(redirected from Agonistic pluralism)
Related to Agonistic pluralism: antagonism


n.1.Contention for a prize; a contest.
Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, published 1913 by G. & C. Merriam Co.
References in periodicals archive ?
In this article I analyze the actual and potential role of ethnic media as facilitators of counterhegemonic discourses in liberal democracies through an engagement with Chantal Mouffe's (1993, 1999, 2000, 2012) theory of agonistic pluralism, with specific examples drawn from Australia (Mouffe, 1993, 2000; Wingenbach, 2011).
(102.) See generally CHANTAL MOUFFE, THE DEMOCRATIC PARADOX (2000); LAW AND AGONISTIC POLITICS (Andrew Schaap ed., 2009); Chantal Mouffe, Deliberative Democracy or Agonistic Pluralism, 66 Soc.
Grounding her theory on the assumption of antagonism's ineradicability, Mouffe redefines democratic politics as agonistic pluralism. She fleshes out in this way her own political project by offering a 'metaphoric redescription' of liberal democratic institutions (2) and an alternative to other contemporary appoaches to democracy.
The second weakness--believing that an exaggerated consensus can be created through participation--is remedied with insights drawn from agonistic pluralism. The third weakness--assuming that participation in workplace governance is the essential, participatory training ground--is corrected with insights drawn from research on deliberative democracy.
It then presents Chantal Mouffe's doctrine of "agonistic pluralism" and her partial legitimization of the presence of religions in the political domain.
Third, similar to Chantal Mouffe's agonistic pluralism, Prof.
Different modes of public engagement (social marketing, public participation, agonistic pluralism) are combined to study the politics of science communication.
After developing Habermas's views on "deliberative democracy" and Mouffe's counterproposals on "agonistic pluralism," I analyze the relevance of their debate to Third World politics in terms of both what they share and what sets them apart.
It is this distinctive play of mind that Gray tries to fit into the framework of academic philosophy by such awkward contrivances as "agonistic pluralism" and "agonistic liberalism." In doing so, he is in danger of creating a Berlin who, like Tolstoy, is by nature a fox but believes in being a hedgehog.
Sicakkan, Integration, Diversity and the Making of a European Public Sphere, makes an important argument for adapting a new theoretical framework from an extended agonistic pluralism perspective of the public sphere for understanding the complex and contesting relationships in the making of the European public sphere.