Democratic theory has long grappled with the challenge of how to navigate the politics of difference while safeguarding against domination. Within this debate, agonistic democracy offers a compelling starting point due to its rejection of consensus-oriented models of democracy that obscure power relations under the guise of neutral deliberation. By foregrounding the constitutive inevitability of political conflict, agonistic theory reconceptualises democracy as a space of ongoing contestation among legitimate adversaries rather than the pursuit of final agreement. However, while agonistic democracy provides a powerful critique of consensus theory, it remains limited in its capacity to fully account for how power structures shape participation, epistemic subject formation, and the normative orientation of democratic struggle. This thesis addresses these limitations by placing agonistic democratic theory in dialogue with intersectional feminist scholarship. It investigates three central questions: how power affects who is able to participate in plural democratic systems and under what conditions; who counts as a democratic subject, whose knowledge is recognised as legitimate; and what democratic politics should ultimately aim to achieve beyond the management of conflict. Through conceptual analysis and critical theoretical synthesis, the study identifies three interrelated limitations within agonistic democratic theory: the abstraction of power away from historically embedded structures of domination; the underdeveloped role of standpoint epistemology in democratic subject formation; and the absence of normative criteria for distinguishing between emancipatory and domination-reinforcing forms of political contestation. Building on insights from intersectional feminist theory, in a mutually reinforcing exchange, the thesis develops a more socially grounded account of democratic pluralism that foregrounds how intersecting systems of oppression structure political participation, authority, and knowledge production. The framework is then applied to questions of governance and sustainability, demonstrating how a justice-oriented democratic approach must prioritise those situated at intersecting margins of power. Ultimately, the thesis argues that democracy should preserve pluralistic contestation while orienting political struggle toward dismantling structurally embedded systems of domination.
Sabrina-Maria Anderson (Fri,) studied this question.