Hegemony is coercion combined with consent, won and perpetually reconstructed through class struggle.

Evidence

Despite his continuing stress on experience and intention, this definition of “dominant culture” in Williams clearly owes a great deal to Gramsci’s pivotal and commanding notion of hegemony (Prison Notebooks ). Gramsci argued that “hegemony” exists when a ruling class (or, rather, an alliance of ruling class fractions, a “historical bloc”) is able not only to coerce a subordinate class to conform to its interests, but exerts a “total social authority” over those classes and the social formation as a whole. “Hegemony” is in operation when the dominant class fractions not only dominate but direct or lead: when they not only possess the power to coerce but actively organize so as to command and win the consent of the subordinated classes to their continuing sway. “Hegemony” thus depends on a combination of force and consent. But—Gramsci argues—in the liberal-capitalist state, consent is normally in the lead, operating behind “the armour of coercion.” — Hall, Stuart, Essential Essays, Volume 1, 905 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Under hegemony, organized consent displaces direct coercion as the main instrument; Hegemony is an unstable equilibrium requiring continuous re-securing.; Hegemony combines coercion with actively won consent, with consent in the lead (+12 more)

Related

• Hegemony combines coercion with actively won consent, with consent in the lead (similarity 0.97)
• Hegemony works by winning consent backed by coercion, not by force alone. (similarity 0.94)
• Hegemony is rule achieved through consent rather than coercion (similarity 0.94)
• Hegemony runs on consent backed by a standby coercive apparatus (similarity 0.94)
• Under hegemony, organized consent displaces direct coercion as the main instrument (similarity 0.93)
• Hegemony is a precarious, ever-rebuilt dominance won mainly through consent plus coercion. (similarity 0.92)
• Hegemony requires economic leadership, not just compromise concessions (similarity 0.91)
• Domination relies on coercion while leadership wins consent and subordinate interests. (similarity 0.90)
• Domination operates through consent won by leadership, not force alone (similarity 0.89)
• Normal parliamentary hegemony pairs force with consent so force appears majority-backed (similarity 0.88)
• Hegemony is achieved by more than mere class dominance (similarity 0.88)
• Hegemony must be actively won and can be lost, never permanent (similarity 0.87)
• Effective revolutionary parties unite force with consent dialectically (similarity 0.87)
• Hegemony is an unstable equilibrium that dominant forces must continually resecure (similarity 0.86)
• Hegemony is a fragile, multi-front achievement won through consent, not domination (similarity 0.86)

Broader Connections

• Hegemony works by winning consent backed by coercion, not by force alone. #corroborates (0.85) — Hall, Stuart, Essential Essays, Volume 1, 905
• Hegemony operates through winning consent backed by the threat of force. #corroborates (0.85)
• Hegemony is reproduced through unstable, shifting equilibria rather than static dominance #expands (0.80)
• Hegemony explains class rule as cultural and political sway, not just economic interest #expands (0.70)
• Culture acquires class meaning only through present political struggle #corroborates (0.65)
• Hegemony explains class domination without reducing it to narrow class-interest exposure. #corroborates (0.60) — Hall, Stuart, Essential Essays, Volume 1, 527
• Bourgeois democracy renders invisible the class operation that produces consent #qualifies (0.40)