Agonism and Antagonism: Past and Future Possibilities of Radical Democracy
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Agonism and Antagonism: Past and Future Possibilities of Radical Democracy By David Matijasevich A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Affairs in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy In Political Science Carleton University Ottawa, Canada © 2015, David Matijasevich Abstract Though radical democratic theory has become a mainstay in progressive political thought for its emphasis on the ability of “anyone at all” to “step out” of their assigned role and challenge political manifestations of domination and exclusion, it is clear that more work needs to be done in terms of establishing the empirical bases for its appearance and continuation. One primary reason for this is the fact that contemporary instances of political contention resembling radical democratic forms of politics have not maintained the agonistic form that radical democratic theorists wish to see. As such, the primary goal of this work is to establish the circumstances in which such episodes are able to take an agonistic form. In order to establish these circumstances, a comparative investigation and analysis of historical episodes of political contestation that reflect those encouraged by radical democratic theorists such as Chantal Mouffe, William Connolly, Bonnie Honig, and Jacques Rancière is employed. In terms of the analytical approach, given radical democratic thought’s various affinities with the subjective and relational vision put forth by the “Contentious Politics” school of political sociology, many of this school’s fundamental explanatory concepts are put to use, including those of interests, capacities, and intervening mechanisms. In comparing across cases of radical democratic contention that included periods of both agonism and antagonism, the work is able to establish frequently occurring patterns of interest compatibility, relative capacity, and intervening mechanisms for both agonistic and antagonistic moments and thus puts forth a general set of circumstances for the continuation of an agonistic form of radical democratic politics. With the cases – those of Croatia 1990-1995, Thailand 2005-2014, Singapore 1945- 1970, and France 1968 – providing the investigation with both a series of events that reflect a radical democratic “stepping out” along with a large number of agonistic and antagonistic moments to be analyzed, the work asserts that these circumstances can be applied to any scenario involving radical democratic contention. After establishing these circumstances for the agonistic continuation of a radical democratic form of politics, the work turns to the question of what this entails for radical democratic theory’s political goals of not only maintaining agonism between competing sets of actors in the contest, but also promoting political equality and having the wrongs endured by previously subordinated groups righted. As the work identifies, there comes to be a clear trade-off between the former goal of agonism and the latter goals of political equality and socio-political transformation. It is at this point that the work moves to a discussion of potential theoretical correctives to some of the radical democratic project’s apparent weaknesses in order to save some of these core political goals. ii Acknowledgments My sincerest thanks are extended to the following people whose thoughts and words provided the foundations for this work. First and foremost, to Achim Hurrelmann whose encouraging yet critical guidance ensured that a fairly overambitious project in its inception was progressively transformed into work that is far more directed and meaningful than it would have been without such a careful eye. Thank you for the continued support and seeing the project through. Also, to Hans-Martin Jaeger and Gopika Solanki whose impressive attention to detail forced me to rethink some my assumptions and allowed me to anticipate crucial tensions that would later arise in the project. As a result of these interventions, I am now able to present a much stronger work. My thanks are also extended to Adrian Little and Zoran Oklopcic who, as external and internal examiners, provided fresh and challenging perspectives through which I was forced to clarify and sharpen some of the work’s central concepts. At Carleton University, I would also like to thank Peter Atack, Brian Schmidt, Supanai Sookmark, and William Walters whose various discussions related to theoretical or case study issues central to this project, whether within the classroom or face-to-face, helped raise important questions and pointed me in directions I had previously not considered. For the day-to-day solidarity, and the sharing of intellectual energy, my warmest thanks are also extended to the Political Science PhD cohort of 2010. Outside of the Carleton community, I would like to thank Phillip Walsh at York University whose introduction of several strands of contemporary democratic thought during my Master’s program opened several new doors of inquiry and gave rise to many of the questions and concerns tackled in this dissertation. Beyond Canadian shores, for taking the time to speak to me at either great length or great depth about the project’s Southeast Asian case studies and overall theoretical framework as it relates to politics in the region, I would also like to thank Chua Beng Huat, Albert Lau, and Eli Elinoff at the National University of Singapore. Since the majority of this project was conducted while overseas and away from my home institution, I also wish to extend my appreciation to the library and archive staff at Aix- Marseille Université and the Bibliothèque de l’Alcazar in Marseille, France, Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok, Thailand, and the National University of Singapore. Despite me having no official privileges at your institutions, many of you made an incredible effort to help me track down certain texts that helped give the work some much needed breadth. Finally I want to thank my family and friends for their support throughout the duration of the PhD, particularly during some tough moments in the early stages. A special thanks is owed to Rujipa for her love and patience, even during testing times with the writing when perhaps I was not at my most pleasant. iii List of Acroymns BS - Barsian Socialis (Socialist Front) CFDT - Confédération française démocratique du travail CGT - Confédération générale du travail CPT - Communist Party of Thailand CRES - Centre for the Resolution of Emergency Situation CRS - Compagnies Républicaines de Sécurité FEN - Fédération de l'éducation nationale FGDS - Fédération de gauche démocrate et socialiste FO - Front ouvrière HDZ - Hrvatska Demokratska Zajednica (Croatian Democratic Union) HSS - Hegemony and Socialist Strategy JCR - Jeunesse communiste révolutionaire JNA - Jugoslavenska Narodna Armija (Yugoslav National Army) MASPOK - Masovni Pokret (Mass Movement) MCP - Malayan Communist Party MDU - Malayan Democratic Union NDH - Nezavisna Država Hrvatska (Independent State of Croatia) NTUC - National Trades Union Council ORTF - l’Office de Radio-Diffusion Française PAD - People’s Alliance for Democracy PAP - People’s Action Party PCF - Parti communiste français PCFML - Parti communiste français marxiste-léniniste PDRC - People’s Democratic Reform Committee PPP - People’s Power Party PSU - Parti socialiste unifié SATU - Singapore Association of Trade Unions SBWU - Singapore Bus Worker's Union SCMSSU - Singapore Chinese Middle School Student Union SDS - Srpska Demokratska Stranka (Serb Democratic Party) SFSWU - Singapore Factory and Shop Workers Union SGEU - Singapore General Employees Union (S)LF - (Singapore) Labour Front SKH - Savez Komunista Hrvatske (Croatian League of Communists) SKH-SDP - Stranka Demokratski Promjena (Party of Democratic Reform) SKJ - Savez Komunista Jugoslavije (League of Communists of Yugoslavia) TRT - Thai Rak Thai (Thais Love Thais) UDD - United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship UGE - l'Union des grandes écoles UMNO - United Malays National Organisation UNEF - l'Union nationale d'étudiants français iv Table of Contents Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………….ii Acknowledgments……………………………………………………………………… iii List of Acronyms…………………………………………………………………………iv 1 Interrogating the Radical Democratic Project……………………………………….1 2 Democratic Paradoxes and Political Blind Spots…………………………………..40 3 Logs and Bullets: The Krajina Serb Rebellion in HDZ Croatia………………………………………..76 4 The Politics of Double Standards in Thailand: Organic Crisis as Radical Democracy……………………………………….........112 5 Democratic Theory and the Curious Case of Singapore………………………...185 6 Radical Democracy Par Excellence? Revolution and Reform in France’s May 68……………………………………....276 7 Cross Case Comparison: Open and Closed Doors for Radical Democracy……………………………….. 365 8 Radical Democratic Challenges and Challenges for Radical Democracy…………………………………………………403 9 Proposals for a Better Democratic Theory………………………………………..462 Works Cited……………………………………………………………………………506 v Chapter 1 Interrogating the Radical Democratic Project Introduction Over the last decade a radical form of the democratic ideal has certainly been in vogue. As a host of analysts have suggested, unlike the fifteen to twenty year period following the end of the Cold War, despite (or in some cases, in response to) a general increased narrowing of political alternatives at the level of state and government, a particular resurgence of democratic engagement “from below” has sprung up to challenge dominant socio-political