Habermas as an agonist? Communicative action and the ideals of agonist planning theory
Loading...
Date
2016
Authors
Editors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
AESOP
Abstract
Communicative planning theories have been criticized already for years for their adherence to Habermasian ideal of ‘rationally motivated consensus’, and ideal that does not seem to meet the power-laden and irrational reality of planning, and also an ideal that does not seem to do justice to the irreducible pluralism in contemporary societies (see e.g. Hillier 2002; 2003; Ploger 2004; Purcell 2009). Agonist planning theory, in particular, has followed political theorists such as Chantal Mouffe, who has argued that the idea of consensus does not do justice to the space of ‘the political’, the space that is characterized by a condition of ‘agony’. ‘Agony’, for Mouffe, does not refer to antagonism - a condition of struggle between enemies - but to a condition of struggle between adversaries (Mouffe 2013: 7). The target of Mouffe’s criticism is the liberalist political philosophy in general, but she makes also explicit references to Habermas’s ideas of consensus (Mouffe 2013).
Theorists of agonist planning have directed their attention especially to the ways in which planning could be more sensitive to difference and particular identities of people and groups, identities that are neglected in liberal political tradition and often suppressed in modern, neo-liberalizing societies (Purcell 2008; 2009; Hillier 2003). In the search and expression of identities, Habermasian transparent and understanding-oriented uses of language seem to fall short, whereas the ‘ruptures’ in language seem to open promising potentials for identity-searching and expression of suppressed needs (ibid.).
Description
Proceedings of the IV World Planning Schools Congress, July 3-8th, 2016 : Global crisis, planning and challenges to spatial justice in the north and in the south
Keywords
License
All Rights Reserved