Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-qs9v7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T04:32:01.492Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Subjecthood and Self-Determination: The Limitations of Postmodernism as Democratic Theory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

Jeff Noonan
Get access

Extract

The history of Western liberal capitalist society, viewed from the perspective of the growth of democracy, is contradictory. Although the idea of negative liberty at the basis of democracies of the liberal type secured citizens against arbitrary encroachments from the state, at the same time, by securing the rights of property first and foremost, it exposed those same citizens to the more insidious and all-determining undemocratic forces of the capitalist market. The history of liberal democracy thus created the conditions for the flourishing of genuine individuality in a democratic polity at the same time as it undermined those conditions by subjecting all need fulfillment (through which individuality is developed) to market forces. Until the fragmentation of radical movements occasioned by the upheavals of the 1960s, radical theory and practice was minimally unified around the critique of the contradiction between democracy and market forces at the core of liberal society. The fundamental principle of this critique stated that democratic society could flourish if and only if need satisfaction was freed from its subordination to money demand.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Philosophy Supplementary Volume , Volume 25: Civilization and Oppression , 1999 , pp. 147 - 169
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See Gitlin, ToddTwilight of Common Dreams (New York: Henry Holt, 1995)Google Scholar.

2 While very much an authoritarian, Hobbes nevertheless located original sovereignty in individuals, and should therefore be identified as the key theorist of the new political theory. Locke connected the new political philosophy to the interests of the propertied class. See Hobbes, ThomasLeviathan (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1994)Google Scholar, esp. Part 1, chap. 13, Part 2, chap. 17, and Locke, JohnSecond Treatise of Government (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1980)Google Scholar. For the history of classical liberalism, see MacPherson, C. B.The Political Theory of Possesive Individualism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1962)Google Scholar.

3 See Smith, AdamAn Inquiry Into the Nature and Understanding of the The Wealth of Nations (New York: Random House, 1937), esp. 14, 421-23.Google Scholar

4 Mill, John StuartOn Liberty (New York: Norton, 1975), esp. chap. 2 and 3Google Scholar.

5 Hayek, FriedrichThe Road to Serfdom (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994), 78Google Scholar.

6 Nietzsche, FriedrichBeyond Good and Evil (Amherst, NY: Prometheus, 1989), 226Google Scholar.

7 Foucault, Michel ‘Nietzsche, Genealogy, History,’ The Foucault Reader, ed. Rabinow, Paul (New York: Pantheon, 1984), 76–100Google Scholar.

8 Foucault, MichelThe History of Sexuality, Volume 1: An Introduction (New York: Vintage, 1978), 94Google Scholar.

9 Foucault, The History of Sexuality, 94Google Scholar.

10 Foucault, ‘What is Enlightenment,’ The Foucault Reader, 46Google Scholar. Compare this with the arguments of Hayek in The Road to Serfdom.

11 Derrida, Jacques ‘Differance,’ Margins of Philosophy (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982), 11Google Scholar.

12 Derrida, Jacques interviewed in Kearney, RichardDialogues With Contemporary Continental Thinkers (New York: Routledge, 1984), 125Google Scholar.

13 Derrida, Margins of Philosophy, 15Google Scholar.

14 Laclau, Ernesto and Mouffe, ChantalHegemony and Socialist Strategy (London: Verso, 1985), 115Google Scholar.

15 Again, compare Hayek's critique in The Road to Serfdom.

16 Laclau, and Mouffe, Hegemony and Socialist Strategy, 98Google Scholar.

17 Hayek, The Road to Serfdom, 63Google Scholar.

18 Laclau, and Mouffe, Hegemony and Socialist Strategy, 167Google Scholar.

19 Laclau, and Mouffe, Hegemony and Socialist Strategy, 176Google Scholar.

20 Young, Iris Marion ‘Polity and Group Difference: A Critique of the Ideal of Universal Citizenship,’ Ethics 99 (January 1989): 251CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

21 See Young, Justice and the Politics of Difference (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990)Google Scholar.

22 Arato, Andrew and Cohen, JeanCivil Society and Political Theory (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1987)Google Scholar.

23 Symptomatic of the degenerative logic we are tracing, Mouffe has come to accept these limits as necessary as well. See Mouffe, ChantalThe Return of the Political (London: Verso, 1993), 90–100Google Scholar. For Bobbio's arguments see Bobbio, NobertoThe Future of Democracy (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1989), 63–79Google Scholar. Keane, John also follows this line of thought in Democracy and Civil Society (London: Verso, 1988), 1–23Google Scholar.

24 Arato, and Cohen, Civil Society, 402-03Google Scholar.

25 Arato, and Cohen, Civil Society, 415Google Scholar.

26 Arato, and Cohen, Civil Society, 416Google Scholar.

27 A precise analysis of this phenomenon of blocking criticism of the market by converting its contingent dynamics into necessary principles can be found in McMurtry, JohnUnequal Freedoms: The Market as an Ethical System (Toronto: Garamond Press, 1998), 57–73Google Scholar.

28 Bohman, JamesPublic Deliberation: Pluralism, Complexity, and Democracy (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996), 28–29Google Scholar.

29 See Hegel, G.W.FThe Phenomenology of Spirit (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977)Google Scholar, and Marx's interpretation in Marx, KarlEconomic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844 (New York: International Publishers, 1977), 177Google Scholar.

30 Marx, Karl and Engels, FriedrichThe Communist Manifesto (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1986), 54Google Scholar.

31 Mouffe, The Return of the Political, 4Google Scholar.

32 Laclau, and Mouffe, Hegemony and Socialist Strategy, 114Google Scholar.