Blocking democratic closure requires abandoning the ideal of stable consensus grounded in justice

Evidence

A democratic thinking that incorporates their insights can be more receptive to the multiplicity of voices that a pluralist society encompasses and to the need to allow them forms of expression instead of striving towards harmony and consensus. Indeed it acknowledges that, in order to impede the closure of the democratic space, it is necessary to abandon any reference to the idea of a consensus that, because it would be grounded on justice and rationality. could not be destabilized. The main obstacle to such a ‘radical-pluralistic-democratic’ vision is constituted by the misguided quest for consensus and reconciliation, and this is something that Wittgenstein. with his insistence on the need to respect differences. brings to the fore in a very powerful way. — Chantal Mouffe, The Democratic Paradox, 357

Categorization

• XREF: Directly speaks to the reader’s test of a non-exclusionary pluralist ‘we’: Mouffe claims democracy stays open only by dropping consensus ideals. — connects to: The conversation of justice must not have a victor — Chantal Mouffe, The Democratic Paradox, 345; Rejecting consensus as impossible protects democracy from closure — Chantal Mouffe, The Democratic Paradox, 146; Democratic politics should mobilize passions, not eliminate them for rational consensus — Chantal Mouffe, The Democratic Paradox, 462 (+8 more)
• QUESTION: If consensus grounded in justice-rationality is the obstacle, what exactly does the reader’s agonistic ‘we’ rely on instead for legitimacy?
• SEED: Essay angle: consensus-seeking democracy as the subtle enemy of pluralism, contrarian to ‘dialogue and reconciliation’ pieties.

Broader Connections

• Rejecting consensus as impossible protects democracy from closure #corroborates (0.88) — Chantal Mouffe, The Democratic Paradox, 146
• Conflict legitimation, not consensus, is modern democracy’s condition of existence #corroborates (0.87) — Chantal Mouffe, The Democratic Paradox, 463
• Undecidability, not consensus, is the condition of democratic freedom #corroborates (0.86) — Chantal Mouffe, The Democratic Paradox, 150
• Democratic politics should mobilize passions, not eliminate them for rational consensus #corroborates (0.85) — Chantal Mouffe, The Democratic Paradox, 462
• Democratic negotiation is agonistic struggle without final resolution #corroborates (0.83)
• Democracy’s constituting of the people requires an inescapable moment of closure. #complicates (0.82) — Chantal Mouffe, The Democratic Paradox, 192
• Deliberative democracy eliminates pluralism to achieve consensus, leaving it unable to answer Schmitt #expands (0.80) — Chantal Mouffe, The Democratic Paradox, 225
• Believing power dissolves through rational debate endangers democratic institutions #corroborates (0.78) — Chantal Mouffe, The Democratic Paradox, 467