Sattumuslikkus, hegemoonia ning õiglus: John Rawls ja radikaalne demokraatia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12697/spe.2010.3.1.03Keywords:
Rawls, Laclau ja Mouffe, radikaalne demokraatia, õiglus kui ausameelsus, sattumuslikkus, Laclau and Mouffe, radical democracy, justice as fairness, contingencyAbstract
Artikkel käsitleb kriitiliselt üht viimaste kümnendite vastandust poliitilises filosoofias — ‘poliitilise liberalismi’ (Rawls) ja ‘radikaalse demokraatia’ (Laclau ja Mouffe) vahel. Artikkel püüab käivitada potentsiaalset dialoogi nende kahe näiliselt lahkneva lähenemise vahel. Kokkuvõttes näitab artikkel, et vastandus on möödarääkimine vähemalt ühes fundamentaalses mõttes: mõlemad lähenemised jagavad ühiskonnastmõtlemisel sama aluseetost. Artiklis nimetatakse seda ‘sattumuslikkuse eetoseks’ ning väidetakse, et see on kõige fundamentaalsem alusveendumus nii Laclau ja Mouffe’i ‘radikaalse demokraatia’ kui ka Rawlsi ‘õigluse kui ausameelsuse’ idee jaoks. Artikkel osutab ka ühele kesksele kitsaskohale Laclau ja Mouffe’i lähenemises: nende suutmatusele kontseptualiseerida institutsioonilisi korraldusi tulenevalt nende ülemäärasest rõhuasetust demokraatia dekonstruktiivsele potentsiaalile. Selles suhtes osutatakse ka Rawlsi käsitluse ilmselgetele eelistele, kuna see pakub juhiseid organiseerimaks demokraatlikke institutsioone.
The paper concentrates on a controversy in recent decades’ political thought between ‘political liberalism’ of Rawls and ‘radical democracy’ (represented in this paper by Laclau and Mouffe). The article tries to initiate a potential dialogue between these seemingly divisive approaches. In conclusion the paper maintains that the whole controversy is misguided in one fundamental respect: both approaches share the same underlying ethos in envisioning society—‘the ethos of contingency’. It is argued that it is the most fundamental tenet informing both Laclau and Mouffe’s theory of hegemony with its complementary idea of ‘radical democracy’, and justice as fairness conceived in terms of reciprocity with its accompanying idea of public justification and reflective equilibrium. _e article points to a central impasse in Laclau and Mouffe’s approach: its incapability to conceptualize institutional arrangements due to their overemphasis on the deconstructive potential of democracy. In this respect the obvious merits of Rawls’ conception are highlighted in view of his proposals for organizing democratic institutions.
Downloads
References
Barber, B. (1988). The Conquest of Politics: Liberal Philosophy in Democratic Times, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Benhabib, S. (2002). Claims of Culture: Equality and Diversity in the Global Culture, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Blackburn, S. (2002). Oxfordi filosoofia leksikon, Vagabund, Tallinn. Tõlkinud Märt Väljataga ja Bruno Mölder.
Bobbio, N. (2005). Liberalism and Democracy, Verso, London. Tõlkinud Martin Ryle and Kate Soper.
Brandt, R. (1979). A Theory of the Good and the Right, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Cohen, J. (2003). For a democratic society. S. Freeman (toim.), The Cambridge Companion to Rawls, Cambridge University Press,Cambridge, lk 86-138.
Cohen, J. (2005). Deliberation and democratic legitimacy. D. Matravers ja J. Pike (toim.), Debates in Contemporary Political Philosophy. An Anthology, Routledge, London, lk 342-360.
Daniels, N. (1996). Justice and Justification: Reflective Equilibrium in Theory and Practice, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Dworkin, R. (1978). Taking Rights Seriously, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Freeman, S. (1999). Editor’s preface. S. Freeman (toim.), John Rawls, Collected Papers, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, lk ix-xii.
Glynos, J. (2003). Radical democratic ethos, or, what is an authentic political act?, Contemporary Political Theory 2:187-208.
Habermas, J. (1990). Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Tõlkinud Christian Lenhardt and Shieny Weber Nicholsen.
Habermas, J. (1995). Reconciliation through the public use of reason: Remarks on John Rawls’s political liberalism, The Journal of Philosophy 92:109-131.
Hare, R.M. (1973). Rawls’ theory of justice, The Philosophical Quarterly 23:144-155; 241-252.
Haslet, D.W. (1987). What is wrong with reflective equilibria?, The Philosophical Quarterly 37:305-311.
Honig, B. (1993). Political Theory and the Displacement of Politics, Cornell University Press, Ithaca.
Howarth, D., Norval, A. ja Stavrakakis, Y. (toim.) (2000). Discourse Theory and Political Analysis: Identities, Hegemonies and Social Change, Manchester University Press, New York.
Jorgensen, M. ja Phillips, L. (2002). Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method, Sage Publications, London.
Knops, A. (2007). Agonismasde liberation: On Mouffe’s theory of democracy, The Journal of Political Philosophy 15:115-126.
Kukathas, C. ja Pettit, P. (1990). Rawls: A Theory of Justice and Its Critics, Stanford University Press, Stanford.
Kymlicka, W. (2002). Contemporary Political Philosophy: An Introduction, 2 tr, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Laclau, E. (1990). New Reflections on the Revolutionin Our Time, Verso, London.
Laclau, E. (1994a). Introduction. E. Laclau (toim.), The Making of Political Identities, Verso, London, lk 1-8.
Laclau, E. (1996). Emancipation(s), Verso, London.
Laclau, E. (1999). Politics, polemics and academics: An interview by Paul Bowman, Parallax 5:93-107.
Laclau, E. (2000). Identity and hegemony: The role of universality in the constitution of political logics. J. Butler, E.Laclau ja S. Žižek (toim.), Contingency, Hegemony, Universality: Contemporary Dialogues on the Left, Verso, London, lk 44-89.
Laclau, E. (2001). Democracy and the question of power, Constellations 8:3-14.
Laclau, E. (2004). Glimpsing the future. O. Marchart ja S. Critchley (toim.), Laclau: A Critical Reader, Routledge, London, lk 279-328.
Laclau, E. (2005). On Populist Reason, Verso, London.
Laclau, E. (toim.) (1994b). The Making of Political Identities, Verso, London.
Laclau, E. ja Mouffe, C. (1985). Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics, Verso.
Laclau, E. ja Mouffe, C. (1987). Post-Marxism without apologies, New Left Review 166:79-106.
Laclau, E. ja Mouffe, C. (2001). Preface to the second edition, Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towardsa Radical Democratic Politics, 2tr, Verso, London, pp. vii-xx.
Laden, A. (2001). Reasonably Radical: Deliberative Liberalism and the Politics of Identity, Cornell University Press, Ithaca.
Laden, A. (2003). The house that Jack built: Thirty years of reading Rawls, Ethics 113:367-390.
Lefort, C. (1988). Democracy and Political Theory, Polity Press, Cambridge. Tõlkinud David Macey.
MacIntyre, A. (1981). After Virtue: A Studyin Moral Theory, University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame.
MacIntyre, A. (1988). Whose Justice? Which Rationality?, University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame.
Marchart, O. (2007). Post-Foundational Political Thought: Political Difference in Nancy, Lefort, Badiou and Laclau, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh.
McCarthy, T. (1994). Kantian constructivism and reconstructivism: Rawls and Habermas in dialogue, Ethics 105:44-63.
Mouffe, C. (1993). The Return of the Political, Verso, London.
Mouffe, C. (1996a). Deconstruction, pragmatism and the politics of democracy. S. Critchley ja C. Mouffe (toim.), Deconstruction and Pragmatism, Routledge, London, lk 1-12.
Mouffe, C.(1996b). Democracy, power and the ‘political’. S. Benhabib (toim.), Democracy and Difference, Princeton University Press, 245-25 p. Princeton.
Mouffe, C. (1999). Introduction: The Schmitt’s challenge. C.Mouffe (toim.), The Challenge of Carl Schmitt, Verso, London, lk 1-8.
Mouffe, C. (2000). The Democratic Paradox, Verso, London.
Mouffe, C. (2005a). The limits of John Rawls’s pluralism, Politics, Philosophy & Economics 4:221-231.
Mouffe, C. (2005b). On the Political, Routledge, London.
Norval, A. (2004). Democratic decisions and the question of universality: Rethinking recent approaches. O. Marchart ja S. Critchley (toim.), Laclau: A Critical Reader, Routledge, London, lk 140-166.
Nozick, R. (1974). Anarchy, State, and Utopia, Basic Books, New York.
Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Rawls, J. (1999a). Constitutional liberty and the concept of justice. S. Freeman (toim.), John Rawls, Collected Papers, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, lk 73-95.
Rawls, J. (1999b). Distributive justice. S.Freeman (toim.), John Rawls, Collected Papers, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, lk 130-153.
Rawls, J. (1999c). The domain of the political and overlapping consensus. S.Freeman (toim.), John Rawls, Collected Papers, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, lk 473-496.
Rawls, J. (1999d). Justice as fairness: Political not metaphysical. S. Freeman (toim.), John Rawls, Collected Papers, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, lk 388-414.
Rawls, J. (1999e). Justice as reciprocity. S.Freeman (toim.), John Rawls, Collected Papers, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, lk 190-224.
Rawls, J. (2000). Lectures on the History of Moral Philosophy, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Rawls, J. (2001). Justice as Fairness: A Restatement, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. E.Kelly(toim.).
Rawls, J. (2002a). Õiglus kui ausameelsus. J. Lipping (toim.), Kaasaegne poliitiline filosoofia: valik esseid, EYS Veljesto Kirjastus, Tartu, lk 156-185. Tõlkinud Kaido Floren.
Rawls, J. (2002b). The Law of Peoples with ‘The Idea of Public Reason Revisited’, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Rawls, J. (2005a). The idea of public reason revisited, Political Liberalism. Expanded Edition, Columbia University Press, New York, lk 435-490.
Rawls, J. (2005b). Political Liberalism. Expanded Edition, Columbia University Press, New York.
Rawls, J. (2005c). Reply to Habermas, Political Liberalism. Expanded Edition, Columbia University Press, New York, lk 372-434.
Rawls, J. (2007). Lectures on the History of Political Philosophy, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Rawls, J. (2010). Õiglus kui ausmeelsus: Taasesitus II, Akadeemia 22:1385- 1400. Tõlkinud Tanel Vallimäe.
Rorty, R. (1991). Priority of democracy to philosophy, Objectivity, Relativism, and Truth. Philosophical Papers Vol. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, lk 175-196.
Rorty, R. (1999). Sattumuslikkus, iroonia ja solidaarsus, Vagabund, Tallinn. Tõlkinud Märt Väljataga.
Sandel, M. (1982). Liberalism and the Limits of Justice, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Schmitt, C. (1996). The Concept of the Political, Chicago University Press, Chicago. Tõlkinud George Schwab.
Selg, P. (2010). Kes kardab John Rawlsi?, Akadeemia 22:1401-1427.
Smith, A.M. (1998). Laclau and Mouffe: The Radical Democratic Imaginary, Routledge, London.
Žižek, S. (1999). Carl Schmitt in the age of post-politics. C. Mouffe (toim.), The Callenge of Carl Schmitt, Verso, London, lk 18-37.
Taylor, C. (1985). Philosophy and the Human Sciences. Philosophical Papers Vol. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Thomassen, L. (2005). Reading radical democracy: A commentary on Clive Barnett, Political Geography 24:631-639.
Torfing, J. (1999). New Theories of Discourse: Laclau, Mouffe, Žižek, Blackwell, Oxford.
Vatter, M. (2008). The idea of public reason and the reason of state: Schmitt and Rawls on the political, Political Theory 36:239-271.
Waldron, J. (1987). Theoretical foundations of liberalism, Philosophical Quarterly 37:127-150.
Walzer, M. (1983). Spheres of Justice. A Defence of Pluralism and Equality, Basic Books, New York.
Walzer, M. (2005). Philosophy and democracy. D. Matravers ja J. Pike(toim.), Debates in Contemporary Political Philosophy. An Anthology, Routledge, London,lk 361-386.
Warren, M. (1995). The self in discursive democracy. S.K. White (toim.), The Cambridge Companion to Habermas, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, lk 167-200.
Wenman, M.A. (2003). Laclau or Mouffe? Splitting the difference, Philosophy & Social Criticism 29:581-606.
Wolin, S. (2004). Politics and Vision. Expanded edition, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
