|
Posthegemony or post-hegemony is a concept which designates a period or a situation in which hegemony is no longer said to function as the organizing principle of a national or post-national social order, or of the relationships between and amongst nation-states within the global order.〔Williams, ''The Other Side of the Popular'', 327: "Posthegemony () is no longer a name for the hegemony of transnational capital, but the name of those 'places in which hegemony ceases to make sense' (Jean Franco)."〕 The concept has different meanings within the fields of political theory, cultural studies and international relations. ==In cultural studies== In the field of cultural studies, posthegemony has been developed as a concept by a number of critics whose work engages with and critiques the use of cultural hegemony theory within the writings of Ernesto Laclau and within subaltern studies.〔For example George Yúdice (1995), Alberto Moreiras (2001), Gareth Williams (2002) and Jon Beasley-Murray (2010).〕 George Yúdice, in 1995, was one of the first commentators to summarize the background to the emergence of this concept: The shift to post-Fordism and other changes in the mode of production () correspond to a weakening of the articulation of The concept of posthegemony is related to the rise of the "multitude" as a social force which, unlike the "people", cannot be captured by hegemony, together with the roles of affect and habitus in mechanisms of social control and agency.〔These ideas are discussed extensively in Hardt and Negri’s ''Empire'' (2000) and ''Multitude: War and Democracy in the Age of Empire'' (2004), as well as in Beasley-Murray (2010).〕 Posthegemony and its related terms are influenced by Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, Pierre Bourdieu and Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri’s accounts of the supra- and infra-national forces that are said to have rendered obsolete the national-popular forms of coercion and consent through which, for Antonio Gramsci, hegemony structured and constituted society. The features of posthegemony as a concept correspond closely to those of postmodernity. Thus, posthegemony theory argues that ideology is no longer a political driving force in mechanisms of social control, and that the modernist theory of hegemony, which depends on ideology, therefore no longer accurately reflects the social order.〔Beasley-Murray, "On Posthegemony," 119.〕 Some commentators also argue that history is not, as Karl Marx described it, a class struggle, but rather a "struggle to produce class".〔Beasley-Murray, "On Posthegemony," 120.〕 The concept of posthegemony also resonates with the work of post-Foucauldian theorists such as Giorgio Agamben. Nicholas Thoburn, drawing on Agamben's discussion on the "state of exception," writes that "it is, perhaps, with the recasting of the relationship between law and politico-military and economic crises and interventions that is instituted in the state of exception that the time of hegemony is most revealed to have passed."〔Thoburn, "Patterns of Production," 89.〕 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Posthegemony」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|