Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This article examines the implications of the introduction of the category of ‘heterogeneity’ in Ernesto Laclau's most recent work. Laclau's theory of hegemony and discourse theoretical approach to ideology is often associated with the category of ‘antagonism’. I argue that heterogeneity should be the central category of hegemony and discourse analysis, and that antagonism can be seen as a strategy of ideological closure. In addition, heterogeneity—understood as the simultaneous condition of possibility and impossibility of hegemonic articulation—renders the theory of hegemony closer to Derridean deconstruction. Hegemony analysis and deconstruction are often presented as different and complementary theoretical moves. I argue that this is not the case, and that they can instead be seen as dealing with the same issues of the conditions of possibility and impossibility of the discursive constitution of ideology and identity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lasse Thomassen (2005) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: