of my favored artists, Krzysztof Wodiczko!
@enricolaquatra6068
@enricolaquatra6068 9 жыл бұрын
omg sooooo good *_* feeling in love
@sirvanmohamadnezhad273
@sirvanmohamadnezhad273 5 жыл бұрын
Merci beaucoup
@CrownPrinceEscalus
@CrownPrinceEscalus 5 жыл бұрын
I never really understood what replaces consensus as a basis of decision-making in the agonistic pluralist view.
@ErDiEr
@ErDiEr 4 жыл бұрын
Consensus implies a rationalistic form of decision-making that presupposes a shared set of beliefs and the use of discourse only as a form of reasoning. Agonistic pluralist view implies that we only need to agree that the values of democracy, liberty and equality, are fundamental, and everything else must be, as a political stance, in a public confrontation before it becomes hegemonic. There is no consensus in agonism, there is only the assurance that the democratic rules based on its values stay in place with no violation.
@beatrizfranco2984
@beatrizfranco2984 2 жыл бұрын
@@ErDiEr so, to me, it takes agonism to the basis of the deliberation consensus. The agreement about the democratic's values is, in itself, to me, a consensus
@hazimali7744
@hazimali7744 Жыл бұрын
​@@beatrizfranco2984 Actually, there is also no a priori acceptance of democratic values. Agonism is not a process of contestation that takes place within an established democratic order, but a means by which that order is perpetually negotiated and reimagined without the expectation of reconciliation or consensus. This is because 'democracy' in this tradition does not denote a mode of government (i.e., liberal democracy), but captures a more abstract ontological condition for the possibility of any political act as such.
@tessatessa7110
@tessatessa7110 3 жыл бұрын
21:23 did she just say "in fucking xenophobic way"? ._.
@aifricdoherty2766
@aifricdoherty2766 2 жыл бұрын
I think she said 'in fact, in [a] zeno...'. In French, they said 'en fait' all the time, so it would make sense.
@rainhardvidiansyah6968
@rainhardvidiansyah6968 4 жыл бұрын
I love post-marxism
@scarymary2k8
@scarymary2k8 11 жыл бұрын
Mouffe is sickk, her concept of agonistic democracy is revolutionary, but her accent sucks!
@garcontoutsimple8361
@garcontoutsimple8361 5 жыл бұрын
What's unbelievable is that she's lived and taught in England since... 1972!!! ;-) ;-) ;-)
@bluedjules
@bluedjules 5 жыл бұрын
I advise you to get used to these accents. We (the rest of the non-Anglo world) are all learning and speaking your language, so the least you can do yourself is to train your ears.
@AP-yx1mm
@AP-yx1mm 2 жыл бұрын
@@bluedjules I am non native speaker, I speak without accent but sometimes it just goes beyond my means, it becomes painful.
Chantal Mouffe: For a Left Populism
1:07:35
IWMVienna
Рет қаралды 9 М.
Postmodernism
46:52
Daniel Bonevac
Рет қаралды 478 М.
Spot The Fake Animal For $10,000
00:40
MrBeast
Рет қаралды 189 МЛН
Chantal Mouffe: "A Left Populist Strategy for a Green Democratic Revolution"
1:11:53
Futures of Sustainability, Universität Hamburg
Рет қаралды 382
The World In 2024 With Niall Ferguson: Crisis, Conflict And The New Axis of Evil
1:30:07
Chantal Mouffe: The Affects of Democracy
48:59
IWMVienna
Рет қаралды 3,3 М.
Habermas: The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere
8:34
Laclau and Mouffe
15:28
UNSW eLearning
Рет қаралды 58 М.
Jeffrey Kipnis and Reinhold Martin, "What Good Can Architecture Do?"
1:43:20
Laclau and Mouffe - Discourse Theory - Hegemony, Antagonism and Dislocation
29:21
Political Theory and Contemporary Politics
Рет қаралды 10 М.