Suchergebnisse

When Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe published an elaborate version of their discourse theory inHegemony and Socialist Strategy(1985), they were met with fierce resistance by a unified front of traditional Marxists and anti-poststructuralists. The debates on post-Marxism dominated much of the book's reception. This focus, combined with discourse theory's rather abstract nature, its lack of clear methodological guidelines, and its more natural habitat of Political Studies, caused discourse theory to remain confined to this realm of Political Studies, despite the broad ideological definition of the political preferred by the authors. This article aims to revisit discourse theory and bring it into the realm of Media Studies. A necessary condition to enhance discourse theory's applicability in Media Studies is the re-articulation of discourse theory into discourse theoretical analysis (DTA). DTA's claim for legitimacy is supported in this article by two lines of argument. Firstly, a comparison with Critical Discourse Analyses (CDA) at the textual and contextual level allow us to flesh out the similarities — and more importantly — the differences between CDA and DTA. Secondly, DTA's applicability is demonstrated by putting it to work in a case study, which focuses on the articulation of audience participation through televisional practices. Both lines of argument aim to illustrate the potential, the adaptability and the legitimacy of DTA's move into media studies.

When Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe published an elaborate version of their discourse theory in Hegemony and Socialist Strategy (1985), they were met with fierce resistance by a unified front of traditional Marxists and anti-poststructuralists. The debates on post-Marxism dominated much of the book's reception. This focus, combined with discourse theory's rather abstract nature, its lack of clear methodological guidelines, and its more natural habitat of Political Studies, caused discourse theory to remain confined to this realm of Political Studies, despite the broad ideological definition of the political preferred by the authors. This article aims to revisit discourse theory and bring it into the realm of Media Studies. A necessary condition to enhance discourse theory's applicability in Media Studies is the re-articulation of discourse theory into discourse theoretical analysis (DTA). DTA's claim for legitimacy is supported in this article by two lines of argument. Firstly, a comparison with Critical Discourse Analyses (CDA) at the textual and contextual level allow us to flesh out the similarities - and more importantly - the differences between CDA and DTA. Secondly, DTA's applicability is demonstrated by putting it to work in a case study, which focuses on the articulation of audience participation through televisional practices. Both lines of argument aim to illustrate the potential, the adaptability and the legitimacy of DTA's move into media studies. Adapted from the source document.

This article explores the use of populism by comparatively privileged groups, a specific type of populism we call the 'populism of the privileged'. Our argument is not merely that 'populisms of the privileged' are also forms of populism, but that they warrant a specific label. We first identify intersections between populism and privilege on the levels of populist actors, support for populism and beneficiaries of populism, which we call populism by, with and for the privileged. We then present a discursive conceptualization of 'populism of the privileged'. Building on this we develop analytical strategies for the study the 'populism of the privileged', zooming in on how 'the people' and 'the elite' are constructed in such populisms, their sociological directionality, the layeredness of privilege and un(der)privilege, the discursive construction of 'crisis' and 'unmet demands' and the role of discourses about populism in reproducing the claims of populisms of the privileged.

This article formulates precise questions and 'rules of engagement' designed to advance our understanding of the role populism can and should play in the present political conjuncture, with potentially significant implications for critical management and organization studies and beyond. Drawing on the work of Ernesto Laclau and others working within the post-Marxist discourse-theory tradition, we defend a concept of populism understood as a form of reason that centres around a claim to represent 'the people', discursively constructed as an underdog in opposition to an illegitimate 'elite'. A formal discursive approach to populism brings with it important advantages. For example, it establishes that a populist logic can be invoked to further very different political goals, from radical left to right, or from progressive to regressive. It sharpens too our grasp of important issues that are otherwise conflated and obfuscated. For instance, it helps us separate out the nativist and populist dimensions in the discourses of the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP), Trump or the Front National (FN). Our approach to populism, however, also points to the need to engage with the rhetoric about populism, a largely ignored area of critical research. In approaching populism as a signifier, not only as a concept, we stress the added need to focus on the uses of the term 'populism' itself: how it is invoked, by whom and to what purpose and effect. This, we argue, requires that we pay more systematic attention to anti-populism and 'populist hype', and reflect upon academia's own relation to populism and anti-populism.

This article formulates precise questions and 'rules of engagement' designed to advance our understanding of the role populism can and should play in the present political conjuncture, with potentially significant implications for critical management and organization studies and beyond. Drawing on the work of Ernesto Laclau and others working within the post-Marxist discourse-theory tradition, we defend a concept of populism understood as a form of reason that centres around a claim to represent 'the people', discursively constructed as an underdog in opposition to an illegitimate 'elite'. A formal discursive approach to populism brings with it important advantages. For example, it establishes that a populist logic can be invoked to further very different political goals, from radical left to right, or from progressive to regressive. It sharpens too our grasp of important issues that are otherwise conflated and obfuscated. For instance, it helps us separate out the nativist and populist dimensions in the discourses of the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP), Trump or the Front National (FN). Our approach to populism, however, also points to the need to engage with the rhetoric about populism, a largely ignored area of critical research. In approaching populism as a signifier, not only as a concept, we stress the added need to focus on the uses of the term 'populism' itself: how it is invoked, by whom and to what purpose and effect. This, we argue, requires that we pay more systematic attention to anti-populism and 'populist hype', and reflect upon academia's own relation to populism and anti-populism.

Chapter 4: A Discourse-Theoretical Approach to Death and DyingChapter 5: Putting Your Relationship to the Test: Constructions of Fidelity, Seduction, and Participation in Temptation Island; Section 3: Production; Chapter 6: The Postmodern Challenge to Journalism: Strategies for Constructing a Trustworthy Identity; Chapter 7: The Particularity of Objectivity: A Poststructuralist and Psychoanalytical Reading of the Gap between Objectivity-as-a-Value and Objectivity-as-a-Practice in the 2003 Iraqi War Coverage; Section 4: Audiences and Participation

The introduction to the edited volume Communication and Discourse Theory aims to reflect on the interaction between discourse theory and the study of media and communication, as well as the Brussels Discourse Theory Group's contribution to it. The chapter starts with a summary of the main tenets of Laclau and Mouffe's discourse theory, and touches upon its methodological/analytical translation in discourse-theoretical analysis (DTA). The next main part of the chapter discusses how discourse theory has been put to use for the analysis of communication and media, distinguishing four thematic areas: (1) communication, rhetoric, and media strategies; (2) discourses in media organizations; (3) media identities, practices, and institutions; and (4) media and agonistic democracy. In the next part, two areas that are currently being developed in the group, and have thus far remained under-developed, are singled out theoretically as well as empirically, from a discourse-theoretical perspective. This includes the relation between the discursive and the material, and the relation between media, communication, and audiences. Finally, the chapter provides a short overview of the other chapters in this book.

Abstract
This article is the English translation of a text originally published by Ernesto Laclau in French in 1981 as part of the
proceedings of the colloquium Materialités Discursives held in Nanterre on 24–26 April 1980. In this text, Ernesto Laclau reflects on the
subject of hegemony as a discursively constructed phenomenon. Building on research on the discursive construction of the acceptability of
popular front politics in 1935 during the Seventh Congress of the Komintern, the author proposes a number of broader arguments on the notion
of antagonism and on some of the problems related to the Marxist conception of totality.

The Democracy in Europe Movement 2025 (DiEM25), launched by former Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis, seeks to construct a transnational left political project to 'democratise Europe'. Its construction of a European 'people' against an international elite raises questions about the potentials of populism beyond the nation-state. Building on a discourse-theoretical distinction between populism and nationalism, the article asks whether DiEM25 is a truly transnational populist movement. Through an analysis of the movement's manifestoes, speeches, press releases and published interviews with DiEM25 leaders, the article shows how DiEM25 constructs a 'European people' in opposition to an international 'elite', how DiEM25 oscillates between speaking for national 'peoples' and a transnational 'people', and how it negotiates its populism, nationalism and transnationalism. The article contributes to the theorisation of populism beyond the usually assumed nation-state level and shines a light on the potentials and limitations of transnational populism as an as-yet understudied political development.

AbstractThis article assesses the current state of play of the poststructuralist and post-Marxist discourse theory associated with Laclau and Mouffe and the 'Essex school', and identifies ways forward at the level of theory development, research practice and critique. The article starts by disentangling the different meanings of the notion of 'discourse' in 'discourse theory', clarifying the specificities of discourse theory as a theoretical and analytical framework and situating discourse theory in, but also beyond, critical discourse studies. It then moves to an assessment of the current state of discourse theory, its main contributions, and the identification of shortcomings and ways forward. This discussion is organized around five topics: methodology and the theory-analysis dialectic; the logics approach; the discursive-material relation; the role of fantasy and other psychoanalytic categories; and populism.

Abstract
This article introduces the special issue of the Journal of Language and Politics on 'Discourse Theory: Ways forward for
theory development and research practice.' In this introduction we discuss the aims and structure of this special issue focused on the development of the poststructuralist and post-Marxist discourse theory originally developed by Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe.