44
CriticalStudies
LaclauTribute
politics,intentonchangingtheworldnotmerelyinterpretingit.Istruggled,though,
with party lines, with party discipline, with Marxist theory, and with party hacks
of apartheidMarxism developedboth a serious conceptualisation of theapartheid
regime, and a political strategy for revolutionaries committed to equality. In practice,though,knowledgeandpowerfusedalltooeasilyinthelanguageofstudentactivistswhoassumedthattheyspokeinthenameofhistory.Thosewhoposedawkward questions were re-educated against residual bourgeois prejudices. In 1989 I
readHegemonyandSocialistStrategy.Itmadesenseofmygropingattemptstofusea
commitmenttotheleft,withalanguageandapoliticswhichacknowledgedthecontingenciesanduncertaintiesofpoliticalengagement.NothingelseIreadleftmewith
thevisceralexcitementIexperiencedwhenreadingLaclauandMouffe.Theirrigour,
combinedwiththeircommitment,allowedmetorethinktheorganisationofpolitical
struggle,toreformulatetherelationshipbetweenpowerandknowledge,totakeseriouslyathoroughgoingcommitmenttocontingencyandantagonism.Theycelebrated
radicaldemocraticpoliticsandreframedGramsci’saccountofhegemonyintermsofa
logicofequivalence.Thetextrespondedtotwocrisesfortheleft.First,theemerging
hegemonyofaglobalneoliberaldiscourse.ManyreadersforgetthatthefourthchapterofHegemonyandSocialistStrategyboththeorisesabout,andthinksagainst,the
emergenceofatriumphalistneo-liberalism,zealousinitsquesttoarticulateeverypoliticsbothwithandagainstMarx,echoingthemoodoftheEasternEuropeanrevoltsagainsttheone-partydictatorsandthestatecapitalistcompromiseformations,
whichbrandishedthelabel‘communist’tojustifythemostabhorrentofpractices.
Iwas absorbedin thesedebateswhen,in1992,ErnestoLaclauvisitedtheUniversity.HisseminartookplaceinaroomattachedtotheDepartmentofAnthropology,
atWitsUniversity.Therewerenoexternalwindows,sodespitethefactthatitwas
brightandsunnyoutsidewegatheredinwhatseemedlikedusktohearErnestotalk.
Hespokewithalmostnonotesforgoingonanhour.Whenhewasdonewe,keenMA
students,interrogatedhim.Inthatcontexttheoreticaldebateshadeverythingtodo
withpoliticalstruggle.Iworriedaboutthetheoreticalstatusofcontingency–wasit
thiswasanexcellentquestion,stilltobeproperlyworkedout.Otherschallengedhis
reading of Marx,hiscritiqueof Althusser,askedabout hisconceptualisationofthe
Devenney-ErnestoLaclau:RethinkingPoliticalAntagonism
stateandabouthisrelationshiptopost-colonialscholarship.Ateveryturnhisresponsesweresharp,pertinent,yetopenandwithoutrancourevenwhentherewas
violentdisagreement.Hewaspreparedtoadmituncertainties,anddidnotassume
thathehadalloftheanswers.Later,IwalkedwithAlettaNorvalandErnestobackto
hishotel.Theywere,Iamsure,desperatetoberidofthistall,ganglyMAstudent,intentonquestioningwithoutrespite,withnoapparentconcernfortheirneedtoeat,
rest,haveadrink.YetasIlefthesaid,‘Whydon’tyoucompleteyourPhDatEssex?”
TheUniversityofEssexin1994wasahavenforcriticalscholarship.Itwasaconcrete
monstrosity,theworstdesignedofthe60sUniversities,coldandgreywithbuildingsandsquareswhichchannelledfreezingNorthseawindsthroughitssquares.
InthisunwelcomeenvironmentErnestoLaclauandAlettaNorvalcoordinatedthe
PhDandMAprogrammeinIdeologyandDiscourseAnalysis.WithNoreenHarburt
andSimonCritchleytheymanagedtheCentreforTheoreticalStudies,hostingweeklyseminars,conferencesandannuallectureswithamongothersJacquesDerrida,
GiorgioAgamben,LindaZerrili,JaneBennetandWilliamConnolly.OnWednesday
afternoonsstudentsfromSouthAfrica,Argentina,Brazil,Mexico,theUS,Switzerland,Austria,NewZealand,Greece,Canada,andChinamettopresentPhDchapters
andtolisten to Aletta andErnesto presenttheir own work, plan future activities
wereallequallyengagedinworkingthroughuncertainties,pushingargumentsto
thepointatwhichtheybroke,takingonboardthecriticismofothers,butoffering
criticisminlikemanner.TheconditionswerereminiscentofwhatHabermasonce
termedanidealspeechsituation,exceptthatallofusrecognisedthecontingencyof
whateverclaimwedeemedvalidinoneweek,andneverassumedthattherewasa
regulativeidealcoordinatingouractions.Weweretherebecauseofourengagement
withErnestoLaclau’swork.Wechallengedhisargumentsknowingfullwellthathe
wouldtakeonboardandintegratesuchchallengesifpertinent.Atthesametimehe
wasmakingspaceforanewgenerationofscholars,mostobviouslyintheperson
ofAlettaNorvalwhohadestablishedherowndistinctivereputationasapolitical
theorist.ManyofthosestudentsnowpopulateHumanitiesandPoliticsdepartments
aroundtheworld.Allaremarkedbytheirtimeinthoseseminars.YannisStavrakakis, Anthony Clohesy, Jason Glynos, Benjamin Arditi, Oliver Marchart, Urs Staheli,
Ifweweredrivenbytheoreticalrigourwewerealsoconcernedtothinkthroughthe
politicsoftheleftasneoliberalreformoftheUniversitybegantotakehold.Thelarge
numberof studentsontheprogramme ensuredthat a spaceforintellectual freedomwaspreserved,evenasinstitutionalchangesrenderedsuchspacesimproper,
becausetheirvaluewasnotmeasuredinmonetaryterms.Therewereothersatthe
Universitywhoprotectedthisspace,andwhothemselvesgeneratedspacesforengagement–JayBernstein,SimonCritchleywholaterbecamedirectoroftheCentre
forTheoreticalStudies,ElaineJordan,PeterDewsandAlexanderGarcíaDüttmann.
extendedfromtheacademyacrosstheworldtothevariousplacesweengagedwith,
andtothetheoreticalandcriticalprogrammeswewerechallenging.Isometimes
45
46
CriticalStudies
meetcolleaguesfromthosedays.Weharkbacktothoseextraordinaryyearsduring
whichourpoliticalandacademicidentitieswereforged.
Ilearntoneenduringlesson,theoreticalandpoliticalfromErnestoLaclau:politics
isantagonistic.LaclauandMouffewrotein1985:“This‘experience’ofthelimitofall
objectivitydoeshaveaformofprecisediscursivepresence,andthisisantagonism.”1
particularpoliticaldiscourseandpoliticalvictoriesareforgedincontingentstruggleswhichcannotbeaccountedforinadvance;second,antagonismisontological
rivenbyanuncertaintywhichcannotberesolved.However,Laclaudidnotsimply
allparticularidentitiesandstrugglesmakeclaimswhichaspiretowardsuniversalcommittedtothedeepeningofequalityrequired,Laclauwould have argued,that
ofpossibilitiesratherthanassumethathistoryisonthesideofgood.
Overthepastdecadesthisclaimaboutantagonismasthe‘experience’ofthelimit
ofallobjectivityhasbeenthesubjectofsomeargument.Scholarsinspiredbythe
mulationofamorefundamentaldislocation,animpossibilitythatmightbeformulatedintermsofLacan’sthinkingofthereal.Suchaclaimhastheapparentvirtue
ofseparatingouttheontologicalfromthepolitical.Itallowsonetoarguethatthe
impossibilityofbeing,afundamentallack,becomespoliticalwhenthelimitofobjectivityisexperienced,whenlackisarticulatedaspolitical.Inmyviewthoughthe
claimthatdislocationis‘morefundamental’,aclaimwhichLaclaudoesmake,inNew
,riskselidingtheradicalityoftheargument
thatanyclaimtobeisalwaysalreadypolitical.Laclau’sprivilegingoftheconcept
withMarx’sargumentsaboutclassasthefundamentalantagonismincapitalistsociety.WhilerejectingMarx’saccountofclassLaclauremainedcommittedtotheview
thatsocietyisrivenbyantagonismswhichconcernboththestructuringofeconomic
andpoliticalrelations,andthewaysinwhichpoliticalidentitiesareforgedinrelationtothesestructuraldifferences.
These arguments,as straightforwardas theyare,have nonethelessbeenthesubjectofviciouscaricatureandattackfromMarxisttheorists.NormanGerasspokefor
mostwhenwritinginNewLeftReview
progressiveorreactionary.”2Infactthisdescriptionisininsomerespectsaccurate:
HegemonyandSocialistStrategy(London&NewYork:Verso,
1985),122.
New
Devenney-ErnestoLaclau:RethinkingPoliticalAntagonism
Laclaurefusedtheluxuryofclaimingthathistheorywaseithernormativelyprivilegedoverothers,orthatitofnecessityprivilegedoneformofpoliticsoverothers.
Herecognisedforexamplethatinasituationofextremeuncertaintyapartycommittedtotheintroductionoforder–whetherleftorright–wouldinalllikelihood
winout.Radicalcontingencydoesmeanthatvirtuallyanykindofpoliticsispossible,intherightcircumstances.WhatGerasmissesisthatone’scommitmenttothe
valuesofequalityandlibertyispreciselyacommitment–withoutepistemological
or ontological privilege the left must take responsibility for these commitments.
Gerasandhiscomradesassumethatthestakeisalreadyplantedintheground,and
thatthisstakeestablishesinadvancethetermsonwhichoneengagesinpolitics.
Refusalto recognisethe stakes involvedmeansthatone has made an error, does
recognisesmenarebornintoconditionsnotoftheirownchoosing,thatthestakes
aresetinadvancesotospeak,butheinsiststhatthesearecontingentconditions–
notarbitrary,butcontingent–andthattakingaccountoftheseconditionsiswhat
determinesthetermsofpoliticalstruggle.
ThisalsoexplainsLaclau’spolitics.HispoliticalidentitywasforgedintheArgentinianleftinthe1960s.Thesepoliticalexperiencesarecongruentwiththecourseofhis
theoreticalwork.Leftistpoliticsispopulist.Itentailsthearticulationofequivalentiallinksbetweenoppositionalforcesthatmaynot,atleastinitially,seemtoshare
anythingincommonotherthantheiroppositiontoanoppressiveorunpopularregime.Itentailsapoliticalstrategyofdrawinglinksbetweendisparatestruggles,in
oppositiontotheantagonisticother–theregime–thatcausestheparticularillswe
experience.Itentailsashiftingofperspectivesothatwhatseemedtobelocalisrelatedtomoregeneralconditionsofoppression.ThisdoesnotmeanthatforLaclau,
theactivist,anythinggoes.Rather,itmeansthattheorycannotguaranteethatthe
limitswehavearethosethatwillberealisedintheharshrealityofpoliticalstruggle.
Italsomeansthat politicsisnotall ornothing.Hegemonicarticulationof radical
formulated.TakeforexamplethepoliticsofSyrizainGreece.Anumberofcommentatorsonthelefthavedecidedinadvancethatthenewgovernmentwillfail.Ifone’s
commitment is to total revolution, immediately, regardless of circumstance, then
thisisofcoursetrue.ThecompromisesSyrizamakesshouldinsteadbeevaluated
inrelationtowhatispossibleintheextraordinarycircumstanceswhichtheyhave
inherited.OnemarkerofsuccessconcernsthedominantnarrativewhichframesEuropeanpolitics.TheEuropeanUnion,thetroika,andtherulingelitesinGreecehave
foralmostadecadearticulatedtheGreeknationstateasafecklesscommunityof
non-tax paying citizens, unproductive andlazy. Value is reducedtoa quantitative
onlyinsofarastheyarecompatiblewiththeobligationtopaydebts,debtswhich
Greekcitizensdidnottakeon.Onthesetermsanypolicy–cuttingpensions,selling
LeftReview169(1988):34-61,35.
47
48
CriticalStudies
asnecessary,andjust,designedtoensurethatthefutureisbetterforall.Syriza’s
successisnotsimplyaboutthepolicieswhichitseesenacted.Asimportantisthe
reformulationofthedominanttermsofpoliticaldebatesothatquestionsofdignity,
justiceandequalitydictatethetermsonwhichpoliticaldebatetakesplace.Ifthe
termsofequivalencearerearticulatedthus,thenthepoliticalimaginaryframingEuropeanpoliticswillhavebeenradicallyredrawn.
IfforLaclauthereisnoonerevolutionarymoment,nostartingagainfromground
zero,thisisnobadthing.Rather,itleadstotherecognitionthatrevoltismultiple,
thatittakesplaceinmanyarenas,onmanyfronts,thatinsomecasesitmayresult
inwholesalechangestoasociety–asforexampleinthecaseofArgentinianKirchneristpolitics-butthatoftenchangeiswonthroughcompromise.Manywillargue
thatthisissimplyreformism,thatpost-Marxistshavegivenuptheircommitments,
arecapitalistneoliberalsindisguise,purveyorsofthirdwaypolitics.Infactthereverseisthecase.Therevolutiondoeslastalongtime.Itwillcontinuelongafterwe
havegone,butthisdoesnotmeanthatweshouldwaitfortheworldtobemadea
betterplace.Ifitisthecasethatthelefthastowinthroughantagonisticstruggle,
if democracyisnotsimply givenona plate buthastobe reforged anew inevery
generation,thenwemustevaluatetheworldwehaveinherited,andmakeitanew
forfuturegenerations.Weareantagonistsinthisstruggle,astrugglewhichisongoing,whichtransformsnotonlytheworldweinherit,butthesubjectswebecome
aswerearticulatetheworldandourselves.ThisisLaclau’slegacy–acommitment
toantagonisticstruggle,toequality,toactivismwithoutthecomfortingsecurityof
theoreticalcertaintyandstupidity.
MymostabidingmemoriesofErnestoarerecent.In2013Iorganisedaconference
titled:‘ThinkingthePolitical:TheWorkofErnestoLaclau.’Ernestoopenedtheconferencewitharetrospectiveaccountofthedevelopmentofhisowntheoreticalwork
asaresponsetothecrisisoftheleftinthelastdecadesofthe20thcentury.Heattendedeverysession,andspoketoparticipantsaboutthearguments,thedisagreements
andtheclaimsthattheymade.ManyofthefriendsIhadmadeduringthe1990sin
Essexcametotheconference–fromArgentina,NewZealand,fromEssex,Athens,
Turkey,Finland,Slovenia–andImetmanymorescholars,somenowfriends,whom
ference,PhDstudentsinspiredbyhisideas,desperatetohaveawordwithhim,to
pushhim,tochallengeandtoextendhisarguments.Ernestowasaspatientthenas
hehadbeenwithme21yearsago.AttheconferencedinnerErnestoledeveryone
inarenditionoftheInternationale,followedimmediatelybyItalianrevolutionary
songs,thewordsofwhichonlyheknew.Ihadnosensethatthiswouldbethelast
academicevent atwhichIwouldseeErnesto.Iwas duetomeethimataconferenceinLeuven,inJune2014.Hewasduetowriterepliestopapersdeliveredatthe
conference,aspartofabookproject.Thatultimatecontingency,death,meansthat
wewillneverspeaktoErnestoagain.Wewillneverwatchhimdrawthatdiagram
meetingsinBuenosAiresinthe1960sbeforethedictatorshipdisruptedhisactiv-
Devenney-ErnestoLaclau:RethinkingPoliticalAntagonism
argumentwronglypresented,hisinimitabledescriptionofhisownproject.Hisenduringlegacyistoremindusthatpoliticsisantagonistic,contingentandstrategic.
[email protected]
49