Every democratic consensus is a provisional hegemony that entails exclusion

Evidence

It is for that reason that the ideal of a pluralist democracy cannot be to reach a rational consensus in the public sphere. Such a consensus cannot exist. We have to accept that every consensus exists as a temporary result of a provisional hegemony, as a stabilization of power, and that it always entails some form of exclusion. β€” Chantal Mouffe, The Democratic Paradox, 467

Categorization

  • DEEPTHINKING: This is the paradigm-shifting core: democracy’s legitimacy rests not on pure rationality but on acknowledged provisional hegemonies that always exclude β€” directly central to the reader’s conceptual test.
  • XREF: Sets up the tension the reader is probing: if consensus always entails exclusion, what happens to the excluded β€” do they become Enemy or adversary? β€” connects to: Every consensus is a provisional hegemonic stabilization entailing exclusion. β€” Chantal Mouffe, The Democratic Paradox, 467; No political consensus could exist free of exclusion β€” Chantal Mouffe, The Democratic Paradox, 139; Democratic equality cannot exist without a correlate of inequality and exclusion β€” Chantal Mouffe, The Democratic Paradox, 173 (+4 more)

Broader Connections