【墨菲】商谈民主抑或争胜式多元主义

1、SOCIAL RESEARCH. Vol. 66. No. S (Fall 19M)SOCIAL RESEARCH. Vol. 66. No. S (Fall 19M)SOCIAL RESEARCH. Vol. 66. No. S (Fall 19M)SOCIAL RESEARCH. Vol. 66. No. S (Fall 19M)BY CHANTAL MOUFFEBY CHANTAL MOUFFEDeliberative Democracy or Agonistic Pluralism?As testified by the increasing Miccess of (he extrem

2、e right in wv eral countries, western societies are witnessing a growing disaflec- tion with deinocralic institutions. Such a disaffection may have serious consequences for die future of democracy. Unfortunately liberal democratic sociEir are ill-prepared to confnini the present challcngct since rhe

3、y are unable to grasp its nature. Onr of the main muons for【his inability lies in the type of political iho ory currently in vogue dominalrd as it is by an indmdiialhtic. uni- vcrsalistic. and rationalistic framework. Such a framework erases the dimension of the political and impedes envisaging in a

4、n adequate manner (hr nature of a pluralistic deinocralic public sphere.This paper examines the most reerni paradigm of liberal demo cratir theory: Udrlibenuive leni(Kmcy;v in order to bring to the fore its shoncomings. Then, I put fbnvard some elements for the elaboration of an altemathr model that

5、 I propose to call aagonijr tic pluralism?To be sure, the aim of (he theorists who advocate lhe different versions of deliberative democracy* is commendable. .Xgainst the interest-based conception of democracy, inspired by econoiiiicn and skrplical about die nrtues of political panicipation9 they wa

6、nt to inlHMlucr questions of morality and justice into politics* rhey are looking for new meanings of tniditional demK：rati( notions like autonomy popular sovereignty, and equality. Their aim is to refbnnulalc die classical idea of the public sphere, giving it a central place in the democratic pnijc

7、ct. Howerert by proposing to SOCIAL RESEARCHscnsus portwcf!i legitimacy and ralionalit)； finally resolving the tension that exists in drmocmcy betwen die collective will and the will of all. Bui this is to transform pluralist democracy into a sclf-reftiting ideal, since the moment of ita realization

8、 would also be lhe moment of its (lisiiUcgralion.Tliis is why an approach that reveals the impossibility of establishing a consensus without exclusion is of fundamental impor- lance for democratic politics. By warning us against the ilhiMon dial a fully achieved democracy could ever be instantiated,

9、 it forces us to keep the democratic contestation alive. An agonistic* democratic approach acknowledges the real nature of its frontiers and recognizes die forms of exclusion that thry embody, instead of trying to disguise them under the veil of rationality or morality. -Awareness of the fact that d

10、ifTrrence allows us to constitute unity and totality while siniuitaricousK providing essential limits is an agonistic approach dial conlributrs in the subversion of the cvcr present temptation tlut exists in democratic MKietirs to naturalize their frontiers and essentializc their identities. Such an

11、 approach would, therefore, be much more receptive than the deliberative democracy model to the multiplicity of voices that a pluralist society encompasses, and to the complexity of the power structure that this network of differences implies.ReferencesBrnhaNk Seyia. Touard a leliberative Model of D

12、rmcxrratic l-rgiti- macy. in Drmocran and Diffrnicr, Brnhabib, Sryla. rd. (Princeton: Princeton University Press. 1966).(lavell, Sian ley, Comhlum Handsomt and Unhandsome (Chicago: Chi ago I ni(m( PreiBt 1990).Habermas. Jurgen. -Further Reflections on the PuNic Sphere,* in Habrr- mas anti thr PublK

13、Sphm. Calhoun. Craig, rl (Cambridge: The MIT FH*bermas. Jurgen, MReconciliHion through the Public Use of Reason. Remarks on John Rawls*i Political Liberalism.* TM Journal of Philos- irphy (March 1995h XXC1I:3.758SOCIAL RESEARCHLaclau. trnesto and Moutte, Chantal, Hegemony and Socialist StraUf. Tmifa

14、rds a Rmlwal DrmtHratu P(4Uics (London: Verso, 1985).Rawls. John. A Thrtny of Justice (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1971).Wittgenstein. Ludwig, Philowphual Inwstigalums (Oxford: Basil Black- well, 1953).Wiltgestein, Ludwig. On Ortatnty (New York; Harper Torchlxxiks, v 1969).Zizek, Slavoyt Enjoy Your Symptom (London: Routledge. 1992).Copyright of Social Research is the property of New School for Social Research. The copyright in an individual article may be maintained by the auth