Democracy Today.indb - Universidade do Minho
Democracy Today.indb - Universidade do Minho
Democracy Today.indb - Universidade do Minho
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
and that, as long as there is any social reality, it will be characterized<br />
by conflicts or antagonisms. This inevitable antagonistic dimension of<br />
social reality is what Mouffe calls ‘the political’. And, as everything is<br />
discursive, ‘the political’ itself becomes an ontological category.<br />
That is why we can speak about a political ontology. Before I continue,<br />
let me briefly summarize the points made above:<br />
1.<br />
2.<br />
3.<br />
4.<br />
5.<br />
There exists no distinction between the discursive and the extradiscursive.<br />
Every reality is discursive in nature.<br />
A discourse can only exist through an act of exclusion<br />
The ‘relation’ towards what is excluded, is always a potentially antagonistic<br />
one, because what is excluded forms a threat to the existing order.<br />
This inevitable, antagonistic dimension is called ‘the political’.<br />
As such, everything is political.<br />
92<br />
DEMOCRACY TODAY<br />
The statement ‘everything is political’, must be understood in the<br />
right way. It <strong>do</strong>es not mean that everything is the object of politics;<br />
that would be similar to a totalitarian situation where in every aspect<br />
of life is <strong>do</strong>minated by politics. Rather, it should be understood in the<br />
way in which Carl Schmitt described the political. For Schmitt, the<br />
<strong>do</strong>main of politics changes constantly as result of shifting power configurations.<br />
In this Schmittian view, the political acts like a ghost: the<br />
social is haunted by the political. Every aspect of social life, whether<br />
it be health, religion or economics, can suddenly become the object<br />
of political contestation. [9] But, and this is important, the political can<br />
never appear in every aspect of the social at the same time. That would<br />
be equivalent to a Hobbesian state of nature or the psychotic universe<br />
mentioned above. So, instead of saying ‘everything is political’, it would<br />
be better to say ‘everything can become (ever again) political’.<br />
At this point we start to see glimpses of the relevance of this ontological<br />
position. Indeed, if what is excluded from a signifying system<br />
is not the result of an underlying necessity, it can only be the result of<br />
a decision. The act of the decision, is an authoritarian moment which<br />
has no foundation except in itself. To make this decision acceptable<br />
is the result of a successful hegemonic operation. Since the decision<br />
9<br />
Schmitt (1979) 38.