Radical Democracy in Global Perspective: notes from the pluriverse

Abstract

In this article we contrast the theoretical tradition of radical democracy developed by Chantal Mouffe with an alternative tradition of radical democracy rooted in the practices of subaltern social movements. While the former is wedded to the context and aspirations of Western modernity, the latter consists of place-based forms of ‘colonial difference’ within the Third and Fourth Worlds that are subalternised by the (aggressively globalising) modern tradition of democracy. Working within a ‘modernity/coloniality’ framework, we contrast these traditions of radical democracy along three main axes: 1) the logic of articulation among diverse struggles and movements; 2) the orientation towards, and aspirations with respect to, the state; and 3) the relation to the global scale and vision of the ‘pluriverse’.

Notes

1 A Escobar, ‘Beyond the Third World: imperial globality, global coloniality and anti-globalisation social movements’, Third World Quarterly, 25(1), 2004, p 207.

2 J Tully, Public Philosophy in a New Key, Vol 2, Imperialism and Civic Freedom, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008, p 158.

3 For an overview of this body of work, see A Escobar, ‘Worlds and knowledges otherwise: the Latin American modernity/coloniality research program’, Cultural Studies, 21(2–3), 2007, pp 179–210. Key works in this field include W Mignolo, Local Histories/Global Designs, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000; Mignolo, ‘The geopolitics of knowledge and the colonial difference’, South Atlantic Quarterly, 101(1), 2002, pp 57–96; Mignolo, ‘Globalization and the geopolitics of knowledge: the role of the humanities in the corporate university’, Nepantla: Views from South, 4(1), 2003, pp 97–119; A Quijano, ‘Coloniality of power, eurocentrism and Latin America’, Nepantla, 1(3), 2000, pp 533–580; E Dussel, ‘Beyond eurocentrism: the world-system and the limits of modernity’, in F Jameson & M Miyoshi (eds), The Cultures of Globalization, Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1998, pp 3–31; E Dussel, ‘Europe, modernity and eurocentrism’, Nepantla, 1(3), 2000, pp 465–478; and Dussel, ‘World-system and “trans”-modernity’, Nepantla, 3(2), 2002, pp 221–244.

4 Mignolo, ‘The geopolitics of knowledge and the colonial difference’, p 66.

5 For an elaboration of their understanding of modernity, see Quijano, ‘Coloniality of power, eurocentrism and Latin America’, pp 543–547.

6 Escobar, ‘Beyond the Third World’, p 221.

7 Ibid, p 220. See also A Escobar, Territories of Difference, Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2008, p 12ff; and Escobar, ‘Worlds and knowledges otherwise’.

8 C Mouffe, On the Political, New York: Routledge, 2005, p 53.

9 C Mouffe, ‘Radical democracy or liberal democracy?’, in D Trend (ed), Radical Democracy: Identity, Citizenship, and the State, New York: Routledge, 1996, p 20.

10 Ibid, p 20.

11 C Mouffe, The Democratic Paradox, London: Verso, 2000, p 18.

12 E Laclau & C Mouffe, Hegemony and Socialist Strategy, London: Verso, 2001, p xvi; and Mouffe, ‘Radical democracy or liberal democracy?’, p 20.

13 B d S Santos, ‘The WSF: toward a counter-hegemonic globalisation’, in J Sen, A Anand, A Escobar & P Waterman (eds), World Social Forum: Challenging Empires, New Delhi: Viveka Foundation, 2004, p 236.

14 C Mouffe, The Return of the Political, London: Verso, 1993; and Mouffe, The Democratic Paradox.

15 Mouffe, The Return of the Political, p 141.

16 Laclau & Mouffe, Hegemony and Socialist Strategy, p 187.

17 Ibid, p 188.

18 R Day, Gramsci is Dead: Anarchist Currents in the Newest Social Movements, London/Toronto: Pluto Press/Between the Lines, 2005, p 8.

19 Ibid, p 6.

20 Mouffe, The Return of the Political; Mouffe, The Democratic Paradox; and Mouffe, On the Political.

21 C Mouffe, ‘Which world order: cosmopolitan or multipolar?’, Ethical Perspectives, 15(4), 2008, pp 453–467; Mouffe, The Democratic Paradox; and Mouffe, On the Political.

22 Mouffe, ‘Which world order’, p 463.

23 Ibid; and Mouffe, On the Political.

24 Mouffe, On the Political, p 118.

25 Mouffe, ‘Which world order’, p 466.

26 A Dhaliwal, ‘Can the subaltern vote? Radical democracy, discourses of representation and rights, and questions of race’, in Trend, Radical Democracy, pp 42–61.

27 I Kapoor, ‘Deliberative democracy or agonistic pluralism? The relevance of the Habermas–Mouffe debate for Third World politics’, Alternatives, 27(4), 2002, pp 459–487.

28 GC Spivak & D Plotke, ‘A dialogue on democracy’, in Trend, Radical Democracy, pp 209–222.

29 P Wignaraja, ‘Rethinking development and democracy’, in Wignaraja (ed), New Social Movements in the South: Empowering the People, London: Zed, 1993, pp 4–35; and G Esteva & MS Prakash, Grassroots Postmodernism: Remaking the Soil of Cultures, London: Zed Books, 1998.

30 JB Childs, Transcommunality: From the Politics of Conversion to the Ethics of Respect, Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press, 2003; T Alfred, Peace, Power and Righteousness: An Indigenous Manifesto, Don Mills: Oxford University Press, 2009; and L Simpson (ed), Lighting the Eighth Fire: The Liberation, Resurgence and Protection of Indigenous Nations, Winnipeg: Arbeiter Ring, 2008.

31 Esteva & Prakash, Grassroots Postmodernism, pp 16–17, n 2.

32 P Parajuli, ‘Revisting Gandhi and Zapata: motion of global capital, geographies of difference and the formation of ecological ethnicities’, in M Blaser, HA Feit & G McRae (eds), In the Way of Development: Indigenous Peoples, Life Projects, and Globalization, London: Routledge, 2004, p 236.

33 Blaser et al, In the Way of Development.

34 G Esteva, ‘Oaxaca: the path of radical democracy’, Socialism and Democracy, 21(2), 2007, pp 74–96. See also G Esteva, ‘The Asamblea Popular de los Pueblos de Oaxaca: a chronicle of radical democracy’, Latin American Perspectives, 34(1), 2007, pp 129–144; and www.mraroaxaca.uoregon.edu.

35 Esteva, ‘Oaxaca’, p 89.

36 Ibid, p 85.

37 Ibid, pp 75–78.

38 Ibid, p 94.

39 Ibid, p 78.

40 Ibid, p 90.

41 A Robinson & S Tormey, ‘Is “another world” possible? Laclau, Mouffe and social movements’, in A Little & M Lloyd (eds), The Politics of Radical Democracy, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2008, pp 133–157.

42 Blaser et al, In the Way of Development.

43 Esteva & Prakash, Grassroots Postmodernism, p 28.

44 For a discussion of this aspect of the World Social Forum in relation to democratic theories of deliberation and representation, see J Conway & J Singh, ‘Is the World Social Forum a transnational public sphere? Nancy Fraser, critical theory, and the containment of radical possibility’, Theory, Culture & Society, 26(5), 2009, pp 61–84.

45 Day, Gramsci is Dead. See also W Fisher & T Ponniah (eds), Another World is Possible: Popular Alternatives to Globalization at the World Social Forum, London: Zed Books, 2003.

46 Escobar, Territories of Difference, p 15.

47 Robinson & Tormey, ‘Is “another world” possible?’, p 140.

48 Esteva & Prakash, Grassroots Postmodernism, pp 16–17.

49 Ibid, p 153.

50 B d S Santos (ed), Democratizing Democracy: Beyond the Liberal Democratic Canon, London: Verso, 2005; and DL Sheth, ‘Micro-movements in India: towards a new politics of participatory democracy’, in Santos, Democratizing Democracy, pp 3–37.

51 AB Cal y Mayor, ‘The de facto autonomous process: new jurisdictions and parallel governments in rebellion’, in J Rus, RAH Castillo & SL Mattiace (eds), Mayan Lives, Mayan Utopias: The Indigenous Peoples of Chiapas and the Zapatista Rebellion, Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2003, pp 191–218.

52 M Menser, ‘Disarticulate the state! Maximizing democracy in “new” autonomous movements in the Americas’, in H Gautney, O Dahbour, A Dawson & N Smith (eds), Democracy, States and the Struggle for Global Justice, New York: Routledge, 2009, p 252.

53 S Roque, Six Miles Deep, National Film Board of Canada, 2009.

54 Y Dion-Buffalo & J Mohawk, ‘Thoughts from an autochthonous center: postmodernism and cultural studies’, Cultural Survival Quarterly, Winter 1994, pp 33–35, cited in Esteva and Prakash, Grassroots Postmodernism, p 45.

55 For analyses of some of the complex experimentations occurring in Latin America with respect to the state, see A Escobar, ‘Latin America at a crossroads: alternative modernizations, post-liberalism, or post-development?’, Cultural Studies, 24(1), 2010, pp 1–65; and P Regalsky, ‘Political processes and the reconfiguration of the state in Bolivia’, Latin American Perspectives, 37(3), 2010, pp 35–50.

56 Esteva & Prakash, Grassroots Postmodernism, p 27.

57 Ibid, p 164.

58 Parajuli, ‘Revisting Gandhi and Zapata’.

59 Esteva & Prakash, Grassroots Postmodernism, p 39.

60 Parajuli, ‘Revisting Gandhi and Zapata’, p 249. See also V Shiva, Earth Democracy: Justice, Sustainability, and Peace, Cambridge, MA: South End Press, 2005.

61 Esteva & Prakash, Grassroots Postmodernism, p 26.

62 Ibid, p 28.

63 R Panikkar, ‘La diversidad como presupuesto para la armonia entre los pueblos’, Wisay Marka (Barcelona), 20, 1993, pp 15–20, cited in Esteva & Prakash, Grassroots Postmodernism, p 127.

64 D Haraway, ‘Situated knowledges: the science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective’, in Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature, London: Routledge, 1991, pp 183–201.

65 N Yuval-Davis, ‘Beyond difference: women and coalition politics’, in M Kennedy, C Lubelska & V Walsh (eds), Making Connections: Women's Studies, Women's Movements, Women's Lives, London: Taylor & Francis, 1993, pp 3–10.

66 F Wilmer, The Indigenous Voice in World Politics, Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1993, cited in Parajuli, ‘Revisting Gandhi and Zapata’, p 248.

67 Dussel, ‘World-system and “trans”-modernity’.

68 Escobar, Territories of Difference, p 14.

69 W Mignolo, ‘The many faces of cosmo-polis: border thinking and critical cosmopolitanism’, Public Culture, 12(3), 2000, p 743.

70 Childs, Transcommunality.

71 For an important discussion of the use of incommensurability as a critical tool in subaltern and Indigenous studies, see JA Byrd & M Rothberg, ‘Between subalternity and indigeneity: critical categories for postcolonial studies’, Interventions, 13(1), 2011, pp 1–12.

72 Escobar, ‘Beyond the Third World’, p 223.

73 Esteva & Prakash, Grassroots Postmodernism, p 35.

74 Mignolo, ‘The many faces of cosmo-polis’, pp 741–742.

75 For the concept of ‘low-intensity democracy’, see B Gills, J Rocamora & R Wilson (eds), Low Intensity Democracy: Political Power in the New World Order, London: Pluto Press, 1993.

76 W Brown, ‘We are all democrats now … ’, Theory & Event, 13(2), 2010.