Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
1.3
0.6
Journals
Philosophies
Special Issues
Theories of Plurality and the Democratic We
share announcement

Theories of Plurality and the Democratic We

A special issue of Philosophies (ISSN 2409-9287).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 March 2024) | Viewed by 9470

Special Issue Editors

Prof. Dr. Christine Abbt

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Philosophy, Universität St.Gallen, 9000 St Gallen, Switzerland
Interests: social and political philosophy; radical democracy; identity politics; critical theory; feminism; poststructuralism
Dr. Leire Urricelqui

E-Mail Website
Co-Guest Editor
Department of Philosophy, University of St. Gallen, 9000 St. Gallen, Switzerland
Interests: social and political philosophy; radical democracy; biopolitics; critical theory; poststructuralism

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

We invite you to participate in a Special Issue of Philosophies, "Theories of Plurality and the Democratic We".

Across the world, populist discourses imagine and reclaim a mythical We, where homogeneity is defended as a condition for the existence of a lasting community. In this political vision, expressions of solidarity stop at the borders of the nation state and belonging is an exclusive privilege, with access to democratic citizenship for those participating in the common.

Parallel to this rhetorical retreat to nationalism, trade, communications, profits, and migration, as well as wars, climate change, disease, and hunger, we unmistakably transcend the democratic horizon of national boundaries and confront all living beings with the interconnectivity and multiple interdependencies of the world in which we live. They confront us with a given obligation of cohabitation and coexistence, as Judith Butler points out.

How can we democratically respond to this divergent situation?

Some scholars argue that in order to think like a democratic community, democracies cannot detach themselves from the constitutive boundary between us and them. Sarah Song, for example, underlines this problem. She doubts that community can be thought independently of a clearly defined and exclusive territory in which the representatives and the represented are strongly connected. Chantal Mouffe accentuates the partisan dimension of politics and its relevancy for democracy. For her, democracy needs an agonistic form of pluralism, constituted by both a common good and a constitutive exterior. Within these theories, understanding the political community as a group of people who share a way of life remains necessary for identification within the group, both for mutual recognition, as well as for sharing a sense of solidarity.

Other scholars accentuate the fundamentally plural and global character of the We. Hannah Arendt underlines the collective and plural character of the political, posing the question of sharing and interaction with the diverse. Her notion of plurality names interrelation, as well as demanding, as Adriana Cavarero indicates, the constitutive dimension of each being’s uniqueness. Arguing for the recognition of interdependency and interconnection as the proper political response to the current challenges, authors, such as Paul Gilroy or Gayatri Spivak, invite us to think about the necessities and difficulties of cosmopolitanism with the idea of the planetary while Étienne Balibar provides his notion of cosmopolitics. Donna Haraway calls for an extension of plural bonds beyond the human species, given the multiple interdependencies and relationships and, therefore, responsibilities among all living beings.

Moving away from the equation of the demos with the nation, we would like to ask how community and plurality can be thought together. How can the political community be thought of without reducing the principles of freedom and equality? Can we think of commonalities only within mechanisms of exclusion and inclusion? What idea of the common do we need to constitute a democratic We that is not sustained and defined by the nation state? How can such a We give voice to the plural condition of the world in which we live?

We would like to invite articles that explore these and other related issues to think about the role of plurality for a democratic We that encompasses the challenges of the interrelated and interconnected world we live in.

Prof. Dr. Christine Abbt
Dr. Leire Urricelqui
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a double-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Philosophies is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • democracy
  • plurality
  • political community
  • relationality
  • interdependence
  • internationality

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • e-Book format: Special Issues with more than 10 articles can be published as dedicated e-books, ensuring wide and rapid dissemination.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue polices can be found here.

Published Papers (5 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

24 pages, 359 KiB  
Article
Didier Eribon vs. ‘The People’—A Critique of Chantal Mouffe’s Left Populism
by Pascal Oliver Omlin
Philosophies 2024, 9(5), 143; https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies9050143 - 9 Sep 2024
Viewed by 979
Abstract
In this article, I develop a critique of Chantal Mouffe’s leftist populism and its construction of ‘the people’ against an opposed ‘them’, from a perspective informed by the thought of Didier Eribon. I draw on both his public interventions and his theoretical work, [...] Read more.
In this article, I develop a critique of Chantal Mouffe’s leftist populism and its construction of ‘the people’ against an opposed ‘them’, from a perspective informed by the thought of Didier Eribon. I draw on both his public interventions and his theoretical work, employing his concepts of return, society as verdict, and his two principles of critical thinking to question the desirability of crafting ‘the people’ in the first place. I contend that Eribon’s critique renders Mouffe’s proposal problematic on three accounts. First, her approach is too politically volatile; its instability leaves it devoid of a critical analysis of the differences between concrete social positions, struggles, and subjectivities within ‘the people’. Consequently, the political becomes merely a function of the social. Yet, the social and its determining power remain mostly unaddressed by her framework. Second, its simplistic opposition of an overly generalised ‘the people’ against ‘the oligarchy’ is susceptible to right-wing populist appropriations. Third, for a shot at hegemony and a general appeal, it eclipses plurality and dissensus within ‘the people’. In contrast, Eribon encourages a connection between the social and the political by suggesting that a self-critical analysis be mutually intertwined with social analysis. Instead of merely mobilising affects, they must be critically interrogated. Instead of summoning ‘the people’, a return to their respective genesis must be attempted. Unless both principles of critical thinking, the insights of return, and societal verdicts are deployed to come to terms with the social determinisms at hand, the ‘people’s’ mobilisation against an opposed ‘them’ risks sacrificing pluralism and equality alike and neglecting the criteria of the desirability of specific changes in favour of a “whatever it costs” attempt at hegemony. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Theories of Plurality and the Democratic We)
12 pages, 252 KiB  
Article
Can Democratic “We” Be Thought? The Politics of Negativity in Nihilistic Times
by Agustín Lucas Prestifilippo
Philosophies 2024, 9(2), 52; https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies9020052 - 22 Apr 2024
Viewed by 1450
Abstract
In this article I attempt to systematically reconstruct Theodor Adorno’s account of the relationship between the processes of authoritarian subject formation and the processes of political formation of the democratic common will. Undertaking a reading that brings Adorno into dialogue with contemporary philosophical [...] Read more.
In this article I attempt to systematically reconstruct Theodor Adorno’s account of the relationship between the processes of authoritarian subject formation and the processes of political formation of the democratic common will. Undertaking a reading that brings Adorno into dialogue with contemporary philosophical perspectives, the paper asks the question of whether it is possible to think of a “democratic We” in nihilistic times. In order to achieve this aim, I will analyze in reverse the modifications that the concept of narcissism has undergone, from Adorno’s use of it to account for the symbolic obstacles to the formation of democratic subjectivities after the Holocaust, to the initial formulations of Freudian psychoanalysis. Finally, I will attempt to outline an affirmative answer to the initial question, formulating the potentials and merits of what I will call a politics of negativity. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Theories of Plurality and the Democratic We)
10 pages, 333 KiB  
Article
The People and Their Animal Other: Representation, Mimicry and Domestication
by Laurin Mackowitz
Philosophies 2024, 9(1), 3; https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies9010003 - 23 Dec 2023
Viewed by 1864
Abstract
Animal stereotypes are used to describe, circumscribe and label people. They also serve to negotiate what counts as familiar and what is expelled as foreign. This article explores the composition of animal stereotypes and examines why they continue to influence the way humans [...] Read more.
Animal stereotypes are used to describe, circumscribe and label people. They also serve to negotiate what counts as familiar and what is expelled as foreign. This article explores the composition of animal stereotypes and examines why they continue to influence the way humans understand themselves. Referring to dehumanising language in contemporary political discourse, anthropological theories of mimicry and representation as well as ethnological observations of human–animal relations, this article argues that if animals are regarded as intelligent and compassionate rather than irrational or violent, the debasing intent of animal stereotypes fails. While a deeper understanding of the mutual dependence of humans, non-humans and their environment is of academic and social interest alike, the projection of images of oneself onto animal others only highlights certain features, whilst leaving others in the dark. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Theories of Plurality and the Democratic We)
9 pages, 260 KiB  
Article
Accomplice Neighborhood: Everyday Life Politics
by Héctor Fernández Medrano
Philosophies 2023, 8(6), 119; https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies8060119 - 14 Dec 2023
Viewed by 1640
Abstract
This paper delves into the conceptual delineation of the institution of the neighborhood as a catalyst for innovative political discourse and practice. It aims to set the basis for an upcoming reevaluation of the work of Andrés Ortiz-Osés, pioneer of Gadamerian hermeneutics in [...] Read more.
This paper delves into the conceptual delineation of the institution of the neighborhood as a catalyst for innovative political discourse and practice. It aims to set the basis for an upcoming reevaluation of the work of Andrés Ortiz-Osés, pioneer of Gadamerian hermeneutics in Spain, considering the neighborhood’s potential: its co-implicated and co-implicative nature connects consistently with his symbolic hermeneutics of the sense. The neighborhood, a complex institution transcending conventional affiliations, underpins coexistence, mutual tolerance, and a kind of ethical dialogue. This work contributes to highlighting the neighborhood’s political dimensions on its own and claims its philosophical relevance beyond its traditional understanding. The ambivalent space of vicinity promotes plural speech and serves as a vital agora, fostering dynamic, ethical coexistence and engaged citizenship, thereby enhancing the democratic landscape. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Theories of Plurality and the Democratic We)
16 pages, 303 KiB  
Article
Rupture and Response—Rorty, Cavell, and Rancière on the Role of the Poetic Powers of Democratic Citizens in Overcoming Injustices and Oppression
by Michael Räber
Philosophies 2023, 8(4), 62; https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies8040062 - 17 Jul 2023
Viewed by 1799
Abstract
In this paper, I discuss the importance of practices of disidentification and imagination for democratic progress and change. To this end, I bring together certain aspects of Stanley Cavell’s and Richard Rorty’s reflections on democracy, aesthetics, and morality with Jacques Rancière’s account of [...] Read more.
In this paper, I discuss the importance of practices of disidentification and imagination for democratic progress and change. To this end, I bring together certain aspects of Stanley Cavell’s and Richard Rorty’s reflections on democracy, aesthetics, and morality with Jacques Rancière’s account of the importance of appearance for democratic participation. With Rancière, it can be shown that any public–political order always involves the possibility (and often the reality) of exclusion or oppression of those who “have no part” in the current order through a particular order of perceptibility, and that democratic action, therefore, requires rupturing acts of political agency on the part of self-proclaimed political actors through which disidentifications and constructions of difference against such existing orders become possible. With Cavell and Rorty, in turn, it can be shown that these rupturing moments, in order to actually become politically effective, require a responsive disposition and a willingness to engage in practices of imagination on the part of those who occupy dominant positions on existing orders, insofar as they must acknowledge the expression of others’ sense of injustice. The upshot of my discussion is that a comprehensive account of the aesthetic dimension of democratic politics must simultaneously address the interruption of political action on the one hand and responsiveness on the other, and that Rancière and the neo-pragmatists Rorty and Cavell complement each other insofar as they illuminate the blind spots of their respective approaches. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Theories of Plurality and the Democratic We)
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-5
Back to TopTop