Podcasts about Chantal Mouffe

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit wisdomofcrowds.liveOur special guest this week, David Polansky is a political theorist and commentator who lives in Canada. A frequent contributor to Wisdom of Crowds, he joins Shadi Hamid and Damir Marusic to discuss two excellent recent essays. The first one, titled “Does Canada Exist?” is about Canadian national identity, an issue that has become more relevant since Donald Trump has taken to calling Canada the 51st state, and while some in the western Canadian province of Alberta has floated the idea of seceding from the rest of Canada. Polansky's article was quoted in the New York Times and National Post.David's most recent peace, “Michael Jordan Yes; Winston Churchill No?” is about what makes politicians great and whether political greatness (in terms of impact) can be distinguished from moral goodness. After one hundred days of Trump, it is an important question to ask.What follows is a rollicking and often hilarious conversation in which various politicians — Justin Trudeau, Bill Clinton, Donald Trump — are sized up according to the standards of classical greatness and found wanting. Damir and Shadi nevertheless argue that Trump is the most consequential president since FDR. Polansky argues that Trump's impact is in large part due to the fact that the Left is lost right now. It is lost, he argues, because it cannot create a new identity, and instead tries to forge unity around “niche issues,” like the Palestine question.In our bonus section for paid subscribers, the gang muses on Trump's relationship to shame; Polansky distinguishes between courage and guts, and why Trump has the latter but not former; Shadi asks, “What do you think about Stalin?”; Damir explains why Trump is like a character in a science fiction novel; Polansky argues that “there's a grandeur to America, but there's also a ridiculousness to America”; Shadi interrogates Polansky on hierarchy and greatness; and the three men ponder whether Eisenhower was a great president.Required Reading and Viewing* David Polansky, “Michael Jordan, Yes; Winston Churchill, No?” (WoC).* David Polansky, “Does Canada Exist?” (WoC).* David Polansky, “Pundit Don't Preach” (WoC).* David's Substack, Strange Frequencies.* Where the “Worthwhile Canadian Initiative” meme comes from (Paul Krugman's Newsletter). * “What to Know About Alberta's Potential Separation From Canada” (TIME).* Carl Schmitt (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy).* Chantal Mouffe on “agonistic” democracy (Pavilion).* Stephen Kotkin talk about Stalin (YouTube).* Isaac Asimov, the Foundation trilogy (Amazon).* “Trump says Houthis showed ‘bravery,' believes they will honor truce deal” (Times of Israel).* Polansky's “Cabots and Lodges” reference (Berkshire Edge).* Analysis of Bill Clinton's 2012 DNC speech (CNN).Free preview video:Full video for paid subscribers below:

In which we inaugurate the Chantal Mouffe era of the show. Reading: Neither Vertical Nor Horizontal (2021) by Rodrigo Nunes Send us a question, comment or valid concern: auxiliarystatements(at)gmail.com DISCORD: https://discord.gg/EAHjv96U

In this episode, philosopher Aaron Simmons returns for an intriguing discussion on the complexities of sustaining democracy. The conversation spans various philosophical insights from thinkers such as Robert Talese, Chantal Mouffe, and Simon Critchley. We explore tensions between political equality and justice, the paradox of democracy, and the necessity of engaging agonistically with adversaries. Aaron also shares his experiences teaching Radical Political Theory, addressing the intricacies of class tensions, bad faith discourse, and the compelling ethical demands that challenge contemporary democratic practices. You can WATCH this conversation on YouTube Dr. Simmons is an Associate Professor of Philosophy at Furman University. You can follow his Substack ‘Philosophy in the Wild.‘  Previous Episodes with Aaron A Philosopher & Ethicist Process This Election The Courage to Be 15 w/ Elgin Fuller & Aaron Simmons Aaron Simmons: Camping with Kierkegaard Faith After Deconstruction Philosophy & the Experience of God Do I Have a Soul? & other cultural preferences in bold. Off-Road Religion & Pandemic Philosophizing A Five-Week Online Lenten Class w/ John Dominic Crossan Join us for a transformative 5-week Lenten journey on "Paul the Pharisee: Faith and Politics in a Divided World."This course examines the Apostle Paul as a Pharisee deeply engaged with the turbulent political and religious landscape of his time. Through the lens of his letters and historical context, we will explore Paul's understanding of Jesus' Life-Vision, his interpretation of the Execution-and-Resurrection, and their implications for nonviolence and faithful resistance against empire. Each week, we will delve into a specific aspect of Paul's theology and legacy, reflecting on its relevance for our own age of autocracy and political turmoil. . For details and to sign-up for any donation, including 0, head over here. _____________________ Join our class - TRUTH IN TOUGH TIMES: Global Voices of Liberation This podcast is a Homebrewed Christianity production. Follow the Homebrewed Christianity, Theology Nerd Throwdown, & The Rise of Bonhoeffer podcasts for more theological goodness for your earbuds. Join over 80,000 other people by joining our Substack - Process This! Get instant access to over 45 classes at www.TheologyClass.com Follow the podcast, drop a review, send feedback/questions or become a member of the HBC Community. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

SHOWNOTES:Samira hatte Geburtstag yippieeee! (und Friedemann davor auch!)2:00: Ein „Darüber reden wir heute nicht“ XXL Spezial u.a. mit:- Wintereinbruch- Dubai-Schokolade- Friedrich Merz und die Windräder- Scholz vs. Pistorius- D-Day der FDP- Das ISGH-Urteil gegen Netanyahu und die Hungersnot in Gaza (folgt bald)14:00: Jetzt aber: brauchen wir einen linken Populismus? Warum überhaupt, wie kommen wir da drauf?16:20: Was ist erstmal an Konzept und Begriff kritisch zu sehen? Wo wird „Populimus“ falsch benutzt?20:00: Was hat Chantal Mouffe dazu in ihrem Buch „Für einen linkne Populismus“ geschrieben?27:55: Was ist die „Frointlinie“ laut Mouffe zwischen Bevölkerung und „Oligarchie“? Warum ist die Energiewende ein Beispiel mit politischen Potenzial dafür, was nicht genutzt wird?35:30: Das Problem mit entleerten Begriffen wie „Gerechtigkeit“? Welche Affekte will man eigentlich bespielen?44:30: Wo gibt es Konflikte zwischen ökonomisch und identitätspolitisch orientierten Gruppen? Beispiel Sarah Wagenknecht und die Brombeer-Koalition in Thüringen.51:00: Wie kann ein „nach oben treten“ dennoch ein Gruppenbewusstsein kanalisieren, das eine politische Bewegung trägt?54:30: Samira war im Kino und empfiehlt „Arona“, des diesjährigen Gewinnerfilm in Cannes von Sean Baker. Eine Romcom-Dekonstruktions-Party feat. eine junge Sexworkerin und einen russichen Oligarchensohn.60:00: Friedemann empfiehlt „Tschugger“, eine Schweizer Serie, die auf Netflix läuft. Ein abgerissener gröénwahnsinniger Dorfpolizist verstrickt sich in die ganz große Verschwörung. Mitten im Wallis.LINKS:The Populist Moment: The Left After the Great Recession, Arthur Borriello, Anton Jägerhttps://www.versobooks.com/products/2934-the-populist-moment?srsltid=AfmBOoq4JT5xLYnf3uSw5fmZBuq2p07QkGfRdOq8gQpdcEMfzLSYFsADHegemonie und radikale Demokratie, Chantal Mouffe, Ernesto Laclauhttps://www.passagen.at/gesamtverzeichnis/bestseller/hegemonie-und-radikale-demokratie-4/Für einen linken Populismus, Chantal Mouffe, übersetzt von Richard Bathhttps://www.suhrkamp.de/buch/chantal-mouffe-fuer-einen-linken-populismus-t-9783518127292Eine Grüne demokratische Revolution: Linkspopulismus und die Macht der AffekteChantal Mouffe, übersetzt von Ulrike Bischoffhttps://www.suhrkamp.de/buch/chantal-mouffe-eine-gruene-demokratische-revolution-t-9783518127582 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Çağlar Öztürk: My first question concerns populism. Populism has become a fashionable term in recent years which has led to quite some confusion even among political scientists and political science students. First of all, what qualifies a politician or party as populist? How do they differ from others, from non-populist ones? What was your motivation in choosing populism as a key concept and what contribution did you intend to make with the book? Giorgos Venizelos: There's indeed a lot of confusion about populism, even though there's so much literature about it. Without going too deep in this heated debate, I should say that scholars agree that populism is organised around two notions: people- centrism and anti-elitism. Of course, there are very different approaches to these two operational criteria related to the people and the elite. For me, populist communication is not just about rhetoric, but also bodily gestures, accents and aesthetics that resemble, represent and enact ‘the people.' When we talk about populism, we also talk about a certain logic, a certain style or performance. And it can also be said that populism operates with a political cleavage that is distinct from the typical left-right political cleavage – it's a cleavage between ‘the populists' or ‘the people' at the bottom and ‘the elite' or ‘the anti-populists' at the top. There is non-populist politics as well, of course, politics or discourses that do not have these characteristics or have just one of those two characteristics. For example, they talk to ‘the voter' or ‘the citizen' instead of ‘the people,' or they use ‘the people' as a term, but there's no antagonistic dimension. Vice versa, we might identify certain types of challenger parties, especially on the far right, that articulate a strong anti-establishment discourse, so there is an exclusionary element there, however, the notion of ‘the people' as a collective identity that can supposedly fit the 'whole society' is absent. Arguably, besides these two categories, populist and non-populist, we can have anti-populist discourses as well: politicians, journalists, and other actors may be showing a very open and clear aversion towards the notions of ‘the people,' popular sovereignty, populist politicians, and so on. These discourses often reveal degrees of ‘democratic elitism.' Why did I choose the concept of populism? I wanted to explain how popular identities, or mass identities, are constructed. It was at a time of mass mobilizations against austerity politics that I started thinking about Populism in Power. Discourse and Performativity in Syriza and Donald Trump. I wanted to study how electorates are mobilized in moments of crisis, how emotions are involved in such processes of political identification, and how populism is not exactly and always a negative, a mystifying or exceptional phenomenon, but rather part of everyday political life. We have been talking mostly about populism until now, but my book is specifically about populism in power. You asked me what the intended contribution of the book is. I initially wanted to examine what happens when populists get into power – because when I was thinking about the project, prominent cases were emerging, like Syriza in Greece, but also Podemos in Spain and then later Donald Trump in the US. I started reading into the literature of populism in power and the assumptions about what happens to populism when it moves from the opposition to government did not really convince me. The way populism – and consequently also populism in power -were conceptualized left me puzzled because I thought that scholars focused too much on the consequences of populism for democracy. For example, they would say things like “populists turn authoritarian.” Scholars also focused too much on what happens to populism itself. For example, they would say that “populism fails in power.” However, these are possibilities for other, non-populist actors as well, so why should they be so central in the debate about populism? When talking about populism, all these assumptions end up defining the concept. I don't think that they're defining it well, but these assumptions seem to be very much discernible in the discourse of scholars. So, the idea behind my project was that in order to rethink populism in power we first have to rethink populism, re-work the way we approach it. ÇÖ: Which theories and concepts do you draw on and how do you position your book and scholarship in the existing literature? GV: I draw on theories of discourse and the so-called Essex School of Discourse Analysis in particular, but also theories of political style and socio-cultural approaches to politics. I draw on theories of affect, emotions, and collective identities. Just to name a few authors here, Ernesto Laclau, Chantal Mouffe and Yannis Stavrakakis have all had an important influence on me. Benjamin Moffitt and Pierre Ostiguy have also been important to me, but so have more traditional theories of affect, such as Freud's or Lacan's. I also draw on populism studies, of course. ÇÖ: It's often maintained that there are two main strands of populism: left-wing and right-wing. What separates those two strands from each other, and why is it nonetheless adequate to refer to both as populist? More concretely, why have you chosen to study Trump and Syriza in the same framework? And what does such a juxtaposition and comparison yield? GV: It can be argued that there are many more strands of populism besides left and right. There's also a centrist type of populism, but there are also more peculiar or even idiosyncratic formations that are hard to place on the left-right axis. However, there are indeed two main strands, left- and right-wing. I mentioned earlier that populism is about ‘the people' and ‘the elite,' but it's never just that. There's always an ideology that comes with populism. Ideology is defined by certain programmatic features, certain ideas that have to do with equality or distribution, with inclusion and exclusion in social and political processes. For example, a left populist might be for redistribution of wealth while a right-wing populist might be pro-business. We have these programmatic ideas of the left and the right that can, however, be communicated in different ways. In the case of populism, such classic ideas are communicated in a ‘common-sense' way, in the name of ‘the people' and against ‘the elites.' ‘The people' are suffering because ‘the elites' push for certain policies that don't allow redistribution of wealth. Therefore, ‘the people' should rise and take power, regulate, and achieve the redistribution they want. That's an example of communicating a programmatic leftist agenda in a populist manner. I should add though that there are many different types and subtypes of populism, even among the two main families that we have just been speaking about. Not all left populists are the same, nor all right-wing populists. I chose to study Trump and Syriza because, in my view, they were populists in power who had emerged during the same conjuncture. They emerged as a response to the crisis of neoliberalism, understood not just in the economic, but also in the political sense. Technocrats appeared to be very dominant in politics, and certain types of actors or voters rejected this state of affairs. Of course, the case of Trump is not as straightforward because Trump is a pro-capitalist politician. You also asked me about the difference between Syriza and Trump and whether the results of the comparison were surprising. One could sensibly argue that the comparison of left- and right-wing populism, such as Syriza and Trump, is not very original. However, I wanted to pursue this comparison precisely because it's quite provocative. Even if scholars, politicians, and quality journalists would typically agree that there's a difference between a left-wing and a right-wing populist, there are still many uncritical assumptions in public discourse that fail to make this basic distinction. They use a notion of populism which is little more than a synonym for bad. What I therefore wanted to do was to show that there is a fundamental difference, and that ideology plays a key role: the way they construct the people is different, the content of their discourses and the framing of collective identities are really different in the two cases. ÇÖ: Donald Trump and Syriza were both backed by social movements that may well have been triggered by the financial and social crisis of the preceding years. How similar or different were the respective social movements that led to their rise? Do you see social movements as essential factors in their rise, or have they merely contributed to the political momentum that was unfolding? GV: In both cases, we saw social movements emerge as a response to the crisis of neoliberalism and to the collapse of the markets in the two countries. This may have happened at different times, but the two were part of the same conjuncture: in Greece, this took place a bit later, in 2010 and 2011, while in the US already in 2008 and 2009. At this early stage, the movements had similar demands. There was an internationalist dimension. They somehow communicated with one another, and they even had similar slogans. There was a desire for change among participants in these ‘movements of the squares,' ‘occupy movements,' and so forth. In the US, the representative of that movement to the mainstream political arena was not Donald Trump, but Bernie Sanders. However, Sanders did not make it to be the presidential candidate of the Democratic Party. At the same time, we saw the rise of the Tea Party in the US, which was closer to Trump and his agenda. The Tea Party indeed played a very significant role in supporting Trump and mainstreaming his discourse. Despite such differences, we can say that such social movements might be projecting certain social and political attitudes from below. They might also function as some kind of omen for what is about to come. After all, both movements called out the political establishment, created new opportunities, and revealed a desire for change. ÇÖ: In chapter four, you discuss how Syriza's retreat from its key economic promises damaged the party, especially when it comes to the emotional or effective bond between the party and its supporters. Did Syriza's populist promise fail with Alexis Tsipras' capitulation to the demands of the Troika? GV: I could probably offer a simple answer here and say “yes, it did” but I actually think the question is much more complicated. Recall that left-wing populism is constituted by two different elements: a populist one and a leftist one. Of course, Syriza's discourse was centred around the cancellation of austerity, neoliberalism, and so forth, which managed to mobilize the electorate in a populist way. That's why Syriza eventually won power in 2015. When it failed to deliver the key promise around which the affective climate of the time – its whole populist vibe, if you wish – was organized, we could observe a decline of emotions and identifications with the party. The question is whether that failure had to do with populism or with the leftist component of Syriza's politics? The promise to cancel neoliberal austerity actually had to do with Syriza's anti-neoliberalism. Alexis Tsipras in fact continued to speak as a populist even after the capitulation. Does that mean that he remained a populist? That's difficult to answer. If we understand populism as some sort of communication strategy, then we can argue that Alexis Tsipras had to maintain it. However, if we understand populism as an affective bond between ‘the people' and ‘the elites,' then this was no longer there. I personally think that it was a combination of the two. To understand populism in power, we need to look at notions such as hegemony. The question would then be: did Syriza manage to establish hegemony after its capitulation? The answer is clearly “no, they did not.” ÇÖ: What do you think about the actual policies of populists in power? Do they govern differently? And would you agree that we seem obsessed with what populist leaders or parties represent rather than focusing on what they actually do? Last but not least, how did the policies Syriza and Trump adopt influence their image? GV: That's another difficult question to answer because it doesn't apply to all populists; different populists implement different policies. Some are more successful than others and this often has little to do with populism. It rather has to do with the context and the relative autonomy that they have. For example, Greece is part of the European Union. When Syriza was governing, Greece was subjected to various austerity packages and memoranda, so the room for manoeuvre was limited. Certain populists simply have greater difficulties developing their own policies. But there is also a very interesting contradiction here. Although Syriza did not manage to implement its key promise and reject austerity in Greece, it did implement policies that benefitted lower social strata. However, former supporters of Syriza on the left were not satisfied with these achievements because the party's “big betrayal” was still on their minds and in their hearts. Syriza's efforts to introduce a bit of social policy within a rather restricted economic and political framework did not translate into electoral support. We have seen the popularity of the party decline. As opposed to that, Trump was much more autonomous in power. Many scholars have shown that he did not manage to pass many new policies. I remember that even The Atlantic called Donald Trump the worst president in US history. And if we consider how he handled COVID-19 and other important areas, his policy record was very poor indeed. Despite his poor policy record, his base continued to identify passionately with him. Politics is not necessarily about rationality, it is not necessarily about policy choices, and how well politicians do in terms of implementing them. It's more about the ways in which people identify with a political actor. In 2020, Trump in fact received twelve million more votes  than in 2016 – which is not to overlook that there was much more polarization, and many more people went to vote in 2020

Pressemitteilung des Wissenschaftszentrums Berlin für Sozialforschung, 7. Juni 2024, "AfD wählen macht unglücklich - WZB-Studie zeigt Zusammenhang zwischen AfD-Unterstützung und Wohlbefinden", https://www.wzb.eu/de/pressemitteilung/afd-waehlen-macht-ungluecklichDie Studie "Support for a right-wing populist party and subjective well-being: Experimental and survey evidence from Germany", https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0303133(Samiras Kolumne dazu: https://www.spiegel.de/kultur/das-elend-der-afd-waehler-sind-sie-staendig-unzufrieden-vielleicht-liegt-es-daran-dass-sie-extremisten-waehlen-kolumne-a-e74c539a-6bce-4086-ac1d-8de0ce73d5c2)Byung-Chul Han, "Im Schwarm - Ansichten des Digitalen", https://www.matthes-seitz-berlin.de/buch/im-schwarm.htmlTechnologietheoretiker L.M. Sacasas, Essay „We Are Not Living in a Simulation, We Are Living In the Past“, https://theconvivialsociety.substack.com/p/we-are-not-living-in-a-simulationCharlie Warzel über die Thesen von L.M. Sacasas und die "Stuckness": How the Internet Became a Doom Loop, https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters/archive/2022/06/internet-social-media-reactionary-doom-loop/676851/Chantal Mouffe, "Für einen linken Populismus", aus dem Englischen von Richard Barth, https://www.suhrkamp.de/buch/chantal-mouffe-fuer-einen-linken-populismus-t-9783518127292– PIRATENSENDER POWERPLAY LIVE –Tickets für unsere Tour findet ihr hier.25.09.24 Frankfurt, myTicket Jahrhunderthalle Club07.10.24 Berlin, Colosseum08.10.24 Leipzig, Kupfersaal10.10.24 Hamburg, Markthalle12.10.24 München, LEO1713.10.24 Stuttgart, Im Wizemann (Studio)19.10.24 Düsseldorf, Savoy Theater21.10.24 Köln, Comedia Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Bart Geeraedts in gesprek met Marthe Kerkwijk en Peter Huijzer over de Summerschool Kritische theorie. Hoe kan de filosofie bijdragen aan een rechtvaardige maatschappij? Een gesprek over de geschiedenis van de kritische theorie, Theodor W. Adorno, Herbert Marcuse en Chantal Mouffe komen onder andere aan bod.  De Summerschool Kritische theorie is van 14 tm 18 augustus

Programmamanager bij de ISVW Marthe Kerkwijk vertelt in deze podcast aan Bart Geeraedts over onze nieuwe beroepsopleiding Macht en moed die in september van start gaat bij de ISVW. Hoe kun je binnen het ambtenarenapparaat een cultuur mogelijk maken waarin er ruimte is voor tegenspraak? Aan de hand van Jurgen Habermas en Chantal Mouffe legt Kerkwijk uit dat het goed is als ambtenaren meer van hun eigen leefwereld binnen laten in het bureaucratisch systeem van de overheid. Door filosofische gesprekstechnieken zoals het moreel beraad of het socratisch gesprek leren ze als vrije individuen van gedachten te wisselen. Dat maakt dat ze eerder verantwoordelijkheid voor hun handelen en zich minder snel verschuilen achter regeltjes.

A agroecologia não pode ser uma definição, tem que ser conceito e mobilizador político.Não pode ser um conceito que padroniza a prática, mas práticas que ajudam a tornar o conceito ferramenta de superação..Inauguradas as férias, é momento de estudo!.Referências:Texto: A agroecologia nas lutas sociais: expressão de um conflito intermetabólico, de Jorge Romano e Paulo Petersen. Disponibilizado na Revista Margem Esquerda 41, de setembro de 2023, pela Editora Boitempo.Terry Marsden. The Sage Habdbook of Nature.Ernesto Laclau e Chantal Mouffe. Hegemonía y estrategia socialista: hacia una radicalización de la democracia.Site de olho no ruralista para acompanhar: https://deolhonosruralistas.com.br/Vídeo sobre agroecologia no nosso insta: https://www.instagram.com/reel/Cy6QOOqLVot/.Drive das leituras:https://mega.nz/folder/UYNwQZZS#rCNoahoz13hVy7Elyc4Ymg.CUPONS DE DESCONTO:#MorcegoNaAutonomia (cupom de desconto de 20% nos livros da Autonomia Literária) - https://autonomialiteraria.com.br/loja/.Não se esqueça de nos seguir nas redes sociais para ficar sempre por dentro dos nossos conteúdos:.Twitter/instagram: @morcego_marcos_Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/livescavernadomorcegoTwitch: twitch.tv/cavernamorcego.Colabore com a Caverna do Morcego, seja um apoiador:Apoio coletivo:apoia.se/cavernamorcegopicpay: @ marcos.morcegopix e email de contato: podcastmorcego@gmail.com.Equipe:Roteiro/edição : Marcos MorcegoVoz/Postagem: Marcos Morcego

Streit gehört dazu: eine Demokratie lebt von der Auseinandersetzung, vom Ringen um das bessere Argument. Aber wieviel ist zu viel? Bringt mehr Streit nicht auch eine Gesellschaft auseinander? Der Begriff der "gespaltenen Gesellschaft" wird oft genannt. Der FAZ-Herausgeber, Autor und Soziologe Jürgen Kaube hat darüber ein Buch geschrieben. Denise und Sebastian sprechen mit ihm über die Notwendigkeit zu streiten, über wirklich gespaltene Gesellschaften und darüber, was wir im Streit eigentlich alles aushalten können. Beim Blick in die Philosophiegeschichte werden die Ideen der belgischen Politikwissenschaftlerin und Philosophin Chantal Mouffe überprüft. Sie plädiert für noch mehr aktive Auseinandersetzung und Konfrontation. In der Rubrik "Die andere Seite" erzählt Ingo Zamperoni von der gespaltenen Gesellschaft in den USA und davon, was uns in Deutschland doch alles verbindet. Buchtipps: "Die gespaltene Gesellschaft" - Jürgen Kaube, Rowohlt Verlag 2022 "Anderland: die USA unter Trump" - Ingo Zamperoni, Ullstein Verlag 2018 Und noch ein Tipp: Ihr wollt gleichberechtigt leben - in Partnerschaft, Job und Familie - aber irgendwie kommt immer was dazwischen? Die Alltagsfeministinnen zeigen euch, wie ihr eure Ideale lebt. Sonja Koppitz ist Journalistin, Johanna Fröhlich Zapata ist Coach für Alltagsfeminismus. Dieser Coaching-Podcast hat ein Ziel: Ein faires Leben für alle! Jeden Dienstag eine neue Folge. https://www.ardaudiothek.de/episode/die-alltagsfeministinnen/die-alltagsfeministinnen-trailer/rbbkultur/10777229/

As the Radical Thoughts Podcast is no longer active, I am making these old bonus episodes from Patreon publicly available so that listeners don't have to pay for an inactive podcast. - Patrick In this interview, Patrick sits down with the scholar Anton Jäger to talk more about Chantal Mouffe's political theory, the rise of left populism, and the contemporary shape of political struggle. Jäger's piece "Making Sense of Populism" can be read for free online.

Comment la philosophie et l'art peuvent nous aider à penser et à agir en ces temps d'urgence climatique et de crises multiples ? La philosophe Chantal Mouffe veut lancer une révolution démocratique verte (« La révolution démocratique verte », Albin Michel). Et le critique d'art Nicolas Bourriaud estime que l'art du 21ième siècle sera créole ou ne sera pas (« Inclusions. Esthétique du capitalocène », PUF). Les deux intellectuels dialoguent ensemble le temps d'une rencontre inédite. Cet échange s'est déroulé le 27 août 2023 au festival Les Inattendues à Tournai. Merci pour votre écoute Dans quel Monde on vit, c'est également en direct tous les samedi de 10h à 11h sur www.rtbf.be/lapremiere Retrouvez tous les épisodes de Dans quel Monde on vit sur notre plateforme Auvio.be : https://auvio.rtbf.be/emission/8524 Et si vous avez apprécié ce podcast, n'hésitez pas à nous donner des étoiles ou des commentaires, cela nous aide à le faire connaître plus largement.

For September, we read Hegemony and Socialist Strategy by Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe! Although we were late we did finish the book, we discussed the definitions, post-marxism, direct democracy, and starting compounds in minecraft. Youtube summary - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEnjZZzcJ4Y October - Men, Women, and Chainsaws by Carol J. Clover November - Half-Earth Socialism by Drew Pendergrass and Troy Vettese December - How to Read Lacan by Zizkek

Clique aqui e leia o artigo completo!

W tym odcinku Transmisji krytycznych wszystkie wymienione w tytule słowa na „po-” – i jeszcze więcej! ⭐ A ściślej, rozmawiamy o jednej z najsłynniejszych książek opracowujących temat teorii lewicowej polityki: „Hegemonia i socjalistyczna strategia. Przyczynek do projektu radykalnej polityki demokratycznej” (1985). To książka, która narobiła w świecie teorii krytycznych sporo zamieszania – a koncepcje demokracji radykalnej, hegemonii i polityczności Laclaua i Mouffe wciąż cieszą się ogromnym zainteresowaniem. Nasza Transmisja to świetna okazja, żeby się z nimi zapoznać! --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/transmisje/message

Die provokante These der belgischen Politikwissenschaftlerin Chantal Mouffe: Wir brauchen auch einen Linkspopulismus, um Werte wie soziale Gerechtigkeit, Gleichheit und Ökologie mehrheitsfähig zu machen. Rezension von Gerhard Klas. Aus dem Englischen von Ulrike Bischoff Suhrkamp Verlag, 99 Seiten, 16 Euro ISBN 978-3-518-12799-5

Condamné à l'interdiction d'enseigner suite à Nuremberg en raison de ses compromissions avec le Régime National-Socialiste, le professeur de droit déchu et défenseur de la Révolution-Conservatrice Allemande Carl Schmitt s'est illustré par l'écriture de nombreux essais. Chacun d'entre eux a modifié la pratique du droit ainsi que la perception universitaire du politique. Ses thèses sont autant utilisées par les penseurs autoritaires de droite (Julius Evola ou Guillaume Faye) que par des fanatiques de la Démocratie (Habermas ou Chantal Mouffe). Bien que subtil et profond, il semblerait qu'inconsciemment, et involontairement, la philosophie juridique de Carl Schmitt soit ce qui donne à Judge Dredd ses aspects les plus divertissants. Judge Dredd est une série de comics matures. Originalement, il s'agissait d'une caricature poussée à son paroxysme du Thatcherisme : un marché libre sans entraves et un État limité à une Police particulièrement puissante. La qualité du comics finira par jouer un tour à son rédacteur et à transformer Judge Dredd en égérie de la Justice répressive. RAGE Site : rage-culture.com/ Tipeee: fr.tipeee.com/rage Twitter : twitter.com/RageCultureMag Discord : discord.gg/GXeSJ7XuNS Instagram : www.instagram.com/rage_cult/?hl=fr Telegram : t.me/rage_culture Facebook : www.facebook.com/RageCultureMag

durée : 00:39:22 - Le Temps du débat - par : Emmanuel Laurentin - Dans une interview du 22 mars, Emmanuel Macron a dénoncé une contestation issue d'une foule illégitime, se posant en garant de l'ordre démocratique. Alors que le conflit social et politique se poursuit, est-il possible de concilier l'ordre institutionnel avec la radicalité du débat en démocratie ? - invités : Olivier Mongin essayiste , directeur de la publication de la revue Esprit; Chantal Mouffe philosophe, philosophe politique , professeure de sciences politiques et de relations internationales à l'Université de Westminster; Myriam Revault d'Allonnes Philosophe, chercheure associée au CEVIPOF (Centre de recherches politiques de Sciences Po) et professeure émérite des universités à l'École pratique des hautes études.

durée : 00:59:46 - Le 13/14 - par : Bruno DUVIC - La philosophe Chantal Mouffe, qui a naguère inspiré Jean-Luc Mélenchon et Benoit Hamon avec son concept de populisme de gauche publie un nouvel ouvrage aux éditions Albin Michel : la révolution démocratique verte.

Chantal Mouffe is one of the world's leading left thinkers on power and populism. In her latest book, she proposes the creation of a broad coalition of movements under the banner of a Green Democratic Revolution to confront the impending ecological crisis.Mouffe was joined in conversation with James Schneider, co-founder of Momentum and author of Our Bloc: How We Win.Find more events at the Bookshop website: https://lrb.me/eventspodSubscribe to Close Readings: https://lrb.me/closereadings Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Después del intento de asesinato a la vicepresidenta, Cande López nos ayuda encontrar un horizonte para comprender que hacemos como colectivo.

«Hegemonie und radikale Demokratie. Zur Dekonstruktion des Marxismus» (1991) lautet der Titel des bekanntesten Werkes von Chantal Mouffe und Ernesto Laclau, das 1985 auf Englisch erschienen ist und einer der maßgeblichen Beiträge zur kritischen Sozialtheorie und Demokratietheorie wurde. Das Buch ist ein Vorschlag, die strategische Krise der Linken zu überwinden, der sie sich mit der Entstehung der Neuen Sozialen Bewegungen gegenübersah. Erklärungen durch ökonomische Determinanten, Ableitungen aus Produktionsverhältnissen oder in Begriffen der Klasse wurden herausgefordert durch eine neuartige Konfliktualität des Sozialen, also durch neue Themen, Akteure, Gegenstände des Protests. Es sind diese plötzlich auftretenden Formen der Kämpfe, mit denen niemand rechnet. Laclau und Mouffe argumentieren deswegen gegen das Gesetz der Notwendigkeit und für ein Verständnis der Kontingenz. Nicht durch äußere Ursachen lässt sich die Einheit der Bewegungen erklären, sondern nur durch symbolische Prozesse. Als Vorläufer eines solchen Verständnisses von sozialen Bewegungen begreifen sie Rosa Luxemburg und Antonio Gramsci. Dessen Begriff der Hegemonie wollen sie diskurstheoretisch weiter ausarbeiten. «Gesellschaft» ist nach ihrem Verständnis keine Totalität von Vermittlungen. Vielmehr ergibt sie sich aus artikulatorischen Praktiken – und für eine bestimmte Phase stellt sie hegemonial den Fluss der Bedeutungen still, indem sie einen besonderen Konflikt und Antagonismus totalisiert. Die Linke muss sich demnach als fähig erweisen, das soziale Feld zu polarisieren und antagonistische Bedeutungen zu erzeugen. Gleichzeitig aber muss sie im Blick behalten, dass keine Bedeutung eines Kampfes sich jemals endgültig fixieren lässt. Auch wenn sich nicht konkret erwarten lässt, welche Konflikte ausbrechen werden, wird jede Form von Gesellschaft und jede Hegemonie auf unerwartete Weise neue Subjekte und neue Antagonismen hervorbringen. Darauf soll sich die Linke einstellen, so der Rat von Chantal Mouffe; sie kann nicht erwarten, dass es einmal zu einem letzten Antagonismus kommt und der demokratische Prozess abgeschlossen werden kann. Zu Gast bei Alex Demirović ist in dieser Folge der Erziehungswissenschaftler Steffen Wittig von der Universität Kassel.

No episódio de hoje conversamos com Cristina Consani, professora na UFPR, sobre a atividade filosófica que toma o Direito, a Ciência Jurídica, como objeto de sua análise. Falamos acerca da possibilidade de uma definição para o Direito a partir de Herbert Hart, Ronald Dworkin e Joseph Raz. A Filosofia do Direito de Jeremy Waldron bem como seu debate com Dworkin e os limites da tolerância tratando mais detidamente do discurso de ódio. Cristina analisa também o descompasso entre os âmbitos normativo e descritivo da relação entre poder judiciário e política. Por fim, falamos sobre a sua pesquisa atual a respeito do consenso e conflito na política internacional, pensando os modelos propostos por Habermas e Chantal Mouffe.

En cette fin juin 2022, notre partenaire POUR a organisé une conférence de Chantal Mouffe sur le campus de l'Université Libre de Bruxelles, avec pour sujet : La radicalisation de la démocratie est la seule solution. Chantal Mouffe, philosophe politique, professeure à Harvard, au CNRS, à l'université de Westminster à Londres où elle dirige encore le Centre […] The post Rencontre avec Chantal Mouffe, philosophe, inspiratrice d'une « Révolution démocratique verte »  appeared first on Fréquence Terre.

En cette fin juin 2022, notre partenaire POUR a organisé une conférence de Chantal Mouffe sur le campus de l'Université Libre de Bruxelles, avec pour sujet : La radicalisation de la démocratie est la seule solution. Chantal Mouffe, philosophe politique, professeure à Harvard, au CNRS, à l'université de Westminster à Londres où elle dirige encore le Centre […]

Welche Freiheit lohnt es, verteidigt zu werden? Wieso lässt sich besonders in Krisenzeiten ein Erstarken des Populismus und des Faschismus beobachten? Und woher kommt die verbreitete Angst, dass schon die kleinste Einschränkung der individuellen Freiheit automatisch in der Knechtschaft mündet? Vier Bücher zu diesem Thema im neuen Suhrkamp espresso. Tempolimit? Nein, danke! Selbst angesichts des rasant voranschreitenden Klimawandels hat sich in weiten Teilen des politischen Diskurses die Ablehnung von Verboten und die Betonung von individueller Freiheit als schlagkräftiges Argument etabliert. Philipp Lepenies geht diesem Aspekt in seinem Buch Verbot und Verzicht nach und beschreibt, wie stark sich die Ideale des Neoliberalismus in den Köpfen festgesetzt haben. Aus politischen Debatten ist der Begriff des »Populismus« kaum wegzudenken, doch noch immer herrscht Uneinigkeit, was darunter eigentlich genau zu verstehen ist. In seinem gleichnamigen Sammelband hat Herausgeber Kolja Möller rund ein Jahrhundert Populismusdiskussion versammelt – mit Texten u. a. von Antonio Gramsci, Isaiah Berlin, Chantal Mouffe, Stuart Hall, Ernesto Laclau, Jan-Werner Müller und Karin Priester – und bietet eine umfassende Einführung in den Forschungsstand zu dieser hochaktuellen Debatte. »Der Faschismus ist Furcht vor der Freiheit, geweckt durch eine Ahnung von Freiheit.« – auf diese Weise definiert Paul Mason das Phänomen, mit dem er sich in seinem gleichnamigen Buch beschäftigt. Für Mason ist Faschismus nicht zuletzt ein Gedankengebäude, in dessen Zentrum eine ethnisch definierte Mehrheit steht, die sich als Opfer emanzipatorischer Bestrebungen sieht und alles ablehnt, was sie in ihrem Widerstand dagegen einschränken könnte. In Faschistische Ideologie, das 2019 in einer Neuauflage im Verbrecher Verlag erschien, nimmt Zeev Sternhell eine genaue Bestimmung des Begriffes Faschismus aus seiner historischen und ideologischen Entwicklung heraus vor. Die Bücher der Folge: Verbot und Verzicht von Philipp Lepenies: http://shrk.vg/VerbotVerzicht-P Populismus, hg. von Kolja Möller: http://shrk.vg/Populismus-P Faschismus von Paul Mason: http://shrk.vg/Faschismus-P Faschistische Ideologie von Zeev Sternhell: https://www.verbrecherverlag.de/book/detail/935https://www.verbrecherverlag.de/book/detail/935

More Videos, texts and podcasts of the series on: art-of-assembly.net The assemblies of the numerous square occupations during the last decade have often been laboratories of radical forms of democracy, experimenting with non-hierarchical structures and consensus models instead of majority voting. While watching these movements with sympathy, political theorist Chantal Mouffe emphasises also the necessity of dissensus, of an agonistic pluralism in which adversaries openly fight for their hegemonic projects. Philosopher and sociologist Didier Eribon reflects on the conditions and the limits of such mobilisations and insists on the unsurpassable plurality of movements like the gilets jaunes in France, or more recently, the massive strikes and protests against the demolition of the public sector, as well as the demonstrations against racism etc. In the 7th edition of “The Art of Assembly” Eribon and Mouffe discuss how much agonism social movements can bare and how the diversity of democratic demands should be addressed. The Art of Assembly – Gesellschaftsspiele, a series by Florian Malzacher and brut Wien, in cooperation with Münchner Kammerspiele, Wiener Festwochen and Volksbühne am Rosa-Luxemburg-Platz

The assemblies of the numerous square occupations during the last decade have often been laboratories of radical forms of democracy, experimenting with non-hierarchical structures and consensus models instead of majority voting. While watching these movements with sympathy, political theorist Chantal Mouffe emphasises also the necessity of dissensus, of an agonistic pluralism in which adversaries openly fight for their hegemonic projects. Philosopher and sociologist Didier Eribon reflects on the conditions and the limits of such mobilisations and insists on the unsurpassable plurality of movements like the gilets jaunes in France, or more recently, the massive strikes and protests against the demolition of the public sector, as well as the demonstrations against racism etc. In the 7th edition of “The Art of Assembly” Eribon and Mouffe discuss how much agonism social movements can bare and how the diversity of democratic demands should be addressed.

Jules speaks with Matthew Lowery, one of the cohosts of the Acid Horizon Podcast, about the political works of Carl Schmitt. This conversation is part 4 in the arch of this show, and would naturally follow after our previous episodes discussing Heidegger, Fascism, and Traditionalism. Matthew explains to us who Carl Schmitt was, why one would wish to engage with his work, and makes clear that Carl Schmitt was a Nazi bastard but his ideas are still relevant to contemporary politics. Links and additional articles… Interview with Ric Ortiz on Working People Matthew Lowery on Twitter Acid Horizon on Twitter Carl Schmitt on Wiki Slavoj Zizek, "Against the Populist Temptation" Carl Schmitt on Goodreads "Agamben and Radical Politics" (edited) by Daniel McLoughlin - "Capitalism as Religion" is the specific essay in the collection Jules references when speaking about money not being backed up by gold Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe on Wiki Permanent Links… --- Follow us on Social Media: Twitter Facebook Medium Patreon --- Join the discussion: https://www.reddit.com/r/noeasyanswerspodcast --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/noeasyanswers/message --- Visit our Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/noeasyanswers --- Hang out with us on Discord: https://discord.gg/4RHEEhdxy5 --- One-off Contribution: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/julestaylormusic --- Comments, concerns, criticisms, and vitriol: noeasyanswerspodcast@gmail.com --- Music provided by: Self-Taut --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/noeasyanswers/support

Even though the world is richer today than ever before, a large number of people do not share in those riches, even in democracies. So, what does living in a democracy mean for people who simultaneously confront persistent deprivations and increasing inequalities? Do people living in poverty absorb the universalistic ideas associated with democracy? Or do their precarious lives overwhelm them so much so that they cannot act beyond particularistic concerns? These are the questions that Indrajit Roy tackles in Politics of the Poor: Negotiating Democracy in Contemporary India. Indrajit Roy is Senior Lecturer in Global Development Politics at the University of York. "Why the subaltern chose, not Hindutva, but Trinamool in Bengal""India: a year after Narendra Modi's re-election the country's democracy is developing fascistic undertones""Contesting Consensus. Disputing Inequality: Agonistic Subjectivities in Rural Bihar"Twitter: Indrajit Roy Dan Banik In Pursuit of Developmenthttps://in-pursuit-of-development.simplecast.com/ 

“Both the element of equality and the element of popular sovereignty, which are crucial values of democracy, have been left aside.“ Chantal Mouffe is a Belgian political theorist and former Professor at the University of Westminster. She also held research positions at Harvard, Cornell, the University of California, the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, and others. Together with Ernesto Laclau, Professor Mouffe co-authored a very influential “Hegemony and Socialist Strategy“ – the magnum opus of the so-called Essex School of discourse analysis. As an expert on democratic theory, in this week´s #Forum2000online Chat Professor Mouffe talked about the crisis that liberal democracies around the globe seem to face. In this respect, the pandemics exacerbated the existing problems but also brought about completely new challenges in terms of exercising democratic powers. “People are already accepting a series of limitations of their liberty which they would never have accepted before.“ The interview was recorded on May 6, 2021, and moderated by Arzu Geybulla, Azerbaijanian journalist and member of the Forum 2000 Program Council. #Forum2000online For more information about our activities follow our web and social media: Web: https://www.forum2000.cz Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/forum.2000 Twitter: https://twitter.com/Forum_2000

วาระนี้ #Analysand มาพูดคุยต่อประเด็นกับคุณสรวิศ โดยเริ่มจากหนังสือ Sarah Jaffe, Work Won't Love You Back: How Devotion to Our Jobs Keeps Us Exploited, Exhausted, and Alone, First edition (New York: Bold Type Books, 2021). ขอขอบคุณเพลงเปิดจาก Solitude is Bliss ชื่อว่า 'ย้ายรัง', ขอบคุณสหายศิริวัชรผู้ช่วยปรับ/ตัดแต่งเสียง, ขอบคุณสตูดิโอของ Podcast 'ปั่นประสาท' และขอบคุณผู้ฟังทุกท่านเป็นอย่างสูงค้าบ หากผู้ฟังท่านใดสนใจติชมสามารถ comment ไว้ได้ที่ SoundCloud, YouTube, @the_analysand ใน Twitter, หรือส่ง E-mail มาได้ที่ analysand@protonmail.com และช่วยกันกด Like, Share, และ Subscribe ได้นะฮะ [หนังสือ บทความ และข่าวที่เกี่ยวข้องบางส่วน] - David Graeber, Bullshit Jobs: A Theory (Penguin, 2019). - Miya Tokumitsu, Do What You Love: And Other Lies about Success and Happiness, First Regan Arts hardcover edition (New York: Regan Arts, 2015). - Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe, Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics, Radical Thinkers, Second edition (London: Verso, 2014). - สนใจขยายขอบเขตของงานและความคิดเกี่ยวกับมัน สามารถอ่านได้จากบทความแปลและงานเขียนของสหายรวิพล ดังเช่น: http://www.dindeng.com/wages-for-students/ , http://www.dindeng.com/wages-for-students/ , http://www.dindeng.com/imagine-there-is-no-work/ - ข่าวที่ AOC ประกาศจ่ายเงินให้ intern โปรดดู: https://www.newsweek.com/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-will-pay-interns-15-least-hour-unlike-96-percent-1244265 - ว่าด้วยอุดมการณ์ แฟนตาซี และเอนจอยเมนต์ ที่คุณ สรวิศ พูดไว้ละเอียดกว่านี้ โปรดดู: https://youtu.be/x4rog8C9vKw

A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.My thoughts on polarization have changed over the past few years. On the one hand, polarization can be a danger to democracy. Milan Svolik among others have shown how strong ideological positions lead some voters to support leaders they know are undemocratic. Moreover, democracy depends on the willingness of both parties to make compromises to govern effectively. But on the other hand, there are issues where compromise itself is undemocratic. How do you compromise on the right to vote? Is it polarizing to refuse to waiver on issues of human rights? What about the rule of law? Sometimes compromise does not protect democracy, but endangers it.A lot of intelligent people have strong opinions about polarization. But few of them have thought deeply about the subject or read much of the literature. It’s a complicated subject. Last year Ezra Klein published a surprising book called Why We’re Polarized. It’s actually an impressive work of scholarship from someone who does not consider himself a scholar. But when he says “we’re polarized” he refers to an American experience. He largely ignores the polarization around the world in places like Venezuela, Poland, and India. So I reached out to Thomas Carothers and Andrew O’Donohue because I wanted to better understand polarization not just in the United States but as a wider global phenomenon. Tom and Andrew are the editors of s remarkable volume called Democracies Divided from 2019. Last year they published a supplement called Political Polarization in South and Southeast Asia: Old Divisions, New Dangers. Tom is the Senior Vice President for studies at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He is a legendary scholar in the field of democracy promotion. Andrew is a nonresident assistant at Carnegie as well. He is also in the PhD program in Harvard’s Department of Government. Together they offer reflections on polarization in different contexts. They help explain how each is different and where they commonalities. Most of all this broader examination helps us think about polarization in very different ways.Email me at democracyparadoxblog@gmail.comFollow me on Twitter @DemParadoxKey LinksDemocracies Divided: The Global Challenge of Political PolarizationPolitical Polarization in South and Southeast Asia: Old Divisions, New DangersRejuvenating Democracy PromotionRelated ContentCan Democracy Survive the Internet? Nate Persily and Josh Tucker on Social Media and DemocracyLee Drutman Makes the Case for Multiparty Democracy in AmericaThoughts on Chantal Mouffe's On the Political

Le point sur les manifestations de soutien à l'opposant Alexeï Navalny en Russie avec Tamara Alteresco; reportage de Michel Labrecque sur les 20 ans du Forum social mondial; état des lieux du mouvement altermondialiste avec Chantal Mouffe; retour sur la situation des élèves en difficulté avec Myriam Fimbry; entretien avec Pierre-Olivier Pineault sur les forages exploratoires au large de Terre-Neuve; situation des étudiants internationaux en région avec Catherine Paradis; entrevue avec le professeur de droit Thomas Burelli sur le statut de réfugié climatique; et analyse, par l'expert de l'olympisme Armand de Rendinger, des enjeux d'un maintien ou d'une annulation des Jeux olympiques d'été de Tokyo.

Political philosopher Chantal Mouffe talks to hosts Tom Zoellner and Aida Baghernejad about the varieties of populism, our current moment, and the future of democracy.

In our third episode, we talk about Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe’s Hegemony and Socialist Strategy, the landmark text of post-Marxism. Both serious arguments and slam dunks ensue.patreon.com/leftofphilosophy | @leftofphilReferences:Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe, Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics. Second Edition (New York: Verso, 2001)Karl Marx, “Preface to A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy.” In Selected Writings. Ed. Lawrence H. Simon. (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1994)Music: Vintage Memories by Schematist | schematist.bandcamp.com

durée : 00:32:34 - La Grande table idées - par : Olivia Gesbert - Elle a théorisé le "populisme de gauche" et inspiré des mouvements comme Podemos. La philosophe Chantal Mouffe est notre invitée aujourd'hui pour cette semaine spéciale Europe. - réalisation : Thomas Beau - invités : Chantal Mouffe philosophe, philosophe politique , professeure de sciences politiques et de relations internationales à l'Université de Westminster

"La democracia ha sido vaciada de contenido", dice la teórica política Chantal Mouffe. La lucha por la igualdad y la soberanía popular han sido eliminados como valores, pero surgieron resistencias que cuestionan la idea de que no hay alternativa. Por derecha y por izquierda vivimos un momento populista. En el sexto episodio de Batalla Cultural hablamos sobre pueblo, oligarquía, feminismos y poder. | Una producción original de Anfibia Podcast. Conducción: Iván Schuliaquer. Producción: Ezequiel Fernández Bravo. Edición: Radio La Otra. Diseño: Sebastián Angresano.

Vandaag hebben we een bespreking van een ideologisch antwoord op Chantal Mouffe's Left Populism dat binnen bepaalde cirkels van de SP erg pupolair is. Ellen Meiksins Wood's book The Retreat from Class: A New 'True' Socialism. De versie die we lezen is van Verso en is een herziene editie uit 1998.

The United States has a long tradition of direct democracy through referendums dating back to the early years of the republic. Nearly every state today has some form of referendums or ballot initiatives. Yet the United States has never had a national referendum. John Matsusaka points out that from a comparative perspective, this is unusual. Nearly all other democracies have held national referendums, and many have made them a regular part of their political process. Matsusaka emphasizes tradition should not be an obstacle. He writes, “American democracy is not a static system created by the Founders, but a work in progress, an evolving set of practices that each generation has updated, largely by extending the scope of popular participation.” I share an optimistic conversation with John Matsusaka about the possibilities for direct democracy. There is a little bit of talk about Brexit and a few other countries like Switzerland are mentioned, but we mainly focus on the United States. John thinks the time is past due to introduce direct democracy on the national level. He writes in his book, “Although the Founders got some things wrong, they got many things right. We would like to know if omitting direct democracy was one of the things they got right, or one of their mistakes.”John Matsusaka is the Charles F. Sexton Chair in American Enterprise at the University of Southern California and the author of Let the People Rule: How Direct Democracy Can Meet the Populist Challenge. An economist by training, he works on topics related to political economy, direct democracy, corporate finance, and corporate governance. His article, “Corporate Diversification, Value Maximization, and Organizational Capabilities,” was awarded the Merton Miller Prize for most significant paper by the Journal of Business; and his article "Ballot Order Effects in Direct Democracy Elections" received the Duncan Black Prize for best paper in Public Choice.Thanks to Apes of the State for permission to use their tracks "The Internet Song" and "Bill Collector's Theme Song." You can find their music on Spotify or their Bandcamp. Thanks to James Schneider at Princeton University Press for my copy of Let the People Rule: How Direct Democracy Can Meet the Populist Challenge and for an introduction to John Matsusaka.Please visit my blog at www.democracyparadox.com. I have written 70 reviews of both classic and contemporary works of political science with an emphasis on democracy. This week I reviewed On the Political by Chantal Mouffe. Please visit the website and read my book reviews. And don't forget to subscribe to keep up with future episodes.

Vandaag hebben we een boekbespreking van Chantal Mouffe's boek "For a left populism" en bespreken we ook nog eerst de actualiteiten rondom Voor14.

In dem zweiten Teil zu „Vice – Der Zweite Mann“ führen wir in die Theorie der radikalen Demokratie nach Chantal Mouffe ein. Zunächst werden einige Grundbegriffe geklärt: Antagonismus, Kontingenz, Hegemonie, Politik und das Politische. Dann stellen wir das hegemoniale Projekt der radikalen Demokratie vor, um in einem letzten Schritt Mouffes Anwendung ihrer Theorie auf die internationale Ebene zu folgen. Dabei beziehen wir uns wieder auf die zuvor erörterte Thematik des Films und im speziellen auf das sogenannte „war on terror – Narrativ“.

Leading political thinker Chantal Mouffe proposes a new way to define left populism today: it is more than an ideology or a political regime. It is a way of doing politics that can take various forms but emerges when one aims at building a new subject of collective action — the people. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

A quick review of the important takeaways from my discussion with Prof. Lewis Gordon.Deeyah Khan, White Right: Meeting the Enemy:https://youtu.be/rxP4B374Os8The Guardian, “‘It’s not fair, not right’: How America treats its black farmers”: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/30/america-black-farmers-louisiana-sugarcaneNew York Times 1619 Podcast:“Land of Our Fathers, Part 1”: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/04/podcasts/1619-slavery-sugar-farm-land.html“Land of Our Fathers, Part 2”: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/11/podcasts/1619-slavery-farm-loan-discrimination.htmlRobert Evans, “Behind the Police” podcast: https://www.iheart.com/podcast/1119-behind-the-police-63877803/Louisville Courier-Journal, "Three Percenters plan 'boots on the ground' in Louisville to counter black militia":https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/2020/07/23/three-percenters-plan-response-nfac-march-louisville/5491690002/NPR, "CAHOOTS: How Social Workers and Police Share Responsibilities in Eugene, Oregon":https://www.npr.org/2020/06/10/874339977/cahoots-how-social-workers-and-police-share-responsibilities-in-eugene-oregonDemocracy May Not Exist, But We’ll Miss It When It’s Gone, by Astra Taylor:https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781250179845Red Pepper, interview with Chantal Mouffe and Ernesto Laclau, “Heats, Minds and Radical Democracy”: https://www.redpepper.org.uk/hearts-minds-and-radical-democracy/The Guardian, “Human brain is predisposed to negative stereotypes, study finds”:https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/nov/01/human-brain-is-predisposed-to-negative-stereotypes-new-study-suggestsThe American Conservative, “How Police Became A Standing Army”:https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-police-became-a-standing-army/Ibram X. Kendi on DemocracyNow:https://youtu.be/_oQXki0hG9wJeff Schoep at NYU, The Veritas Forum:https://youtu.be/xP8bP4hs1p0Music by Chafouin, licensed through Creative Commons:https://freemusicarchive.org/music/Chafouin/a_suffa_comme_i/Chafouin_-_a_suffa_comme_i_-_01_Jessica_92Patreon:https://www.patreon.com/PoliteiaPod

This is a preview for our latest bonus episode. Patrick interviews Anton Jäger - a PhD candidate in history at the University of Cambridge working on populism in the US - on the political theory of Chantal Mouffe and its connection to contemporary political movements.If you want to hear the full episode, you can subscribe to our Patreon for $3 a month. Patreon subscribers receive a monthly bonus episode in addition to our regular reading series.

This is the second half of our conversation on Chantal Mouffe's The Return of The Political. We delve further into the trap of idealism, NGO-styled radicalism, and the influence of populism on real-life movements like Podemos and Britain's New Labour.Our next bonus episode will discuss Left Populism in theory and practice with special guest Anton Jäger. If you want to hear the discussion, support us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/radicalthoughtsThe next book for discussion is The Politics of Friendship by Jacques Derrida.You can check out the Aufhebunga Bunga episode we mentioned here.

In this episode, we begin our discussion of Chantal Mouffe's book The Return of The Political. We discuss the concept of the friend/enemy distinction, debates between Liberalism and Civic Republicanism, and whether or not political struggles have to remain fragmentary and non-universal.We decided to divide our discussion of Mouffe into two episodes because 1) the discussion was pretty long anyway, and 2) we uploaded more content than usual this month so our hosting subscription was running out of space until it renews. We'll upload part 2 at the start of August and follow up with our next discussion later that month.Next Month's Read: The Politics of Friendship by Jacques Derrida

In this special bonus episode, Patrick talks with his friend Misha about current events. The discussion touches on everything from rural/urban divides, the complications of identity and community, the American conception of East Asia vs. its reality, and the implications of recent BLM struggles.This bonus episode is being made available to both the standard feed and the Patreon feed. A bonus episode with guest David Broder on Norberto Bobbio is forthcoming for the Patreon feed. The bookclub discussion will also continue later this month with Chantal Mouffe's The Return of the Political.

Luis Cabrera is the author of The Humble Cosmopolitan: Rights, Diversity, and Trans-state Democracy. He is Associate Professor in the Griffith Asia Institute and the School of Government and International Relations at Griffith University in Brisbane, Australia. His research focuses on global citizenship, human rights, and justice. The interview explores the political thought of Ambedkar, Dalit rights in India, and the implications of global citizenship. Luis Cabrera gives his thoughts on the need for international and regional institutions designed to protect the rights of minorities, but also elaborates on some important interrelated concepts like humility-arrogance and rights-duties. This is the third episode of the Democracy Paradox Podcast. Expect a new episode every week. I continue to publish a new book review every Saturday at www.democracyparadox.com. This week's review was on the classic work of political philosophy, Hegemony and Socialist Strategy by Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe. Please subscribe to learn more from scholars as they elaborate on ideas about rights, institutions, and democracy. Future episodes will feature Alexander Cooley and Daniel Nexon, Takis Pappas, William Smith, and Joshua Dyck.

Tarjei og Johan snakker om teoriene til Chantal Mouffe, Carl Schmitt og Max Adler. Tarjei mener at venstresiden ikke bør lytte til Mouffe når hun argumenterer for at vi bør gå ur fra idéen om det politiske som den grunnleggende kategorien som alle konflikter i samfunnet utgår fra.

In the wake of the coronavirus epidemic and shutting down of much of the UK's cultural life, we have decided to bring you a series of interviews with contemporary artists, writers, filmmakers and other cultural figures, conducted via Skype (so apologies for the diminished audio quality), about their practices, the political issues that inspire them and the socio-economic conditions that have shaped their work. In the eighteenth of these Sessions, Juliet talks to artist Nada Prlja about her project Subversion to Red, made to represent the Republic of North Macedonia at the Venice Biennale in 2019. They discuss every aspect of Prlja’s multi-disciplinary project: its engagement with socialist ideology and legacies; its response to the Biennale’s ‘interesting times’ theme; the importance of the round table events with Chantal Mouffe and others; the history of North Macedonia, before and after the break-up of Yugoslavia, and the transformation of post-socialist Skopje; and the Subtle Subversion series in which Prlja re-created works by Yugoslav artists, such as Jordan Grabulovski and Borko Lazeski, as an act of solidarity. A full list of references for the programme, with links, can be found via our Patreon at www.patreon.com/suite212, and are available to $3 subscribers.

In this second half of my interview with Jakob Hanschu, we evaluate the worth of reading Marx's Capital, discuss capitalism's impact on community, culture and faith, discuss the rise of identity politics and the New Right, and deal with the topic of intersectionality. Some of the thinkers discussed besides Marx are Wendell Berry, Chantal Mouffe, McKenzie Wark, Jacques Derrida and Slavoj Zizek. Jakob Hanschu's blog: https://theoreticalcapriccio.wordpress.com/ More on Jakob: http://mpa.academia.edu/JakobHanschu/CurriculumVitae Here's the URL to the Political Philosophy Facebook group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/60814… … More Marx, Identity, and Recuperation: Interview with Jakob Hanschu (Part 2-Audio)

In this podcast I discuss Chantal Mouffe's take on John Rawls' version of liberal social contract theory. Mouffe is not impressed, ultimately, but she does want to take away the liberal respect for the dignity of the individual while strengthening the person as a citizen, member of community, embedded in the public context. Can she have both--and what dangers do we court when we try to have stronger citizenship and public participation. Can we escape what liberals feared--open conflict--when we try to have stronger democratic participation? The question hasn't yet been answered by Mouffe, but her critique of Rawls lays the groundwork for her attempt to answer it. … More Mouffe on Rawls’ Liberal Theory (Audio-4)

In this second in a series on Chantal Mouffe's ideas in The Return of the Political, I discuss her use of Carl Schmitt's critique of liberalism and relate her ideas to authors she draws from, such as Leo Strauss, Isaiah Berlin, Michael Oakeshott, Charles Taylor, Michael Walzer and Hans Georg Gadamer. I try to get an initial handle on her preferred "agonistic pluralism" as an answer to the question--can we respect particular values and traditions enough to compete with them rather than seeking to destroy them? I relate her line of argument to my understanding of Carl Jung's theory of political ideology as "ideological possession" -- the projection of the shadow. … More Chantal Mouffe, Carl Schmitt, and the Critique of Enlightenment Liberalism (2-Audio)

In this first in a series on her book The Return of the Political, I introduce political theorist Chantal Mouffe, briefly discussing her background and the broad outline of her perspective, with reference to McKenzie Wark's treatment of it in General Intellects. … More No Escape from Politics: Intro to Chantal Mouffe (1 Audio)

Fragmento tomado del seminario internacional 'Política, hegemonía y radicalización de la democracia' desarrollado en la ]Facultad Libre d eRosario en octubre de 2015. www.facultadlibre.org

Diálogos por la democracia con John M. Ackerman y Chantal Mouffe

Ben Cobley discusses his book, The Tribe, explaining how the progressive liberal-left and its associated ‘system of diversity’ have come to dominate society. In this lecture, he talks about the intellectual inspirations behind The Tribe, exploring how Chantal Mouffe, Karl Popper and Martin Heidegger helped him to illuminate the fraught world of identity politics today.LECTURERBen Cobley, author, The Tribe: the liberal-left and the system of diversity.TALKING POINTS ON THIS PODCAST• The emergence of the ‘tribe’ of the progressive liberal left as an identity group that has overseen a domination of institutions and public discourse• The hypocrisy of the politics of diversity which uses the language of inclusivity and overcoming prejudice but in practice is exclusionary in itself• By furthering the politicisation and moralisation of identity, the progressive liberal left has been able to avoid discourse and even legitimate the removal of political opponents beyond the frame of public life.BIBLIOGRAPHYThe Tribe: the liberal-left and the system of diversity, Ben Cobley, Societas, 2018On the Political (Thinking in Action) by Chantal Mouffe, Routledge, 2005THE ACADEMY 2019In the context of today’s instrumental approaches to knowledge, The Academy summer school is a modest attempt to demonstrate the value of scholarship, and of the worth of the university as a place of free enquiry dedicated to the pursuit of truth.IDEAS MATTER PODCASTIdeas Matter is a podcast that takes the most important issues of our times and explores the ideas and intellectual trends that have shaped where we are today.You can subscribe and listen to Ideas Matter on iTunes, Spotify, Podbean or SoundCloud. For full details of all episodes, visit the podcast page on our websiteKeep up-to-date with Ideas Matter and all the initiatives organised by the Battle of Ideas charity by following us on Twitter and on Facebook.Email us at info@theboi.co.uk

Das Ende der Demokratie (Yvonne Hofstetter), Agonistik - Die Welt politisch denken (Chantal Mouffe), Democracy Hacked - Political Turmoil and Information Warfare in the Digital Age (Martin Moore)

Das Ende der Demokratie (Yvonne Hofstetter), Agonistik - Die Welt politisch denken (Chantal Mouffe), Democracy Hacked - Political Turmoil and Information Warfare in the Digital Age (Martin Moore)

Les textes de la semaine avec Aurélie Lanctôt et Kéven Breton. Écrivains sur le terrain avec Sarah Berthiaume et Alain Farah; le Salon Marions-nous. Entrevue avec René Daniel Dubois. La pièce Électre avec Serge Denoncourt. Aurélie Lanctôt et Jean-Philippe Cipriani ont lu Pour un populisme de gauche, de Chantal Mouffe. Michael Wesley Nafi et Raed Hammoud ont lu God in the Qur'an, de Jack Miles.

Hvad er populisme? Og skal venstrefløjen forfølge en populistisk strategi? I femte afsnit af Katalysator diskuterer filosofferne Janus Rønbach og Kristoffer Schønnemann Andersen populismens væsen, med udgangspunkt i Chantal Mouffes nye bog For a Left Populisme. Vi nørder igennem og udlægger en række af Mouffes begreber, diskuterer om De gule veste er populisme, og forsøger at finde ud af om populismen er et interessant værktøj for venstrefløjen.

Can populism be progressive, and what role did it play in the US mid-terms this year? We’ll be back with a brand new series in the new year, but in the meantime we wanted to bring you something a bit different: the best bits from a live event hosted by the New Economy Organisers Network in London in November about progressive populism. The guests were the political theorist Chantal Mouffe, who literally wrote the book on progressive populism ('For A Left Populism'), and the American campaigner Jonathan Smucker, author of 'Hegemony How-To: A Roadmap for Radicals'. Podcast host Ayeisha Thomas-Smith chaired the debate. Enjoying the show? Tweet us your comments and questions @NEF! Produced by James Shield. Music: Podington Bear, licenced under Creative Commons. The award-winning Weekly Economics Podcast is brought to you by the New Economics Foundation – the UK's only people powered think tank. Find out more at www.neweconomics.org

The big 2018 populism discussion. We trash mainstream interpretations of populism (hiya, Cas Mudde) and debate the merits and demerits of 'left populism'. Thatcher, Clinton and Blair are today thought of as anti-populists, but what if they demonstrate many populist features? Is our future 'technopopulism'? And is the 'movement of movements' a dead end?  Plus plenty of bonus stuff: debating the 20th Century disaster; Hillary as the tragic figure of our age; and José Mourinho as right-wing populist.  Readings: Anton's articles at Jacobin Thea Riofrancos on Chantal Mouffe in n+1 Chris Bickerton on technopopulism Cas Mudde on populism The Guardian's stupid populism quiz Phil Cunliffe on the 20th Century (Lenin Lives!)

Thea Riofrancos joins me to discuss her review in n+1 of Chantal Mouffe's new book, 'For a Left Populism'. As well as discussing Mouffe's work we talked more generally about populism in the United States and Europe, the nature of the Trump project, and the necessity of a left populism. You can read Thea's review of Mouffe's book here: https://nplusonemag.com/online-only/online-only/populism-without-the-people/ If you would like to hear the extended version of this episode and other PTO shows, please consider becoming a supporter: www.patreon.com/join/poltheoryother

Mais um episódio do Podcast PCESP no ar! Nós falamos no episódio passado sobre boa educação, principalmente sobre a importância de nos perguntarmos o que é uma boa educação. Como dissemos também, todos pensamos e defendemos uma educação que chamamos de democrática. Mas o que seria isso? Democracia é um tópico quente hoje em dia e é importante marcarmos as diferenças entre as várias concepções correntes. Por isso tentamos nesse episódio falar sobre como a gente entende a democracia que precisamos. E continuando a conversa do nosso último episódio, “O que é uma boa educação?”, discutimos sobre o potencial desse modelo democrático radical para uma educação mais inclusiva e plural. Participantes: Renata Aquino Fernando Penna Diogo Salles Cartaz do episódio baseado na capa da edição brasileira do livro "Sobre o Político", de Chantal Mouffe, publicado pela Martins Fontes. Música de abertura e encerramento: “Tank!”; composição de Yoko Kano; performance de The Seatbelts; direitos reservados a Victor Entertainment O PCESP Podcast é um programa mensal sobre política, educação e história, e tudo o mais que eventualmente couber dentro disso. O Professores Contra o Escola Sem Partido é um grupo de estudos e um coletivo de militância por uma educação democrática radical e plural, donde o Movimento Educação Democrática, nosso filho mais novo. Os episódios saem mensalmente, toda segunda semana do mês. E eventualmente saem episódios extra. Elogios, críticas, dúvidas, sugestões? Fale com a gente! professorescontraoesp@gmail.com Você também pode encontrar a gente em: – Professores contra o Escola Sem Partido Twitter e Instagram: @profscontraoesp https://www.facebook.com/contraoescolasempartido/ https://professorescontraoescolasempartido.wordpress.com https://www.youtube.com/c/ProfessorescontraoEscolaSemPartido – Movimento Educação Democrática https://www.facebook.com/moveducacaodemocratica/ Instagram: @moveducacaodemocratica

On #NovaraFM James Butler is joined by leading theorist of populism Chantal Mouffe. Her new book ‘For a Left Populism’ declares that populist strategy is the only way for the left to properly articulate progressive demands against a burgeoning right – but is it really the only game in town? http://novaramedia.com/?p=11723

Wir holen ein Thema nach, das länger schon in der Luft liegt: Linkspopulismus. Hinter der Debatte steht die Frage, in welche Richtung sich die Linke entwickeln muss, wenn sie in absehbarer Zeit eine neue Sozialpolitik machen möchte – jenseits vom Zentrismus der ewigen großen Koalition, die inzwischen ja auch keine stabile Mehrheit mehr hat. Bücher sind geschrieben worden, zuletzt von Chantal Mouffe. Und eine Bewegung ist gegründet worden, die die gebeugten Linken zum "Aufstehen" auffordert. Um zu verstehen, worum es geht, hören wir eine Veranstaltung nach, die am Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung stattgefunden hat. Gesprochen wurde über die "Chancen einer linken Sammlungsbewegung in Deutschland"; mit dabei waren Sahra Wagenknecht, Wolfgang Streeck und Nils Heisterhagen, die sich alle recht einig über die Problemlage sind. Der These eines Scheiterns der Linken stimmen wir zwar zu. "Linksliberale Ersatzpolitik", die statt Umverteilung auf Identitätspolitik setze, dafür verantwortlich zu machen – das überzeugt uns (ebenso wie Felix Schilk in der Jungle World) nicht. Stehen wir also mit auf? Ganz bestimmt. Aber über die Richtung müssen wir streiten.

On a spooky October mini episode of the Well Reds podcast, hair-raising host Charlie 'Drag Me To Hell' Demers is very sorry for the delay. Look for Charlie's chilling conversation with returning guest 'Sinister' Samir Gandesha (Director at Simon Fraser University Institute of the Humanities) on Chantal Mouffe's 'For a Left Populism' later this month.Catch Charlie on the 'Politics and Podcasts' panel at the 2018 Vancouver Podcast Festival this Thursday, November 8th: https://www.vanpodfest.ca/event/thursday-politics-and-podcasts

Josie Duffy Rice on Justice in America, her new podcast from The Appeal that she co-hosts with with Clint Smith, media coverage of criminal justice, carceral feminism and domestic violence, and the disturbing liberal affection for federal law enforcement under Trump. Thanks to Verso Books. Check out For a Left Populism by Chantal Mouffe versobooks.com/books/2748-for-a-left-populism Support this podcast with your money at patreon.com/TheDig

Part two of a two-part interview with Aslı Bâli on the Syrian civil war and the larger geopolitical conflicts that shape the Middle East — with an emphasis on the role played the United States. During part one, which you should definitely listen to first, Bâli discussed the various powers sacrificing the lives of Syrian people in the pursuit of their perceived geopolitical and sectarian interests. In this installment, Bâli discusses the restrictive frames that dominates the American discussion over Syria, and then assesses the lack of a coherent heterodox left-wing foreign policy in the United States — something that we desperately need as the possibility of the Left taking power becomes newly plausible. Read: "Remember Syria?" by Bâli and Aziz Rana bostonreview.net/war-security/asli-bali-aziz-rana-trump-putin-syria and "The U.S. Debt to Syria" bostonreview.net/war-security/asli-u-bali-aziz-rana-us-debt-syria. Live recording of The Dig coming up in New York City. Friday, August 17, 7 PM at Verso Books (20 Jay Street in Brooklyn). It's called Blockadia and Beyond: Left climate politics for the 21st century https://www.facebook.com/events/2042636042656908/?active_tab=about. Thanks to Verso Books. Check out For a Left Populism by Chantal Mouffe versobooks.com/books/2748-for-a-left-populism. Support this podcast with your money at patreon.com/TheDig!

What are the possibilities for community action that hold powerful urban actors to account? Strategic antagonism and the spaces that community alliances are opening up themselves to engage with urban development might hold the answer. It is not only urban planners and the formal planning system that shape the way residents contribute to the planning of their city. In Sydney, local resident action groups and other urban alliances are working beyond the market-centred urban planning system to achieve their urban development goals. Under market-centred urban planning paradigms, urban development is increasingly valued as an economic process and as a driver of the economy, rather than a social process that might create a more equitable city. We talk to Cameron McAuliffe about the work of the Belgian political theorist Chantal Mouffe, and the way her ideas are being applied to urban planning in Australia. Talking about research conducted with the host of City Road, Dallas Rogers, Cameron says resident action groups are dissatisfied with contemporary urban planning engagement mechanisms in Sydney. Many groups viewed community participation as tokenistic and an end in itself. This was particularly the case in local government planning where community engagement mechanisms were routinely seen as tick-a-box processes, with contributions from the community simply passing ‘into a void’. Community activists spoke of their frustration with these participatory planning mechanisms and recognised their market-centred nature even if they did not use this term. Yet many continued to participate in order to remain in the politics of urban development. They recognised the limitations of formal participatory planning processes and this led many groups to take their political campaigns outside of the formal urban planning system, in what Cameron describes as a form of strategic antagonism. Following Mouffe, Cameron argues that participatory planning needs to move beyond consensus-seeking models of planning consultation. He uses Mouffe’s critique of Habermasian communicative theory and consensus politics, and her theory of agonistic pluralism,  to outline three ways in which the people of Sydney are working beyond the market-centered urban planning system. Cameron McAuliffe is a Senior Lecturer in Human Geography and Urban Studies in the School of Social Sciences and Psychology and part of the Geography and Urban Studies academic group. Cameron is an urban, social and cultural geography and a member of the Urban Research Program, where his research engages with the regulation of difference and the way cities govern ‘marginal’ bodies. His research includes projects on urban governance and resident action groups; the negotiation of national and religious identities among Iranian migrant communities; policy research on graffiti management; and the geographies of kerbside waste.

Dans quelle mesure la théorie et la stratégie populistes peuvent-elles contribuer à repenser et à refonder la gauche ? Peuvent-elles lui permettre de reconquérir l’hégémonie idéologique et politique ? Conférence au café le Lieu-Dit avec : Chantal Mouffe (philosophe, professeure de théorie politique), Lenny Benbara (co-fondateur du site d’opinion Le Vent se lève), Charlotte Girard (co-responsable du programme de la France insoumise), Jorge Lago (sociologue, membre de Podemos), Christophe Ventura (rédacteur en chef du site de Mémoire des luttes).

Pour ce numéro 2 de notre émission culturelle, pop et politique, nous évoquons un genre en soi : les séries tv politiques et tentons (en vain) d'en dresser un top 5 collectif : The West Wing, GOT, The Wire, Baron Noir… Echanges et débats autour d'une liste, forcément non-exhaustive, des oeuvres qui nous semblent les plus emblématiques du genre… Au sommaire Actus - La reprise imminente de Game of Thrones Bassem La carte qui résume la saison 6 (Libé) - Le nouvel hymne pacifiste et écolo de Neil Young sorti le 4 juillet dernier Aymeric - Le numéro estival de So Film “Cinéma & politique" Benjamin La discussion : Séries tv politiques Nos séries préférées : La liste Nos coups de coeur : La Porte des Mondes de Robert Silverberg Aymeric Construire un peuple de de Chantal Mouffe , Iñigo Errejon Bassem American Gods le roman et la série Neil Gaiman Benjamin La playlist de l'émission

1ière heure : Bonne fête Montréal! - 375 mots qui définissent Montréal ; Un enquêteur spécial aux trousses de Donald Trump - Entrevue de Michel Désautels avec le professeur de Sciences politiques de l’Université d’Evansville en Indiana, Robert Dion ; Les drogues, aider plutôt que punir - Reportage de Michel Labrecque ; Tentation radicale à la course à la direction du Parti Conservateur du Canada - Reportage de Frank Desoer. 2ième heure : Le président iranien Rohani réélu - Entrevue de Michel Désautels avec la correspondante de Radio-Canada au Moyen-Orient, Marie-Ève Bédard ; Syriza, ou la nouvelle gauche fracassée sur l’autel de l’austérité - Reportage à Athènes de Ginette Lamarche ; Urgence humanitaire au Yémen - Chronique internationale de Léo Kalinda ; L'Europe à l’heure de la post-démocratie - Entrevue de Michel Désautels avec la professeure au Département de Sciences politiques et des Relations internationales de l'Université Westminster à Londres, Chantal Mouffe.

Design Participativo é uma metodologia democrática de projeto que enfatiza o envolvimento ativo de todas as pessoas que são afetadas pelo projeto, em especial, aquelas que são historicamente excluídas de processos decisórios. Trata-se de uma metodologia altamente relevante para o governo. Conforme expliquei num post anterior, em 2016 participei da campanha do vereador Goura em Curitiba. Depois de formar o gabinete, uma das prioridades da equipe do vereador foi fazer um treinamento sobre design participativo comigo.Montei o treinamento em formato de oficina, uma vez que acredito que design participativo se aprende mais na prática do que na teoria. Apesar dessa visão, fiz uma apresentação introdutória com conceitos básicos como participação social, níveis de participação, agonismo e objeto compartilhado. Também mostrei projetos de referência para os assessores do vereador. Design participativo no governo [MP3] 1.8 MB 1 hora Sugeri que o design participativo seja aplicado das seguintes maneiras no governo: Projeto participativo de obras públicas Elaboração de programas Cocriação de serviços públicos Simulação de impacto de políticas públicas Audiência pública com oficinas de cocriação Após a introdução, definimos em conjunto o objetivo da oficina de discutir o planejamento do mandato. Perguntei o que não estava claro ainda e um participante disse "a linha do mandato". Como quebra gelo, pedi para que fizessem um modelo literal utilizando um fio de lã para representar a linha do mandato. Em seguida, eles colaram as linhas num painel e escreveram as ações a serem incentivadas (post-it rosa) e evitadas (post-it laranja) para manter a linha. Embora cada participante tenha pensado individualmente sobre a linha do mandato, os modelos tiveram diversos pontos em comum. A forma do círculo e da espiral foram predominantes, representando o mandato enquanto um processo de descoberta e ampliação da coletividade. Vale citar que este é o primeiro mandato que o coletivo representado pelo Goura conseguiu conquistar. Em Curitiba, e mesmo no Brasil, há poucas referências de vereadores comprometidos com coletivos democráticos, portanto, há muito a descobrir e experimentar. Design participativo é só uma das coisas que a gente vai tentar fazer juntos. Depois de definir a linha do mandato, olhei para minha caixa de Lego Pessoas da Comunidade e propus mapear os públicos com que o mandato irá se relacionar. A equipe mapeou primeiro os perfis de eleitores do Goura, porém, sugeri que mapeassem novos públicos e também públicos que não necessariamente apoiariam o mandato. O cenário se demonstrou fragmentado, tal como em diversos contextos da política atual. Lembramos que, segundo a proposta do agonismo de Chantal Mouffe, os públicos podem ser reunidos através de paixões e vontades coletivas de transformar a sociedade. Retiramos os bonecos de Lego e fizemos modelos com massa de modelar para expressar emoções que agregassem diferentes públicos. Depois de modelar, escrevemos as descrições das emoções em post-its rosa e agrupamos os públicos. As emoções capazes de agregar os públicos do mandato do Goura segundo sua equipe são: Uprising (brotamento) Comunicação não-violenta Equilíbrio dinâmico Coletividade Empatia e pertencimento Urbanicidade Simpatia Definir as emoções em palavras é mais difícil do que utilizando a massa de modelar, por isso fiz o aquecimento com a massa antes. Apelar para a emoção é uma prática política antiga, porém, aqui aparecem emoções que raramente são estimuladas por políticos tradicionais. Neste ponto, a oficina poderia ter descambado para o planejamento da propaganda e construção da imagem do político, porém, o objetivo de estimular emoções não é assegurar o voto nas próximas eleições, mas sim gerar ações coletivas que envolvam os órgões públicos, movimentos sociais e cidadãos sem vínculos associativos. O urbanismo tático foi uma marca da atuação do Goura quando ele ainda fazia parte do cicloativismo, culminando com a construção da Praça de Bolso do Ciclista. Assim que saiu o resultado das eleições, o coletivo já se organizou para construir a Praça de Bolso da Gilda. No momento, já foram realizadas 3 reuniões públicas para projetar a praça. Qualquer pessoa interessada no projeto pode participar. Além da Praça da Gilda, elencamos diversas ações concretas que poderiam agregar os públicos. As emoções conceitualizadas na etapa anterior já sugerem a abordagem de mobilização. Para terminar a oficina, fizemos uma sessão de edição de texto colaborativo com Google Docs para levantar todas as demandas que chegam ao gabinete e esboçar os procedimentos de resposta. Desde que o gabinete foi formado, a equipe tem ficado sobrecarregada com as demandas burocráticas ou fora de escopo do mandato vindas de diversas pessoas e órgãos públicos. Infelizmente muitas pessoas acham que o papel do vereador é tapar buracos na sua rua e fazer doações de cunho assistencialista. Para desmistificar isso, a equipe fez um vídeo com o Goura explicando o que faz um vereador. O objetivo do mandato é trabalhar com projetos de mudança amplos na cidade e, portanto, o assitencialismo não será a prioridade. Já na abertura das sessões da Câmara, Goura tomou a iniciativa de formar uma frente parlamentar para defender a mobilidade sustentável. O novo prefeito Rafael Greca ainda não se manifestou decisivamente se irá aumentar a velocidade das vias como fez Dória em São Paulo ou se irá dar continuidade ao programa de ciclomobilidade expandido pelo ex-prefeito Gustavo Fruet. Espero que a equipe do Goura consiga aplicar a metodologia do design participativo em seus projetos. Como parte do coletivo que elegeu o vereador, estarei ajudando na medida do possível. Se você também quiser participar das iniciativas do Goura , acompanhe a página dele no Facebook.Comente este post

The belgian political theorist Chantal Mouffe dedicated her talk to “Artistic practices in times of post-politics”. The professor of Political Theory found worldwide recognition with her research on antagonism.

The belgian political theorist Chantal Mouffe dedicated her talk to “Artistic practices in times of post-politics”. The professor of Political Theory found worldwide recognition with her research on antagonism: Mouffe rejects the idea that consensus should be the end-product of every democratic process

Vendredi 21 octobre 2016, Jean-Luc Mélenchon et Chantal Mouffe, philosophe belge, tenaient une conférence intitulée « L'Heure du peuple » à l'invitation de l'association « Mémoire des luttes ».

Indagando il rapporto tra conflitto e democrazia, Chantal Mouffe mostra come il pluralismo conflittuale e negoziato possa beneficiare le democrazie radicalizzandole.

Indagando il rapporto tra conflitto e democrazia, Chantal Mouffe mostra come il pluralismo conflittuale e negoziato possa beneficiare le democrazie radicalizzandole.

SMJ #22 – Modelos de Democracia O que é democracia? Eis aí um termo que tem uma longuíssima história e uma multiplicidade de conceituações. Com a recente crise política brasileira, retomar os debates sobre a definição jurídica de democracia se torna fundamental para que as instituições nacionais saiam desse conflito de forma fortalecida e com nenhum direito a menos para os cidadãos. Nascida entre os gregos, a democracia hoje é muito diversa e seus referenciais muito amplos. As mais influentes formas de se pensar critérios democráticos hoje se pautam no entorno dos chamados modelos deliberativo e agonista, o primeiro hodiernamente inspirado em Jurgen Habermas e o segundo na reflexão de Chantal Mouffe. Para compreender as peculiaridades desses modelos e ver suas amplitudes e limites, o Salvo Melhor Juízo desta semana foi até Jacarezinho/PR conversar com três convidados especiais: Fernando de Brito Alves*, Jairo Néia Lima** e Marcos César Botelho***. Confira! ========= Indicado no programa: Livros e artigos: “Constituição e participação popular” – Fernando de Brito Alves “Democracia à portuguesa” – Fernando de Brito Alves “Magna Carta: 800 anos de influência no constitucionalismo e nos direitos fundamentais” – Jairo Neia Lima (org.) “A legitimidade da jurisdição constitucional no pensamento de Jurgen Habermas” – Marcos César Botelho. “Poucos, muitos, todos: lições de história da democracia” – Pietro Costa. “Devolver a Constituição ao Povo: crítica a supremacia judicial e diálogos interinstitucionais” – Miguel Godoy. ========= Comentários, sugestões, críticas: contatosalvomelhorjuizo@gmail.com Twitter: @SMJPodcast Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/salvomelhorjuizo/ Instagram: @salvomelhorjuizo Assine o Feed: feeds.feedburner.com/salvomelhorjuizo Compartilhe, divulgue, ajude-nos nesse projeto! Agora o SMJ faz parte da rede de podcasts AntiCast! Acesse: www.anticast.com.br *Fernando de Brito Alves é Professor e Coordenador do Programa de Pós-graduação em Direito da Universidade Estadual do Norte do Paraná (UENP). Mestre, doutor e pós-doutor em Direito, realiza suas pesquisas na área de Direito e Democracia. **Jairo Neia Lima é servidor da Justiça Federal, mestre pela UENP e doutorando em Direito pela USP. Pesquisa Direito Constitucional com enfoque em Judicial Review e Conflitos democráticos. ***Marcos César Botelho é advogado da união e professor da graduação e pós-graduação em Direito da Universidade Estadual do Norte do Paraná (UENP). Mestre e doutor em Direito, pesquisa o impacto do pensamento de Jurgen Habermas no Direito.

Chantal Mouffe, University of Westminster on the relationship between global and local