the places and spaces of citizenship and the public in the new global era

8/13/2019 The Places and Spaces of Citizenship and the Public in the New Global Era

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-places-and-spaces-of-citizenship-and-the-public-in-the-new-global-era 1/60

Revisiting the Polis Amidst Shifting Sands. The Places and Spaces of Citizenship andthe Public in the New Global Ea. Cuent Pedicaments! "ebates! and #mplications foThin$ing %A &old in Common'.

Ampao (en)ndez*Cai+n

This pape was pepaed fo pesentation at the &old Congess of the #ntenationalPolitical Science Association! Santiago de Chile! ,ul- //0. #t is based on the theoeticalchapte of a boo$*length manuscipt 1Ampao (en)ndez*Cai+n! pelimina- title2´Contra Viento y Marea´. Memories of Citizenship: the Resilience of Public Space in an

Embattered Polis. The ru!uayan E"perience# $%&'()'$'3. (- eseach too$ placeunde the auspices of the Cento 4atinoameicano de Econom5a 6umana! C4AE61(ontevideo! 7ugua-3. #n the pepaation of that chapte # benefited fom e8tensiveconvesations with Paulo Ravecca! who coodinated m- eseach*team in 7ugua-! and9alle "alh:uist! who tavelled fom Sweden to ;oin it. (- appeciation also goes to&a-ne Gabadi and ,ose Rilla fo thei insightful comments. # am geatl- indebted toRafael Patenain! Ang)lica <itale and! again! to Paulo Ravecca fo thei illuminating

thoughts and obsevations in the couse of two wo$shops held in 4a Paz! =olivia



1,anua- >? and /! //@3 to discuss a pevious vesion of the chapte on which this pape is based.

ABSTRACT * An unsettling teain fo thin$ing %a wold in common' is suggested b- thecuent moment of %wold*wide neolibeal hegemon-' 1=ennan! //>3its con;unctual cisesaside*! tensel- intetwined with %a new ea of divesit-' 1Shafi! >00@3! and the shiftingd-namics evo$ed b- such ubics as %the late moden*postmoden tansition'1Gabadi! //>3!especiall- when attempting to conside the implications of such gagantuan anal-tical $nots fothe place of %things public' in eithe cuent! emeging! o envisioned famings of political life.Such shifts might lend cedence to the notion that thin$ing %a wold in common' bodes thenonsensical o blatantl- naBve. #n tun! the tansfomations of dissent lin$ed to globalizationfom below might suggest that thin$ing a wold in common is a woth- endeavou! though theteain of the battle no longe does 1o should3 lie in the concete places that we inhabit *unlessas pat and pacel of a tansnational stateg- and a cosmopolitan spiit*. Relevant ongoingdebates include and tanscend ma;o taditions in political theo-! at the same time that politicaltheo- is intewoven in novel wa-s with a panopl- of scholal- fields that in the past two

decades o so have embaced new thematizations and appoaches! tansfoming in the pocessthe landscape and oientation of political in:ui- with significant implications fo thin$ing the boundaies! places and spaces of associative pactices! emancipato- politics! citizenship and public space. "awing fom elevant debates and thematizations that challenge! one wa- oanothe! the emplacement of %a wold in common' in the places we inhabit! a discussion of the

polis! citizenship and public space is offeed. Specific attention is ganted to 6annah Aendtsnotion of %a wold in common'! ,Dgen 6abemass influential public sphee as well as hisleading citics*! and Engin #sins contibutions to the stud- of citizenship as alteit-. n the

basis of that theoetical convesation! a set of aguments is offeed highlighting the pivotalfunction of the polis! citizenship and public space **as well as teito- and state*gounding** foundestanding the unfolding of peoples concete political e8peience! and fo thin$ing %a woldin common' in the new global ea.

INTRODUCTION.

This pape see$s to accomplish a two*fold tas$2 fist! to thematize the place of %a

wold in common' in an unli$el-*hospitable pesent! and! second! to offe a eading of

citizenship and public space that ecoves the idea of the polis as elevant theoetical

*and pactical* pusuit.

Two basic points ae advanced in the pages that follow. Fist! that fa fom a

nostalgic -eaning fo %things past' %eal' o imagined*! the idea of the polis

commands the sta-ing*powe eaned though the hospitalit- it has ganted acoss time

to a divesit- of conceptions! debates and seaches centeed on citizenship2 its elusive

and eve*changing! though stubbonl- enduing! conceptual guest. Secondl-! that

undestood as discursi*e space anchoed on plualit- and egalitaianism! the idea of the

polis ma- be deplo-ed to catch a 1stategic3 glimpse of the collective tials! tibulations!

achievements *and sta$es* involved in the cafting! ecafting! and defense of %a wold



in common' in the new global ea.

A few ontological pefeences! nomative commitments! and pemises should be

declaed at the outset.>

Fist2 The motions of citizenship namel-! being with! amongst! o against

othes* define the meaning and meaningfulness of things public in an- milieu! that is!

the place and space affoded to the pusuit of m-iad life*po;ects which must

ac$nowledge whethe to celebate o lament it* that! shot of ma;o catacl-sms! the-

ae a datum of e8peience that cannot be easil- hidden o eased.

(- in:ui- is thus pemised on the ve- basic notion that the inteactions

between the self*and*othes matte as a cental political datum! fo the- ende the

:ualit- and te8tue of an- milieu whee collective life is enacted. &hat mattes most!

fom a political pespective! ae those inteactions and encountes that ta$e place

be-ond the ealm of %eas-*choice' undestanding the latte as those the self ma-

choose to engage in! be it within the pivac- of he own home o the elative comfots

of esticted o e8clusive access to faces! places! and things. The name assigned b- the

motions of histo- to the site fo the fome is public space. #n this pape it shall be

agued that public space entails living togethe amongst stanges and it does not %;ust

happen'! unless the conditions fo its enactment ae poduced! ganting the polis a

pivotal place as the discusive space whee that commonalit- ma- become available.

Second2 This in:ui- is also pemised on the notion that undestanding! acting

upon! envisioning! and cafting the place of the self*and*othes in shaed milieu8 is an

intactable poblem. Thin$ing about those inteactions and encountes e:uies ta$ing a

stance! which! inevitabl-! lies in the nomative sphee. Citizenship! undestood as a

basic two*fold sense of co*entitlement and mutual ac$nowledgement amongst people

who shae an emplacement in time and space that is not of thei choosing seems a

fundamental nomative point of depatue fo in:uiing into public life with concens

about its :ualit- and te8tue! its cafting! ecafting! and enduance.

Thidl-! # stat in sta$ awaeness that an- political milieu is faught with

contadictions. "iffeent logics coe8ist. Conte8ts of e8clusion seldom lac$ inclusiona-

agenc-! while highl-*inclusive milieu8 anchoed on egalitaianism ae unli$el- to lac$

poc$ets of infimit- which stand in denial of such ancho. &hat ma- authoize the

H



ma$ing of plausible statements about the condition! moe 1o less3 egalitaian of a

concete milieu is the :ualit- and te8tue of public life! and whethe the enactment of

the commons has pemeated it fo sufficient time and with sufficient sta-ing*powe to

achieve discusive hegemon-.H

This pape is conceived as a convesation with theo-. Since # am wa- of

standing in denial of that which ma$es the epesentation of m- case possible! # begin

b- ma$ing e8plicit efeence to some cuent pedicaments and debates that destabilize

the aim of m- in:ui- at its ve- coe fo the- challenge! one wa- o anothe!

teitoiall-*based fomations fo faming the meaning and meaningfulness of public

space. # shall then attempt to e*stabilize it! b- aguing foth the pivotal impotance of

teitoial gounding fo enacting the commons 1Section >3. Consideing the basic thustof ongoing convesations about the polis! citizenship! and public space and thee ma;o

theoetical contibutions! is the tas$ of Section . This in:ui- is lagel- indebted m-

awaeness of some of the poblematic aspects of he thin$ing notwithstanding* to

6annah Aendts monumental effot to undestand %a wold in common'. # discuss

Aendts defense of %a wold in common' in Section ! which also includes a

commenta- on ,Dgen 6abemass influential %public sphee'! and a bief discussion of

Engin #sins fomidable stud- of %citizenship as alteit-'. Finall-! the set of aguments

that fame m- own undestanding of the polis! citizenship and public space is disclosed

1Section H3.

I. UNDER CROSS-FIRE: THE PLACE (AND SPACE) OF “A WORLD IN COMMON”.

"oes it ma$es sense! as the fist decade of the >st centu- daws to a close! to

insist upon the impotance of teitoiall-*emplaced collective abodes and states* as

still cental fo thin$ing the place and space of %a wold in common'I To be sue!

pesuasive aguments to the conta- have been aised in the past few decades*consideing the insights of the vast and gowing liteatue about the sweeping

tansfomations implicated in the ea of %time*space compession' 1Giddens!

>0@?!>00> 6ave-! >00/3 the %infomation evolution' 1Castells! ///! 4essig! //>3!

%digital capitalism' 1Schille! >0003! shifting pattens of intenational and tansnational

migation 1Potes! //>3! the ise of intemestic elations 1(en)ndez*Cai+n and

=ustamante! >00J3! %tansnational advocac- netwo$s' 19ec$ and Si$$in$! >00@3!

%blued boundaies' 1=lei$e! ///3! %glocalization' 1Robetson! >00J =aumann!

K



>00@3 etcetea. As leading cultual anthopologist A;un Appaduai has commented!

these tansfomations ae intetwined with %a sense of compomised soveeignt-'!

which has become %the sub;ect of intense debate among political theoists and anal-sts'!

with %a significant numbeLconceMdeing that momentous changes in the meaning of

state soveeignt- ae unde wa-L' 1Appaduai! ///2>O3.

The d-namics implicated in the estuctuing of wold capitalism since the

>0?/s! most notabl- the intenationalization of capital and labo ma$ets 1Sassen!>00O!

//>3 as well as the state 1Co8! >0@>! >0@?! >00O Stange! >00O! >00?3! have loomed

lage in such debates fo :uite some time. And as socioeconomic and cultual

polaization has escalated %in an oveall climate of inceasing uncetaint- and

deceasing legitimac- of govenments eve-whee.'1#sin! //>2 J>3! political life has been the site of changing d-namics! with fa*eaching conse:uences 1=aumann! >0003

the %tansvesalization of dissent' 1=lei$e! ///3! among them*. (ost tellingl-! in the

past decade o so citical intenational theo-s pogamK to %adicall- ethin$ the

nomative foundations of global politics'1"eveta$! //>2 >?J! has entailed not onl- a

s$epticism about foms of political communit- tied to the soveeign state but! even

futhe! see %open the possibilit- of dismantling the ne8us between soveeignt-!

teito-! citizenship and nationalism'1#bid2 >?>3 3 altogethe.

Thee fonts ae illustative of the boundaies! places and spaces unde challenge

in ecent debates about the %actual'! in the pocess of %becoming'! o envisioned

famings of political life.

ne font is citizenship. #f citizenship is to be undestood! in boad tems! as

%membeship in some public and political fame of action' 1Pococ$! >00@2 HJ3! in the

past few decades moden famings have been unsettled at thei ve- coe. The

significant attention paid in ecent -eas to changes in the locus of citizenship! fom%nationhood' to %univesal pesonhood' 1So-sal! >00K3 is illustative. And as Shafi

notes! %Mon top of the still ongoing debates within man- counties between adheents of

the Enlightenments libeal and Romanticisms vl$isch vesions of nationhood and

citizenship! the divesification of industial nation*states populations' has poduced

%new demands fo the e8tension of the ights of citizens in -et new diections' 1Shafi!

>00@2>@3. Such new diections ae %post*national'. ne is teitoiall- emplaced as

illustated most pominentl- b- &ill 9-mlic$as concens with ethnic citizenship and

J



his multicultualist pespective 1>00@! //>! //?3.J The othe pesses be-ond teitoial

fomations as illustated b- So-sal´s pionee thematization of global citizenship ights

1So-sal! >00K3.

The wobbl- teain fo thin$ing %a wold in common' is also well illustated inecent debates about the elationship between teitoial fomations and the %public

sphee'. #n a supeb essa- a popos 6abemass public sphee! =atolovich 1///3 is

inteested %in what sot of publicsmight be imagined that ae neithe nationalLno

dependent upon teitoial state foms'! and sets out %to conside what the implications

of this imagining might be! both fo undestanding capitalism and fo esisting it.'

1#bid.2>03. As this autho puts it! %global ;ustice ma- call fo a new undestanding of

Qpublic sphees as tans*statistL'1=atolovich! ///2>3.A thid font evolves aound the peennial :uestion of democac-. Some

authos have aised impotant :uestions about the ade:uac- of states to manage consent!

elocating in the pocess the place fo democatic accountabilit-. O =- the eal- >00/s

6eld had alead- issued a compelling :ue-2 %&hose consent is necessa- and whose

paticipation is ;ustified in decisions concening! fo instance! A#"S! o acid ain! o the

use of non*enewable esoucesI &hat is the elevant constituenc-2 national! egional!

o intenationalI'16eld! >00H2 O*?3. (eanwhile! postuctualist citi:ues wee posingthe inade:uac- of the logic of state*soveeignt- fo democac-! :uestioning a %moal

catogaph-' that teitoializes democac- and negates alteit- 1Campbell! >00@3! and

calling fo a %disaggegation of democac-' 1Connoll-! >00>2 K?O3 o its %de*

teitoialization' 1#bid! >00>2K?03.?

#n sum! fo well ove a decade authoized voices! whethe moe cautiousl- o

sweepingl-! have been pointing in the diection of %cosmopolitanism' *o some sot of

%global commons'* as the oad paticipation! esistance and emancipation should ta$e.That seems to be the undel-ing pemise of those who see a %global' o %intenational

public sphee'! %tansnational publics' and %global citizens' emeging out of the $ind

of pactices of dissent and emancipato- politics@ that have been staged! most

pominentl-! b- human ights! Geen! ethnic! and gende ights movements.

As is well $nown! the issues outlined above ae b- no means foeign to 4atin

Ameica. To be sue! in the past two decades o so *and amidst unpecedented

O



tansfomations 1Smith and 9ozeniewicz! >00? Potes and 6offman! //H Potes and

Robets //O! among othes3* 4atin Ameica has had to face the peils of dislocation

1(enendez*Caion! //>! //?3 not onl- though the foces imposed upon nation*

states b- neolibeal estuctuing! but though the implications of centuies of neo*

colonialism that have be:ueathed a legac- of coss*cutting cleavages of class! ethnicit-

and egion in combination with gende e8clusion.

Since the >00/s tansnational netwo$s! ethnic movements and gende

movements gone global! %tansnational migant communities'! digital citizenship! and

the %glolocal'! have been pesent in thin$ing 4atin Ameica. 0 Citical scholaship and

concete gass*oot stuggles have been intetwined in effots to boaden the discusive

space of citizenship at the local! national! intenational and tansnational levels* toinclude as ma;o potagonists the voices and claims of those occluded publics that wee

thee all along! and that have made concete inoads in thei seach fo

ac$nowledgement and visibilit- in ecent -eas most notabl-! ethnic and gende

movements*. #n thei stategies! tansnational netwo$ing has been of pivotal

impotance! as 9ec$ and Si$$in$ have shown in thei pionee stud- of %tansnational

advocac- netwo$s' 19ec$ and Si$$in$! >00@3.

To be sue! caution as well as less*than*geat*enthusiasm o shee s$epticismabout the emancipato- potential of %the tansnational' and %the global' is not beeft of

authoitative defendes.>/ =e that as it ma-! m- aim hee is to highlight thematizations

that challenge! one wa- o anothe! the emplacement of %a wold in common' in the

places we inhabit. Thus! the bief eview offeed in this Section has sought to undelign

some waning*signals that flash*out as # stand befoe m- topic. Though ac$nowledging

the significance of such waning signals! # do not find them pesuasive enough to negate

the tas$ of thin$ing %a wold in common' and gounding its place and space

teitoiall- *within the state* as a po;ect woth- of pusuit. Pehaps the- ma$e the tas$

moe compelling.

To m- mind! posing the place and space of political life as eithe limited to o

tanscending an- level of e8peience seems! fo the time being! methodologicall- as

well as stategicall-* unwaanted. And # am not pesuaded that collective

empoweement ought to be pedicated on e8pectations about the pomises the

tansnationalization of dissent and globalizing stategies ma- hold! if those e8pectations

?



slide into subsidiaizing attention to the concete places we inhabit as! still! a ma;o site

whee political life unfolds! placing the state and its institutions as cental teains whee

the small and big battles fo a dignified coe8istence still have to be waged. "e*

politicization! pivatization of polic-*ma$ing! and the seduction of %pivatized

consumeist slumbes'1 oung! >00@2 OJ3 ae foces to be ec$oned with! in cente and

peiphe- 1(enendez*Caion! //?3. And! if as &alze 1>00@203 has convincingl-

agued! %Mthe 6obessian account of societ- is moe pesuasive than it once was'! it

would seem athe peilous to detact attention fom the %cucial fomations that we

inhabit'1#bid20>3.>>

As posaic as the point ma- seem! %being somewhee' in concete steets!

neighbohoods! towns! cities! and states* is still e8peienced b- an ovewhelmingnumbe of humans as a basic featue of thei lives! and no actualit- o po;ect that lifts*

them*off*inhabitance somewhee is thus fa eliminating the need to thin$ about what

dwelling and being settled along with othes politicall- entails. dina- men and

women *in 4atin Ameica and elsewhee* have to face the dail- motions of inhabitance

as neighbos and wo$es full-! pecaiousl- emplo-ed! o unemplo-ed*! as claimants

to poo! un*down! o none8istent public sevices! and as stoic endues of inceasingl-

unavailable conditions of safet- in the steets of concete s:uaes! zones! and cities of

thei teitoial state. The- still have to ma$e a living! and ma- wish to aise a famil-

and not all can o wish to become migants. The- still have to ma$e %mino' 1 %Should #

wal$ to the cone*stoeI &hat if #m muggedI' %Should # let the $ids go out to pla-

with the new neighbousI' %Should # pa- the doctos bill o the dentistsI Suel- # can

t pa- both at the same timeL' %L# can no longe affod to live hee now that ent*

contol is ove L thee is no affodable housing an- moeLwhee can # goIL &hat if #

m evicted as m- neighbos wee last wee$I' 3! and %momentous' decisions 1loo$ing

fo a ;ob! while feaing e;ection eve- step of the wa- at being declaed eithe %ove' o

%unde' :ualified facing mandato- etiement without a meaningful safet-*net

available ;oining a wo$esunion! if one is available going on sti$e and! -es! electing

officials! whethe o not a stong pat-*s-stem and accountable state*institutions ae in

place3! all of these while hoping fo attaining o maintaining a dignified place in the

concete spaces the- shae with othes be-ond famil- and $in.

Thee additional points ae in ode. Fist! emphasizing the pivotal impotance

@



of teitoial*gounding fo thin$ing a wold in common needs not est in the ealists

natualization of the state! o its eification.> And even though! in pinciple! # concu

with #sin 1//?2 >>3! that %Mscala thought conceals the diffeence between actual

1ph-sical and mateial3 and vitual 1s-mbolic! imagina-! and ideal3 states in which

bodies politic e8ist.'>H! # find it moe petinent! fo pesent puposes! to undelign his

own comment! passim! about the %e8istence' of states in thei ve- tangible

epesentations and effects 1#bid.3.

Second! # stat mindful of the histoicall-*contingent emplacement of

citizenship. To be sue! that political and teitoial famewo$s have changed in

anti:uit- fom the Gee$ polis to the Roman Empie! in the middle*ages fom the

Roman Empie to towns! in the moden ea fom towns to nation*states! ma$es plausiblethe posing of a %fouth tansition in the site of citizenship' 1Shafi! >00@2 /*>3! fom

the nation*state to a tansnational o global thust and! eventuall-! to a wold as much

as # t-! still unimaginable to me! howeve* whee scala thought might become %a thing

of the past'. #t is sobeing to emembe! futhemoe! that it is not conceptuall-

necessa- that citizenship be e:uated to membeship in a teitoial communit- since the

Romans! and that the idea of %univesal communit-' is hadl- a novelt- of %post*

moden' times 1Pococ$! >00@2 H@*H0 3. et! # do not find that a cetain awaeness of

eithe histoical contingencies o futue possibilities fo ealizing commendable

aspiations fo a globall- emplaced %common wold'! povides sufficient basis fo

withdawing seious attention fom the teitoial and state* gounding of public life.

Thid! the comple8 unfolding of histoical e8peience wan against se:uential o

eitheo easonings about something as elusive and difficult to undestand as an-

%ongoing tansition'! much less about something as ma;o as the %decline' of the

%nation*state'! if that assessment is somehow constued as suggesting that attention to

thin$ing the place and space of %a wold in common' should be ediected to some sot

of emeging o envisioned global emplacement. #n this sense! $eeping in mind that

%Mthe soveeign state still emains the sole institution that administes and enfoces

ights! even those conceived as univesall- heldL'1Shafi! >00@2 >3 seems called fo.

As So-sal pesuasivel- agued some time ago! %Mthe post*national and the national

famewo$ emain concuent.'1#bid.3 Pesent tends suggest %concuence' fo some

time *with entitlements and claims still anchoed to the state.>K #n that light! 9ec$ and

0



Si$$in$s comment that %the state is still in chage' 1>00@2 >3 seems! indeed!

waanted.

The pesuasiveness o tenuousness of m- aguments aside! # hope to have

established heein! with a modicum of clait-! the consideations that undepin m-adheence to the notion that thin$ing %a wold in common' and emplacing one of its

fundamental la-es in teitoiall-*gounded abodes that odina- peoples concete

e8peiences still enact as %the place whee # live' steets! neighbohoods! small towns!

cities and states*! emains a cental tas$. Futhemoe! unde cetain conditions! senses

of citizenship oiented towads *and enacted within* %bounded teitoies' do not

necessail- o significantl- lodge %usthem' identifications that might avow collective

thusts towads disconnection fom o dismissal of othe moe encompassing* placesand spaces of e8peience! with significant theoetical and pactical implications.

II. THINKING THE POLIS, CITIZENSHIP AND PUBLIC SPACE. JRGEN HABERMAS!PUBLIC SPHERE, ENGIN ISIN!S CITIZENSHIP AS ALTERIT", AND HANNAH ARENDT!S“COMMON WORLD”. A COMMENTAR".

#nvo$ing the idea of the polis is fe:uentl- lin$ed to -eanings fo %paadise

lost'.>J Such widespead view tends to oveloo$! howeve! some impotant aspects of

how the idea functions in ongoing debates *whee! aguabl-! significantl- moe than

%longing' is at sta$e*. To be sue! the deplo-ment of the notion in ecent -eas hasseved to counte individualist conceptions of citizenship. As noted in a leaned eview

of the citizenship debates published in the late >00/s that emains cuent to this da-*!

%Mif the utilitaian vesion of libealism! and in impotant espects even Rawls evisited

libealism! esemble in thei individualistic accent and legalistic famewo$ the Roman!

impeial conception of citizenship! man- of thei opponents deive thei inspiation

fom! and see$ to ma$e elevant to moden life! the Gee$s polis citizenship

ideal'1Shafi >00@2>/3. This is wh- compaing both e8peiences!%suggests man- of the

issues we will encounte in contempoa- citizenship debates.'1#bid2J3. >O

An impotant point to bea in mind concening the polis! fo the time being! is its

simultaneous emegence as a political and spatial ode 1#sin! //2 ?/3. Thee basic

points should be bon in mind! in tun! with egads to citizenship.

Fist! that if the polis emeges as %a named political space' 1#bid2 OH3 citizenship

emeges %as some $ind of claim to such space'1Scull- >00/2>*! epesented in #sin!

>/



//2OH3. Secondl-! that citizenship ma- be egaded as a esilient field of theoetical

in:ui- that encompasses a divesit- of stands and debates engaging libeals!

communitaian! ma8ian! postma8ian! and postuctualist concens! as well as a boad

canvas of concete histoical e8peiences 1Shafi! >00@2 (en)ndez*Cai+n! //?3.

Thidl-! that the comple8 itinea- of citizenship both as concept and as concete ealm

of e8peience is lin$ed to the stategic :uestions it see$s to addess. Regadless of the

contents attibuted to the notion o the dimensions emphasized to define it at an- given

moment legal! teitoial! functional! moal and so foth its stategic impotance ests

in the naatives it funishes fo undestanding and constituting thus %esolving' the

place of pesons and collectivities in tacitl- shaed milieu8 to egulate! contest! o

tansfom them 1(en)ndez*Cai+n! //>3. 6ence its divesit- of meanings anging

fom %estiction' 1insidesoutsides3 and %closue' 1nationalalien3 to %con:uest' and

%e8pansion' of individual and collective ights and senses of %belonging' and

%communit-'! to mention but a few. &hat inteests m- in:ui- is how diffeent

notions of citizenship %esolve' the place of %things public' thei meaning and

meaningfulness and whethe and how such notions ae lin$ed to the enactment of the

commons.

As fo %things public'! it should be bon in mind that the notion has been

%claimed and eclaimed fo a geat vaiet- of puposes and susceptible of a consideable

vaiet- of constuctions' 1=a$e! >002>@03 To be sue! things public ae invo$ed

though a divesit- of emphases in political theo- as well as in activists and polic-*

ma$ing cicles altenativel-! %the public'! %the public sphee'! %the public ealm'!

%public space'! and thei vaious undestandings*. Significantl-! %Mthe wod public

has long seved as the placema$e fo the political ideal of open! inclusive! and

effective delibeation about mattes of common and citical concen.' 1R-an! >002J03.

And in leading scholal- debates the public is egaded *following ,Dgen 6abemas

immensel- influential wo$ and his notion of the public sphee* as the basis fo

engaging a multiplicit- of concens about modenpostmoden aangements and thei

intesections *as a %sphee' of %communication'! and also as %communities of inteest'

o %publics'.

6annah Aendts political theo-! whethe povo$ing e;ection o acclaim it

has elicited plent- of both* emains! the leading efeence when invo$ing the idea of the

>>



polis fo thin$ing contempoa- public life. #n tun! ,Dgen 6abemass public sphee

emains! aguabl-! the most influential. And Enging #sins +ein! Political 1//3! an

empiicall- detailed and theoeticall- sophisticated deconstuction of eceived notions

of citizenship! is bound to challenge citizenship studies! uban studies! and class

anal-sis fo man- -eas to come. (ost basicall-! fo pesent puposes! these ae thee

ma;o thin$es of plualit->? whose ideas # have chosen to engage! fo the- eithe inspie

o seiousl- challenge m- ontological pefeences! nomative commitments and

methodological choices.

&hile 6abemasplualit- esolves itself in the seach of consensus though

ational debate! #sin destabilizes the claims of eceived $nowledge about how plualities

ae histoicall- constucted claims that! as he contends! conceal thei need of alteit-*.(eanwhile! Aendts plualit- is not to be based on the need to esolve consensus! as in

6abemas! o to ac$nowledge alteit-! as in #sin. #n Aendt! plualit- becomes a

fundamental %condition' whose potential and wea$nesses* cannot be escaped. That is!

%a wold in common' must be thought! and built! with a view to its enduance! its

inevitable failt- egadless.

(- aim hee is to povide a bief outline and citi:ue of these thee ma;o

contibutions! and to emphasize the elements that diectl- petain m- in:ui-.

1>3 Plualit- as Rational Citical "ebate. 6abemas Public Sphee. ,ugen

6abemass endition of the public sphee was fist posed in his opera prima! The

Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: ,n -nuiry into a Cate!ory of

+our!eois Society 1>0O3* and late on evised and e8tended b- his citics *and

6abemas himself*. #n what follows # biefl- conside the thust of 6abemas aguments

in that pionee stud-! and discuss some late developments in his endition of the public

sphee. # conclude b- posing a few :ueies a popos m- eading of 6abemaspublicsphee and some of his citics insights and e*wo$ings of the notion.

6abemass aguments in ST ae widel- familia. =iefl-! the fist half of the

boo$ depicts the histoical emegence of the public sphee 1which is! fo 6abemas! the

public sphee of bougeois societ-3! emplaced in >?th and >@th centu- Euopean sites

1=itish! Fench! and Geman! though mostl- =itish! in 6abemass account32 coffee*

houses! salons! and meeting places whee people came togethe to e8change opinions

>



about public affais. #n 6abemass wods! %Mthe bougeois public sphee ma- be

conceived above all as the sphee of pivate people come togethe as a public the- soon

claimed the public sphee egulated fom above against the public authoities

themselves! to engage them in a debate ove the geneal ules govening elations in the

basicall- pivatized but publicl- elevant sphee of commodit- e8change and social

labo'1ST2?3. &h- was its ise significantI 6abemas is definitive2 %The medium of

this political confontation was peculia and without histoical pecedent2 peoples

public use of thei eason' 1#bid3.>@

The second half of the boo$ focuses on the bea$down of the classical bougeois

public sphee. #n 6abemass account! it collapsed unde the weight of mass democac-

and a mass media that tumped the maintenance of a public sphee of infomed publicopinion ma$es. (ass democac- and the welfae state impaied democatic consensus

b- tuning citizens into clients of the state! and ma$ing them pone to state

manipulation of infomation! pecluding autonomous delibeation. &ithin this

famewo$ electoal paticipation and opinion polls could no longe be gounded on an

infomed and easoning public.

Amongst the ealie eactions to ST! thee seem paticulal- woth noting. Fo

(-iam 6ansen! 6abemass conception of the public sphee contibutes two impotant points! namel-! his insistence on its distinctiveness 1a %fouth sphee'3 fom state!

ma$et and the domestic ealm and on the histoicit- of the public sphee 16ansen!

>00H3. Ele-! in tun! ema$s that 6abemass

%Lown vantage point as the legatee of the Fan$fut School! who esumed thei citi:ueof mass cultue at the height of the Chistian "emocatic state and the postwa boomand at a low eb of socialist and democatic pospects! is cucial to undestanding the

boo$s motivating poblematic. 6abemas affimed the citi:ue of the pesentLwhilehe specificall- etieved the past 1the Enlightenment as the founding moment ofmodenit-3. #n contast to 6o$heime and Adono! he upheld the Enlightenments

pogessive tadition' 1Ele-! >00203

=ut if 6abemass aim was! indeed! to uphold the Englightenments pogessive

tadition! then Fases point about one of the basic limitations of ST comes

immediatel- to mind. Fo! in he wods! %Moddl-! 6abemas stops shot of developing a

new! post*bougeois model of the public sphee. (oeove! he neve e8plicitl-

poblematizes some dubious assumptions that undelie the bougeois model'. Thus! as

she concludes! %we ae left at the end of MST without a conception of the public sphee

>H



that is sufficientl- distinct fom the bougeois conception to seve the needs of citical

theo- toda-' 1 Fase! >002 >>>*>>3. Fases own ewo$ing of 6abemass public

sphee stand as ma;o instance of what constitutes! pehaps! the ma;o contibution of

ST! namel-! the decisive path it opened fo futhe eflections on the cucial :uestion of

the place1s3 and space1s3 of the public.>0

To m- mind! the main points made b- his citics ae basicall- thee. Fist!

6abemass failue to ac$nowledge the histoical significance of othe! concuent!

%public sphees' as well as thei ma$es women and %plebeians'! pominent among

them*./ Second! his unsatisfacto- account of the powe teain which undemines! in

tun! the stength of his agumentation about the conditions and d-namics entailed in the

emegence and function* of the bougeois public sphee. And! thid! the conceptualflaws and poblematic implications of esticting the public sphee to %ational citical

e8change'! to the detiment of othe cucial featues of 1public3 inteaction

contestation! fo one! and associational pactices be-ond those involved in opinion

fomation! fo anothe*.

To be sue! ac$nowledging %the e8istence of competing publics not ;ust late in

the >0th centu- when 6abemas sees a fagmentation of the classical libeal model of

/ffentlich0eit but at eve- stage in the histo- of the public sphee and! indeed! fom theve- beginning'1Ele-! >002 H/O3! ta$es us fa be-ond the theoetical confines of

6abemass endition of the public sphee. Fo one thing! it ta$es us be-ond ational

citical e8change to associational life and its spaces *a featue of public life that in

6abemass public sphee emains bac$stage. That is! the centes of sociabilit- and the

new infastuctue of social communication 6abemas descibes in ST ae not pat of

his %political public sphee'. Though ac$nowledged as enabling social infastuctues!

the- emain outside his %political ealm'.> To m- mind! this stands as a ma;o blindspot

in 6abemass account! fo the ve- same %delibeate volunta- activities' undepinning

the sites of that emeging sphee %in pa$s! coffeehouses! discussion goups! litea-

societ- and the li$e'! as =o-te notes! %involved diect popula authoit- and

esponsibilit- fo maintenance' 1=o-te!>002HKO3. As =o-te futhe comments! the

%wide aa- of volunta- activities' suggested b- social histoians such as R-an and

Ele- in thei citi:ues of 6abemass public sphee %ma$es impossible an- simple

distinction between acting in common and public debate' 1#bid.3.

>K



#n the pocess of destabilizing and ewo$ing the notion! citical theoists feed

6abemass public sphee fom its epistemological chains and tuned it into an

empoweing theoetical space fo e*envisioning the public. The notion %of multiple!

sometimes ovelapping! o contending public sphees'1Calhoun!>002 H?3 has been

convincingl- posed b- (a- R-an! Nanc- Fase and Geoff Ele-! among othes. The

meaning of the public sphee has also e8panded be-ond the idea of the public foum fo

delibeating and eaching consensus whethe bougeois as in 6abemas! o counte*

public! as in Fase! as ,amie wen "aniel abl- notes 1"aniel! ///2?3* while the

wo$ of s$a Negt and Ale8ande 9luge! as well as Nanc- Fases! #is (aion

oungs! and Chantal (ouffes have %not onl- plualized the concept butLe8tended

its call fo e:ualit- to the demands of maginalized goups and cultues in ode to ma$e

visible the elationship between social e:ualit- and cultual insights' 1Giou8! ///2

J3.

6abemas did not emain impevious to the influential e*wo$ing of his oiginal

concept b- his leading citics. Thee shifts in his late enditions of the public sphee ae

woth noting.H =- the >00/s! 6abemas public sphee was %no longe bougeois eithe

in its oigins o in its actual functioning'16ill and (ontag! ///2H3. Secondl-! it was e*

emplaced globall-. (i$e 6ill and &aen (ontags penetating eading of this shift is

woth ecalling. #n thei wods!

%while 6abemas initiall- saw the public sphee as a Q national phenomenon! both belonging to and helping to define distinct national cultues! he has followed theagument to its logical conclusion and posited the e8istence of an intenational publicsphee! the global totalit- not simpl- of national public sphees! themselves composedof multiple sphees! but also of tansnational public sphees.' 1#bid2K3

A thid shift is also woth noting. Summaizing a point elo:uentl- made b- 6ill

and (ontag! in 6abemass e*wo$ing of the notion %diffeential popet- and powe

elations disappea fom view'.K As the- put it! %6abemas has boowed fom his

citics the notion of a wold of innumeable vital public sphees! debating and

discussing! unencumbeed b- what once appeaed to be the inescapable constaints of

mateial ine:ualit-'1#bid2J3.

Plualizing his endition of the public sphee as 6abemas has in ecent -eas J

does not suffice! in m- view! to offe a pesuasive account. 6abemass public sphee

continues fiml- anchoed in the notion of %infomed' and %ational' communication

>J



an idea that # find wanting on methodological and nomative! as well as pactical

gounds. Too man- potentiall- meaningful %ealms' ae left %sepaate'! %outside'!

%dislodged fom'! o endeed too subsidia- and thus not :ualified fo seious

theoetical engagement in 6abemass account. #n the final anal-sis! 6abemass

theoetical po;ect endes his public sphee unfit fo the tas$ of thin$ing spaces! places!

pactices! and stuctuing featues of powe and things public withinand be-ond

%politics' as the ational pusuit of ageement.

The basic poblem stems fom his model of ationalit-. (a$ing Gabadis wods

mine!

Reasoning is indeed intesub;ective and social! as M6abemas points out. et! it is alsoe:uall- embodied and diven b- conte8tual foces that cannot be fomalized into a logicof human action... 6abemas wants ou e8peiences! the poduct of highl- nuancedconte8tual envionments! to be steamlined and channeled into a ve- fomal!

pocedual model of ationalit-. The esult is a linguistic model of ationalintesub;ectivit- that is both too naow and too demanding a medium fo effectivesocial integation and political action. #n effect! it instumentall- colonizes thee8istential lifewold. #t denigates the e8peiential comple8it-! divesit-! and potenc-that gives life its moe pofound meaningL' 1Gabadi! //>2H/*H>3 O

Two othe consideations lead me to view 6abemass public sphee as an

implausible poposition. Fo one thing! with (ouffe 1>00H3! # egad the ationalists

pusuit of undistoted communication *and of a politics based on ational consensus* as

pofoundl- antipolitical. Such pusuit does not ma$e oom fo the decisive place

1welcomed o unwelcomed! though still a basic datum3 of passions and affections in

politics.? (ouffe eminds us about the %ineadicabilit- of antagonism' in democatic

politics 1i.e.! the aim of 6abemass public sphee3! which! as she notes! %is pecisel-

what the consensus appoach is unable to ac$nowledge'1(ouffe! >00O2 @!03.@

Nevetheless! some inteesting :ueies aise! fo pesent puposes! a popos both

6abemass public sphee and his citics ewo$ings of the notion.

ne has to do with the place of convesations fo thin$ing %a wold in common'.

Though 6abemass endition of the public sphee bings %convesations' to cente*

stage! his public sphee leaves no oom fo ganting some sot of place! conceptuall-! to

convesations about mattes that inteest the tal$ing paties enough to engage in them

howeve those mattes ma- be defined b- the paticipants in those convesations*! above

and be-ond the pesumed %ationalit-' of the e8changes and thei %opinion foming'

>O



mission. #n othe wods! in ationalist e-es! it might seem meaningless at best! and

nonsensical at wost! to ma$e conceptual space fo the function of %inconse:uential'

encountes as pat and pacel of the public. Casual! une8pected! fleeting e8changes

among stanges ae :uite li$el- candidates! athe! fo the bo8 of %tivia' in ationalist

e-es.

7nbudened b- ationalist pemises0! some potentiall- inteesting :uestion aise.

#s it plausible to gant a theoeticall- meaningful place to casual convesations in being

politicalI "o coffee*houses! s:uaes! pa$ benches! cones and sidewal$s in cities!

neighbohoods! villages and towns* matte fo thin$ing the polis! citizenship and public

space! above and be-ond the %ational e8changes' enabled b- its %infastuctue'

news*stands! tables and chais! stools! and opened doos * and needless to sa-! aboveand be-ond viewing the enactment of such encountes as mee %sociabilit-'I (oeove!

once the notion of %multiple! concuent! sometimes ovelapping public sphees' is

ac$nowledged as conceptuall- sound! is it plausible to thin$ of moments when these

might not onl- function concuentl- and in sta$ tension with each othe! but tespass

thei %boundaies'! inte*elate! and configue multiple spaces of encounte whee

without loosing thei elative autonom-* both thei simultaneit- and aticulation ae

endeed meaningfulI

&ithout falling into the omanticization of comple8 inteactions! and without

dismissing the histoicit- of antagonism o bac$eting the stuggles among contending

political po;ects! is it plausible to thin$ of cetain stuctuing moments of %being

political' whee %non*official' public spaces ae neithe %bloc$ed' not %maginalized'I

6ow would a public space whee what ,amie wen "aniel calls %denial of cultual

authoit-' 1"aniel! ///2 ?H3 does not hold! functionI 6ow would the convesational as

a collective encounte of m-iad ationalities with thei dissonances! tensions! and

alwa-s povisional! though no less authentic o %effective' esolutions fo that matte!

athe than an abstact and ob;ectivist %tiumph of eason'* appea in public! thus

enacting %a wold in common' in concete histoical abodesI

#n othe wods! is it plausible to imagine actuall- e8isting places and spaces

whee people %especting each othe as e:uals' 1#bid2 ?K3! do not onl- fom consensus

16abemas and Fase3 but ac$nowledge each othes entitlement to %be thee'! in

public **as publics** to mingle*and*ageeo to dissent*as*the-*mingle! o whee neithe

>?



ageeing no disageeing but %being thee'! as e:uall- entitled selves*and*othes! athe!

is what mattesI # guess what # am t-ing to fomulate is the following :ue-2 how ma-

the actual e8peience of a public space whee an egalitaian pinciple holds athe than

a metatheoetical %full mateial and cultual e:ualit-'* be posed to functionI

=efoe the plausibilit- of these $inds of :ueies can be entetained! the :uestion

of alteit- should be addessed! howeve biefl-. Engaging Engin #sins pathbea$ing

theoization of alteit- and the challenges it poses to the ve- fomulation of those

:ueies is e:uied fo the tas$.

13 7nsettling the 4ocus of Plualit-. Engin #sins +ein! Political . +ein!

Political 1fom now on! =P3 is offeed as a seies of genealogies of citizenship as

alteit-. The boo$ povides a masteful deconstuction of eceived notions of citizenship*fom the gee$ polis to the cosmopolis of toda-. #n the pocess! #sins in:ui- succeeds

in unsettling established notions of citizenship at thei ve- coe! elicits :uestions! and

opens new paths fo the stud- of citizenship and public space. #n the paagaphs that

follow! and at the is$ of educing to a bae minimum the anal-tical iches of this ma;o

wo$! # will biefl- outline some of its leading emphases! aguments! and conclusions!

and daw some implications fo puposes of m- in:ui-.

=P ta$es as point of depatue one basic concen! namel-! that %Mthe histo-of

citizenship has often been naated b- dominant goups who aticulated thei identit- as

citizens and constituted stanges! outsides! and aliens as those who lac$ed the

popeties defined as essential fo citizenship'1=P2i83. #sins inteest is thus to conside

%cetain categoies of otheness that ma$e citizenship itself possible' 1=P2H/3. Those

categoies he conceives as % thee ovelapping but distinct foms2 stanges! outsides!

and aliens.'1#bid3.

To m- mind! one of the ma;o stengths of the stud- lies in #sins point of

depatue2 an undestanding of politics and the political that allows him to emplace

citizenship and its otheness as a new field of in:ui-. As #sin declaes fom the outset!

=P is not about politics %Mit is about citizenship and otheness as conditions of

politics' 1=P283. Assuming %an ontological diffeence between politics and the

political'! allows #sin to place %citizenship and otheness'! fom the stat! not as %two

diffeent conditions' but! athe! as %two aspects of the ontological condition that ma$es

>@



politics possible.'1#bid.3.

#n #sins fomulation citizenship is consideed %as that $ind of identit- within a

cit- o state that cetain agents constitute as vituous! good! ighteous! and supeio! and

diffeentiate it fom stanges! outsides and aliens who the- constitute as thei alteit-via vaious solidaistic! agonistic! and alienating stategies and technologies12 1=P2

HJ*HO3. H/ #sin pesuasivel- agues that %being political' is best undestood as %a

contested spaceLconfigued b- vaious goups and foms of otheness'! athe than as

%esticted o e8clusive space of citizens'1=P2>>>3. 6e also agues that such contested

space is %negotiated b- invo$ing vaious foms of capital and stategies that assembleL

specific technologies of citizenship' 1#bid.3. Thus! %being political' means %to constitute

oneself simultaneousl- with and against othes as an agent capable of ;udgment aboutwhat is ;ust and un;ust.' 1=P283. And what inteests #sins pogam is ecoveing %those

moments of becoming political, when stanges and outsides :uestion the ;ustice

ad;ued on them b- appopiating o ovetuning those same stategies and technologies

of citizenship' 1#bid.3.

#sins basic contention a popos the gee$ polis and the oman civitas 1i.e.! that

%Mbeing political was not an e8clusive domain of being a citizen'! and that %Mthis

association of being political with being a citizen and conducting oneself in the counciland assembl- is pecisel- the image of citizenship that the ancient citizens themselves

would have stanges and outsides believe' 1=P2 ??*?@3 is e8tensive to late moments

of his sto-. That is! the logic of e8clusion %based on establishing opposite othes'!

whee! in shot! the e8cluded have no popet- of thei own and e8pess! athe! a lac$ of

the popeties of the othe 1conceived as %essential'3* anal-ticall- impoveishes the

moments of destabilization of dominant categoizations 1=P2H3. #sins stud- ecoves

those moments. #t also succeeds in showing how %Mthe closue theoies that define

citizenship as a space of pivilege fo the few that e8cludes othes neglect a subtle but

impotant aspect of citizenship2 that it e:uies the constitution of these othes to

become possibleL' 1=P2K emphasis added3. That is! both the logics of %e8clusion' and

%closue' impoveish an anal-tics of %being political'.

A few comments ae in ode a popos the peceeding highlights of =P. The fist

one is in efeence to the conceptual elationship between %being political' and

%citizenship'. #sin convincingl- agues that %being political' ma- tanscend and

>0



subvet* senses of citizenship. Fom the pespective of an in:ui- such as mine! whee

both categoies ae intetwined! an unsettling :ue- aises especiall- consideing the

pesuasiveness # attibute to #sins genealogies of citizenship*2 does his insistence in

placing %being political' be-ond the domain of %citizenship' suggest that! in his view!

citizenship is a athe poo notion fo captuing the iches of the fomeI

That does not seem to be the case. To be sue! at one point #sin efes to

%becoming political'! pecisel-! as %ma$ing claims fo becoming citizens' 1=P2?J3. #f!

becoming political is conceptuall- and stategicall-* aticulated with %ma$ing claims

fo becoming citizens'! then citizenship *and its attainment* emains a poweful

popelle of being political in #sins fomulation. #n m- view! the challenge #sins

nuanced endition of citizenship poses is methodological. #t issues a waning conceningthe conceptual pitfalls involved in both the logics of e8clusion which! among othe

things! places the e8cluded %in puel- negative tems! having no popet- of its own! but

meel- e8pessing the absence of the popeties of the otheL'! o whee %the

popeties of the e8cluded ae e8peienced as stange! hidden! fightful! o

menacing'1=P2H3*! and closue that endes citizenship a space of pivilege*. H>

# find #sins wo$ e8taodinail- enlightening in tems of how the naatives of

citizenship have been deplo-ed histoicall- fo the poduction of the alteities thatma$es those ve- naatives possible. And! pehaps m- affinit- with #sins thematization

of citizenship esides in the pesuasiveness of his attempt to ecove the notion of being

political fom the naow confines of politics.H Nevetheless! m- eseach concens lie

elsewhee.HH And this gives me pause fo distancing m- undestanding of %being

political' and %citizenship' fom #sins the pesuasiveness of his fomidable account

notwithstanding*.

Given #sins own eseach concens! =P does not conside that moment ofcitizenship when egalitaianism ma- achieve hegemon- as anchoing pinciple of public

life! endeing a elational space whose :ualit- and te8tue ma$es it collectivel-

unacceptable to engage in active stategies fo the production of %stanges' as

%outsides'! that is! as %alien' to citizenship 1i.e.! whee citizenship as moment of

closue and e8clusion is endeed maginal3. No does it conside the conditions unde

which % a wold in common' anchoed on egalitaianism ma- faulte! thus ma$ing the

poduction of stanges! outsides and aliens no longe maginal and the actual foms of

/



esistance e8cecised b- odina- citizens to counteact the dismantling of

egalitaianism as anchoing pinciple of public life. These ae the $inds of moments #

am inteested in. veall! m- concens stand in close affinit- with 6anna Aendts. #

thus tun to a discussion of the cental components of he %wold in common'.

1H3 6annah Aendts Plualit-2 The Conditio Per 3uam of Political 4ife. #n

what follows! and based mostl- on m- eading of The 6uman Condition 1fom now on!

6C3! aguabl-! 6annah Aendts ma;o theoetical wo$ 1=enhabib! >002?K3! #

endeavou to highlight the elements that undepin Aendts defense of %a wold in

common'! and to offe some ideas on the contempoa- elevance of he wo$.

The ongoing contoves- soounding Aendts political philosoph- should be

noted at the outset. 6igh paise as well as hash citicisms abound. &hile fo somescholas %Aendt emains the political philosophe of ou time'! fo othes! %he time

has passed' 1Gabadi! //>2 OJ3. And if Aendts conception of the public ealm has

been banded as %elitist' b- some scholas 1Ale;ando!>00H2>?03! othe e:uall-

authoative voices have convincingl- ague that she offes %a conception of

paticipato- democac- that stands in diect contast to the bueaucatized and elitist

foms of political epesentation so chaacteistic of the moden epoch' 1"EntUves!

>00K203.

#t should also be noted that Aendts wo$ defies classification 1Cuz! //K2 i!vii

"EntUves!>00K2>3. Fo one thing! categoizing he political philosoph- within a

consevative*libeal*socialist*/th centu-*scheme hadl- applies. Fo anothe *and even

though she has been claimed as souce of inspiation b- communitaian thin$es*!

Aendts political philosoph- cannot be eadil- assimilated to communitaianism. To be

sue! Aendt is citical of epesentative democac-! holds evolutiona- moments in

high esteemHK

! and he views on %living togethe' ae at odds with individualist pemisesheld b- libealism in high esteem.HJ At the same time! she is citical of foms of political

association pemised on the integation of citizens %aound a single o tanscendent

conception of the good'! taditional values! customs! ace! ethnicit- o eligion 1"

EntUves! >00K2>*3.

#t is not unusual to find Aendts thin$ing subsumed within the classical tadition

of civic epublicanism.HO To m- mind! howeve! Aendts ecove- of public space ta$es

>



Refeence should be made! fist and foemost! to the pivotal place of plualit- in

Aendts political philosoph-. Fo Aendt plualit- stands not onl- as % the conditio sine

ua non' but as %the conditio per uam' of political life'16C2?3.KH That being the case!

plualit- is emplaced as the bac$bone of he defense of %a wold in common'.KK All he

cental notions %public space'! %feedom'! %action'! %powe'! and the elationship

between %public' and %pivate'* thus est on the plualit- pemise.

Thee is! it seems to me! a fist 1thee*fold3 opeation in Aendts easoning

which enables he to 1i3 emplace plualit- at such an ove*iding place! to 1ii3

immediatel- poceed to fomulate he notion of feedom! and 1iii3 to ;ustif- %a wold in

common' anchoed in a %space' whee feedom is! liteall-! made 1in3 %public'. That

easoning unfolds as follows2Fist opeation* Aendts plualit- pemise ests %on the fact that men! not (an!

live on the eath and inhabit the wold'16C2 ?*@3. That is! humans ae emplaced in a

wold which the- shae egadless of thei moe o less willing disposition to

ac$nowledge the plualit- pemise*.

Second opeation* That basic! pimodial datum 1co*inhabitance3 pevents

humans fom being %fee' * if feedom is undestood as the possibilit- of escaping the

condition of plualit-*. To be sue! Aendts conception of feedom is alien to the idea

of libet- as individual soveeignt-! a notion she egads as a % basic eo' 16C2HK3. KJ

Note that Aendt does not emplace he e;ection of the notion of %self*sufficienc-' on

individualsdependence on each othe 1on shaed wea$nesses! as it wee! o on need of

aid3 but on co*inhabitance2 %No man can be soveeign! because no single man! but men!

inhabit the Eath! and not! as maintained b- tadition since Plato! due to the limited

foce of man! which ma$es him depend upon the help of othes.' 16C2 HK3.

Thid opeation * #f humans passage on eath is to be meaningful! that condition

e:uies ac$nowledgment! fo %Mwithout being tal$ed about b- men! and without

housing them! the wold would not be a human atifice! but a heap of unelated things

Mto which each isolated individual would be at libet- to add one moe ob;ectL without

the human atifice to house them! human affais would be as floating! as futile and vain

as the wandeing of nomad tibes'16C2/K3. Thee is no need to subscibe Aendts

undestanding of nomadism in ode to ecove the coe of he insight2 the flight fom

H



the plualit- pemise implied! sa-! in t-annies! o in an- fom of living that disavows

such pemiseKO does not den- that some $ind of ode is e:uied fo %living togethe'!

lest humanit- ans amoc$. #n Aendtian tems! that ode is ealized though the

enactment of a wold in common. That enactment is what enables the ealization of

feedom *a point # shall come bac$ to futhe below*.

# now tun to Aendts conception of the public! which! to m- mind! ta$es us

be-ond naow definitions of politics! addesses the politics of time in a futue*oiented

manne *locating the futue as unattaineable without emembance*! and accomplishes

these tas$s while ac$nowledging plualit-! at eve- step of he easoning! as an

immanentl- fagile and -et cental! and feasible* po;ect.

Thee ae thee components that # find at the coe of Aendts undestanding ofthe public.K? Fist! in Aendt the public is 1i3 a space of elationships and 1ii3 a

collective and 1iii3 tansgeneational achievement! that 1iv3 endes humans passage on

eath meaningful. Second! in he conceptualization of public space! feedom 1embacing

plualit-3! action 1;oining togethe3! and powe 1acting in concet and being togethe3!

ae ine8ticabl- lin$ed. Thid! the cental place of two ideas! namel-! %appeaing in

public' and %mutual ac$nowledgment' ae woth stessing.

Note! fist! that fo Aendt! the wod public means %the wold itself'! inthusfa as

%it is common to all of us and distinguished fom ou place pivatel- owned place in

it.'16C2J3. That wold is not %natual'! o %given'2 it is an achieved constuct.K@

Note! secondl-! that fo Aendt! public space is the site of feedom! undestood

as a collective popet- that emeges fom embacing the condition of plualit-. #f public

space is collectivel- poduced! it e:uies action. 6e wods in %&hat is Feedom' ae

une:uivocal2 %Mmen ae fee as distinguished fom thei possessing the gift fo

feedom* as long as the- act! neithe befoe no afte fo to be fee and to act ae the

same' 1Aendt! >0O@2>KO3. #n Aendts view! the ve- e8istence of the public ealm is

contingent upon powe. And powe emeges and feedom ealized* though a peoples

;oining and acting in concet! disappeaing the moment the- dispese.

This bings foth the thid element # find woth noting. Public space holds as

cental function that of being the site though which 1no less than3 ac:uiing ones ve-

own place in the wold is endeed possible. #n Aendts wods! %ealit-! humanl- and

K



politicall- spea$ing! is the same as appeaing'! and. %that what appeas befoe all! we

shall call =eing'! since %an-thing that lac$s this appaition comes and goes li$e a

deam! intimatel- and e8clusivel- ous! but without ealit-.' 16C! >3. The implication

is two*fold. Fo one thing! Aendts public space ests on mutual ac$nowledgment2 it is

the pesence of othes 1be-ond famil- and $in3 what guaantees %ealit-' to the self.

Fo anothe! if the testimon- of ones own humanit- that is! ones place in the wold*

is ganted b- othes! then humans need to e8plicitl- appea in public.

# now tun to Aendts notion of powe. #t should be noted! fist! that such notion

is alien to the instumentalization of individual inteest and will outside fom o against

the commons. #t should also be noted that even though Aendts theo- of powe ma- be

faulted fo its lac$ of attention to the :uestion of capitalism as a stuctue of powe *a point to be addessed futhe below*! she does focus on the histoical deplo-ment!

effects and implications of %stength'! %foce'! and %violence' notions of powe which

she egads! howeve! as futile attempts to ovecome the condition of %non*

soveeignt-' and to compensate fo the intinsic wea$ness of plualit-.K0

&hile he conception undeligns the limitless possibilities of powe as well as

action*! plualit- fo Aendt is inheentl- wea$2 it depends upon man- wills and

intentions that ae b- definition* tempoa- and not too tustwoth-. #ts sole limitationis 1no less than3 %the e8istence of othe people' a limitation that %is not accidental!

because human powe coesponds to the human condition of plualit- to begin with'

1 6C2/>3. The esulting space is thus potentiall- stong and -et fagile. #t can be

stengthened o wea$ened. #ts plasticit- is contingent upon the tempoa- ageements of

those so engaged. #n Aendts view! the citical pedicament esides in that an- attempt

to ovecome the conse:uences of plualit- esult no so much on the %soveeign

domination of the self' but on the abita- domination ove the othe! %o as in

stoicism! the e8change of the eal wold fo anothe! imagina- one! whee the othes

would simpl- cease to e8ist.' 1#bid.3

Thee is an additional point about Aendts notion of powe that should be bon

in mind! which immediatel- bings foth the place of the polis and memo-* in he

thin$ing.

Aendts conception of powe is gounded2 it is not thin$eable without

J



inhabitance. %=eing political' and %living in a polis' ae coteminous in Aendt.

#nvo$ing the Gee$ polis she notes! nevetheless! that %Mthe polis! popel- spea$ing! is

not the cit-*state in its ph-sical location it is the oganization of the people as it aises

out of acting and spea$ing togethe! and its tue space lies between people living

togethe fo that pupose! no matte whee the- happen to be'16C2 >0@3.

The Aendtian polis is the outcome of ac$nowledging plualit-! and its

tangibilit- is ganted b- the :ualit- and te8tue of the 1public3 space esulting fom the

1collective3 powe that such ac$nowledgment enables. Secondl-! even though such

sense of place is teitoiall- bound! in Aendts easoning thee is nothing peculia to

specific peoples that would ma$e such space of elationships %e8ceptional'! that is!

accessible onl- to cetain $inds of human conglomeates with some sot of uni:ue ointinsic cultual o nation*specific attibutes. This does not authoize! howeve! to

eadil- band Aendts philosoph- as %univesalizing'. 6e thought! -et again! defies

classification.

6aving said that! howeve! in Aendts thin$ing one ma- find indications that

the boundless :ualit- of action 1%The boundlessness of action is onl- the othe side of

its temendous capacit- fo establishing elationshipsL'M6C2>03 entails the possibilit-

of tanscending bounded ph-sical teitoies. As "EntUves points out! %the famousmotto' that Aendt appeals to in 6C! %&heeve -ou go! -ou will be a polis! e8pessed

the conviction among Gee$ colonists that the $ind of political association the- had set

up oiginall- could be epoduced in thei new settlements! that the space ceated b-

the shaing of wods and deeds could find its pope location almost eve-whee.'1"

EntUves! >00K2??3. Note the %univesal' element in this deplo-ment of the Gee$ polis

metaphoe! an emphasis that does not est! howeve! in the assumption that modes of

being political can 1o ought to be3 somehow homogenized o abitail- %tanspoted

elsewhee' but! athe! in the idea that %living togethe' a space of :ualit- inteactions

anchoed in the pinciple of mutual ac$nowledgment* is not contingent upon cultual

specificities! national attachments! o mateial iches. Aendt conception of the polis

affims the centalit- of space. And he emphasis is in the elational :ualit- of space.

Such elational :ualit- is %neithe the esult of eligious o ethnic affinit-! noLthe

e8pession of some common value s-stem' but attainable! athe! %b- shaing a public

space and a set of political institutions! and engaging in the pactices and activities

O



which ae chaacteistic of that space and those institutions.' 1"EntUves!>00K2>?3J/

A wod is also in ode about the place of memo- in Aendts idea of the polis.

#n he conception plualit- and memo- ae intetwined2 if plualit- is the conditio per

uam of political life! the ac$nowledgment of plualit- cannot be sustained withoutemembance. The polis %esolves' the poblem of time2 it insues a place fo the past!

pesent and futue of the commons. At the same time! it insues the place of the

individual in the commons a place that cannot be undestood in individualist tems!

unless one peilousl- dismisses the plualit- pemise on which it ests*. #t can achieve

those functions! howeve! because it stands as %a $ind of oganized emembance'

16C2>0@3. J>

As the peceeding paagaphs suggest! individual self* inteest and the atomismof egotistical beings ae uled*out in the Aendtian polis! on the gounds that the-

blatantl- den- the human condition! impeil the meaningfulness of %living togethe'!

and tump the monumental significance of its tavails. Aendts conception of the public

does not est upon a denial of the pivate! howeve. As has been noted time and again!

Aendt views the public 1undestood as the political ealm3 and the pivate 1undestood

as the domestic ealm3 as stictl- sepaate. Fo pesent puposes! # find it woth

stessing! athe! that she views the public 1undestood as the space fo being with*and*amongst othes! be-ond famil- and $in3 and the pivate 1undestood as the place of one

s own! whee one can hide fom %publicit-'3! as sepaate though mutuall- e:uied

ealms.

Aendts public ealm is the place fo individuals to be amongst othes e:ual*

beings. Aendt ac$nowledges! howeve! that no one can be thee all the time! fo %a life

that occus in public! in the pesence of othes! becomes supeficial' 16C2 ?O3. Thus!

thee is oom fo pivate popet- in the Aendtian polis! though not in the modensense. #f the public is the space that humans needs in ode to appea! be testified

confimed* b- othes! and thus! to %be' 1pesent in public! and thus! political3!

possession is admitted in tems of having a place whee one can %hide'16C2 H/3. The

fou walls of ones home constitutes the onl- safe*heaven to hide fom %the public

common wold'! fom %what happens thee' and also fom its publicit- %being seen

and head' 16C2?O3 .

?



Note! then! that if Aendt undestands pivate popet- as % a place pivatel-

possessed fo the pupose of hiding'! the geatest theat to such popet- does not stem

fom the abolition of mateial possessions o wealth! but athe! fom the abolition of %a

tangible and woldl- place of ones own.'1#bid3 This is because in Aendts thin$ing

ma;o depivation is not lin$ed to lac$ of mateial iches J! but to a lac$ of being

%testified'%confimed' b- othes. Thus! if not emplaced in elation to a stong public

ealm! the pivate becomes the ealm of depivation! which fo Aendt means %the

absence of othes'16C2 O?3. This absence of othes is what she attibutes to mass

societ-! to commodification! and to lives spent on the pusuit of egotistical pleasues o

that withdaw to the pivac- of the familial. This is what he conception of the

elationship between public and pivate is at pains to highlight2 the futilit- of

hedonismJH! the meaningless %thist' fo commodities * athe than fo people*! the

taged- of alienation! as posed b- (a8! which in tun undepins! in Aendts vision! the

taged- of human lives that show themselves solel- in the pivac- of thei homes o in

the intimac- of thei fiends.

#t is woth noting! finall-! that Aendts idea of %living togethe' is pemised on

the collective and pesonal* is$s entailed in an-thing we envision! wo$ fo! o

poduce. The elentless defende of %collective memo-' and %enduance' poses

duabilit- as an inevitabl- is$- and untustwoth- entepise. No geneation can

ascetain the success of its tavails! fo the test of duabilit- lies in a futue that

tanscends it. #ncidentall-! posing one of toda-s ma;o pedicaments on the basis of the

%societies of is$' notionJK! might appea athe banal! within this famewo$! though

not because Aendts emphasis on duabilit- ignoes is$ but athe! because he entie

theoetical copus is pemised on is$. Pemanenc- and change! thus! stand as false

antagonisms2 both point to the ungaspable :ualit- of action whose ta;ecto- and

finalit- ae inappehensible to an- %pesent'! egadless of its posed thust. This stands!

in m- view! as a ma;o insight of Aendts political theo-.

=uilding upon as well as depating fom* some of the most inteesting

citi:ues aised b- Aendtian scholas! a bief commenta- on some basic shotcomings

of he defense of a wold in common follows.

Aendts notion of the social is highl- poblematic 1&olin! >0@H =enhabib!

>00 "EntUves!>00K3.JJ

Among the citicisms it has aised! one seems especiall-

@



waanted! namel-! that Aendts %identification of the social with the activities of the

household' pevents he fom ac$nowledging %that a moden capitalist econom-

constitutes a stuctue of powe with a highl- as-mmetic distibution of costs and

ewads.'1"EntUves! >00K2@3. This has led Sheldon &olin *who othewise

ac$nowledge the significance of he theo-* to note that

%Aendt neve succeeded in gasping the basic lesson taught not onl- b- (a8 but b-the classical economists as well! that an econom- is not meel- wo$! popet-!

poductivit-! and consumption2 it is a stuctue of powe! a s-stem of ongoingelationships in which powe an dependence tend to become cumulative! andine:ualities ae epoduced in foms that ae eve gosse and eve moe sophisticated.'1&olin! >0@H20*>/3

Aendts stict sepaation of the public and the pivate sphee! as well as he

silence on the ma;o :uestion of %boundaies' *thei immanent tensions! and thei blued :ualit-* ae also highl- poblematic. The elativel- ecent ecove- of Aendt b-

some leading voices within feminist scholaship notwithstanding! ealie feminist

citi:ues have a stong point in that egad.JO

Since # find no ma;o components of Aendts agumentation that would pevent

he oveall famewo$ fom ma$ing oom fo the idea of an e8panding public sphee!

he anal-tical blind*spots on the elationship between the public and the pivate seem

paticulal- intiguing to me. Fo one thing! Aendt would be the fist to ac$nowledge

that conceptions change ove time she calls attention to this time and again in he

efeences to the Gee$ polis! to the Roman civitas! o to the politics of he time. Fo

anothe! she ac$nowledges the plasticit- of public space. Futhemoe! the anchoing

notion of Aendts wold in common the condition of plualit-* and he insistence on

the public sphee as a space fo appeaing! ta$en togethe! suggest that he thin$ing!

ta$en to the >st centu-! would not disavow the enichment of the public though the

pesonal **as undestood b- feminists and othe life*politics movements** becoming political! and the public sphee ma$ing oom fo tal$ing and acting upon those issues.J?

#n the tenuous ealm of mee speculation! # am inclined to egad he stict

sepaation between the pivate and the public as an anal-tical blind*spot stemming fom

he deep*held! ove*iding concen with insisting! time and again! that those sphees ae

to be egaded as distinct! and must emain sepaate if 1a3 a stong public space is to

become plausible *fo %people cannot be in public all the time' and the- need a place

0



%whee to hide'* 1b3 the ealm of the pivate is not to ove*ide the enegies and

commitments e:uied fo poducing and sustaining a wold in common 1c3 the ealm

of necessit- 1the means fo suvival3 must be esolved in ode fo people to become

available fo %being public'. &ithin a theoetical effot whee the leading concen is

claiming a pivotal place fo the commons! the pivate emains subsidia- to a fault in

Aendts thin$ing which also leads he to seious anal-tical blindspots concening the

:uestion of e:ualit- and necessit-! a point # will come bac$ to futhe below.

A thid poblematic aspect of Aendts defense of %a wold in common' has to

do with he failue to addess the tension between the agonal and the paticipato-

components in he notion of action. Should Aendts emphasis on the pivotal ole of

agonism in the Gee$ polis be constued to mean a condonation of public space as meestage fo individuals to distinguish themselvesI #s %being political' fo Aendt! in the

end! no moe than some sot of :uest fo achieving pesonal glo- and immotalit-I J@

To be sue! thee is a stong emphasis on agonism! especiall- in 6C! whee a

conception of action as stiving fo e8cellence! distinguishing oneself! etcetea! is

highlighted time and again.J0 As =otstein noted awhile ago! howeve! Aendts %use of

the notion of glo- is ancient! not moden'. She deplo-s it %in the Roman and biblical

sense! which endows glo- with ethical athe than naow self*seving :ualities'1=otstein! >0?@2H?03.O/

Awae of Aendts citics cogent aguments about he stess on %wods and

deeds'! and though mine is much less authoitative than moe e8tensive and subtle

eadings of Aendt! # dae suggest that the %heoic acts' in the conte8t of Aendts

thin$ing ma- be ead as metaphos of the individual commitment and dedication

e:uied if a wold in common is to be cafted and endue. #n addition! it seems to me

that descibing the individual distinction sought b- citizens in the Gee$ polis! as Aendtdoes! can hadl- be constued as pe;udice towads heoization *this! in light of the

aguments she launches in defense of a wold in common with the plualit- pemise as

thei bac$bone that she is at pains to stess the collective elements of action thoughout

and that fo Aendt powe means acting in concet*.O> #t should be futhe bon in mind!

in this connection! that in he thin$ing %the evelato- :ualit- of speech and action is

contingent on plualit- and solidait-! and is onl- full- ealized! in Aendts memoable

e8pession! whee people ae with othes and neithe fo no against them that is! in

H/



shee human togetheness. 16C2 >@/ "EntUves! >00K2?H3.O

A fouth ma;o shotcoming in Aendts defense of a wold in common! as

authoitative commentatos have pointed time and again! is he failue to addess the

thee*fold :uestion of e:ualit-! necessit-! and e8clusion in a satisfacto- manne. To besue! efeences to poblematic aspects of the Gee$ polis that often stand in Aendts

witings as desciptive accounts without futhe elaboation on he pat e:ualit-!

necessit-! and e8clusion pominent among them*! ma- at times be constued as

condonations and appoving silences. The following passages ae illustative.

#n he depiction of %feedom' in the classical Gee$ polis Aendt notes at one

point that %=eing fee meant not being sub;ected to the necessit- of life no unde the

command of someone and not commanding ove an-one! that it! neithe govening! no being govened' 16C2 KK3. Fine. =ut then she states that %Mneedless to sa- this e:ualit-

has ve- little in common with ou concept of e:ualit-2 it meant living and dealing onl-

among pees! which pesupposed the e8istence of une:ual othes whom! natuall-!

alwa-s constituted the ma;oit- of the population of a cit-*state'16C2J3. Futhemoe!

the basic diffeence between the Gee$ polis and the famil- is that %the fome onl-

$new e:uals! while the latte was the cente of the stictest ine:ualit-.'16C2KK3. These

$inds of passages ae! no doubt! highl- poblematic. The :uestion immediatel- aises2if! as Aendt holds! the meaning and meaningfulness of %a wold in common' ests in

plualit-! how can the :uintessential e8ample of %living togethe' be pedicated on the

Gee$ polis! sustained on the labou and e8clusion* of othes the ovewhelming

ma;oit-* who ae not pat of the public spheeI. 6e lac$ of futhe elaboation on those

the Gee$ polis leaves out women and slaves! most notabl-* is! again! :uite intiguing!

ta$ing into account the thust of he thin$ing.

Those $inds of passages ma- lend themselves to comments such as (ichael&alzes! who suggests that fo Aendt! %among othe epublican theoists'! %Mideall-!

citizens should not have to wo$ the- should be seved b- machines! if not b- slaves!

so that the- can floc$ to the assemblies and ague with thei fellows about affais of

state'1&alze! >00@ 20K3. #f that wee the case! Aendts philosoph- might! indeed! be

constued as %elitist' and %unealistic'! at best! and at wost! as ielevant fo seiousl-

thin$ing contempoa- political life. #n m- eading of Aendt! howeve! the coe of he

insight leads entiel- elsewhee! namel-! to undelining that %e8popiation' pevents

H>



the e8ecise of citizenship. To m- mind! it would seem e8ceed e8ceedingl- abita- to

constue such $inds of passages as some $ind of e8tavagant call fo the fomation of an

e8clusive cotteie of 1non*wo$ing male3 citizens whom! insulated fom the poblems

of dail- life 1tivial suvival mattes that ae bette left in the hands of non*citizens3 ma-

thus indulge in the e8ecise of impessing thei pees with elaboate speeches and bold

acts so as to confim time and again the value of mutual ac$nowledgement! and to hope

fo immotalit-.OH Caicatues:ue eadings aside! such passages *as well as othes in he

Gee$ metapho* point in the same diection2 being 1public3 is not fothcoming unless

vital necessities ae esolved. #t e:uies agents not %foced' b- necessit-.

That seems! of couse! a highl- poblematic idea! if constued to mean that

unless ones vital necessities ae esolved! and in the face of a lac$ in mateial esoucesand s$ills! the e8ecise of citizenship is pecluded. A eading of that sot would be

unwaanted! howeve. Though he teatment of necessit- becomes confusing at times!

and he silences on the matte seem uttel- unsatisfacto-! within the oveall conte8t of

he thin$ing it does seem waanted to ead those passages as bits and pieces of the

convesation Aendt holds with heself in the pocess of moulding the basic idea that

undepins them! namel-! that %being togethe'! %a common wold'! and the meaningful

enactment of the public is pecluded b- e8popiation undestood b- he as %the

depivation fo cetain goups of thei place in the wold and thei na$ed e8posue to the

e8igencies of life' 16C2JK3.

=e that as it ma-! and ganting that the notion that humans have to be %pepaed'

to be in public holds much inteest! Aendt does fail to addess the cucial :uestion of

how the enabling mechanisms might be undestood. This is a ma;o absence in he

theo-! paticulal- consideing that fo Aendt e:ualit- is not %natual'! that is! it does

not est on a theo- of natual ights! fo ights ae! in he view! political2 the- ae made

1and unmade3 in the political ealm.OK

#n that egad! a ma;o wea$ness in Aendts political theo- is he teatment of

the state! wateed*down b- he condemnation of the social! which pevents he fom an-

meaningful theoetical attention to the state*ma$et*societ- t-ad. 6e unsatisfacto-

teatment of capitalism as a powe stuctue and he failue to addess the comple8

elationship between the pivate and the public undepin! in tun! he failue to addess

the :uestion of ine:ualit- and e8clusion within he ecove- of the idea of the polis.

H



These silences ae tied! in the final anal-sis! to he insistence on the stict sepaation

between the public and the pivate! leading to he indictment of the social which is!

pehaps! given the ma;o anal-tical dead*ends it leads to! the most citical flaw of he

theo-.

Flaws! silences! ambiguities and contadictions notwithstanding! Aendts

citi:ue of modenit-! suggest a cucial point2 no wold in common is thin$able without

basic enabling conditions aside fom individuals commitment and will to stuggle*.

&ithin the conte8t of he thin$ing! a wold in common ests in action and powe. And

action and powe ae not fothcoming unde conditions of e8popiation. #n m- view! it

is Aendts pofound disma- at %the depivation fo cetain goups of thei place in the

wold and thei na$ed e8posue to the e8igencies of life' what ultimatel- popels hethin$ing. 6e notion of e8popiation stands! he poblematic silences and assumptions

notwithstanding! as a compelling idea.

The befuddlement and fustation one ma- e8peience when gappling with

Aendts most t-ing and elusive passages! should not stand in the wa- of ones effot to

place them within the thust of he theoetical po;ect. #n the end! it is that thust what

delives he monumental legac- fo thin$ing %a wold in common'.

III A PLACE FOR THE POLIS, CITIZENSHIP AND PUBLIC SPACE AMIDST SHIFTINGSANDS.

&h- lend cedence to the idea of the polis fo thin$ing the pessing dilemmas of

citizenship and the public in concete >st centu- milieu8I 6ow ma- the notion be

deplo-ed while at the same time ma$ing a cedible move to $eep ones in:ui- safel-

awa- fom omanticizing an- %oiginals' o thei eventual %eplicas'I Conside! fo one

thing! #sins thee sobeing emindes about the %oiginals' in :uestion2 %Mthat which

we now call polis was neve defined with the tanspaenc- and consistenc- wedemand of it fom the Gee$s themselves' 1=P2 OK3. (oeove! the classical age of the

Gee$s was %fagile! shot! isolated! and tentativeL'1=P2 JJ3. And %even within that

ve- shot span! citizenship was contested and :uestioned ”1=P2 [email protected] Conside!

futhemoe! the flaws of that %oiginal'! Aendts masteful ecove- notwithstanding.

&h- insist! then! on the contempoa- elevance of the notionI

# stat mindful of some ve- basic waning signals to an-one that see$s to deplo-

HH



the notion without falling into the futile taps of nostalgia. # thus ta$e it as pemise that

in the ealm of concete e8peience the polis! its space and its citizens can hadl- be

invo$ed as imaginaies of %hamonious'! %complete'! %eliabl-*guaanteed' o %safel-

settled' constucts. # also stat mindful of the ve- basic datum that! histoicall-! the

idea of citizenship has! indeed! changed. That is! in the ealm of concete e8peience

citizenship has been famed and e*famed! made and unmade. #t has lodged pactices

and ights that ma- be ac$nowledged! with T. 6. (ashall! as simultaneousl-

%cumulative and contadicto-'1Shafi!>00@2>K3. (oeove! %in most societies

altenative discouses of citizenship coe8ist with and constain one anothe'1 #bid23. #n

addition! citizenship can be endeed meaningless as site of collective well*being!

though fomall- and univesall- ganted 1(en)ndez*Caion! //?! and efeences

theein3.

To m- mind! howeve! those $inds of emindes undelign the fomidable

pesuasiveness of the polis along with citizenship and public space* as enduing

gammas fo confonting the intactable -et unavoidable tas$ of undestanding!

envisioning! and cafting the place of the self*and*othes in shaed milieu8. =eing

political *fo pesent puposes! %being' and %becoming' of the polis* has been at the

basis of human stuggles fo emancipation. &hethe moe o less e8plicitl-! the idea of

the polis *its failties! tentativeness and contadictions in the ealm of concete

e8peience notwithstanding*! has povided a discusive teain fo the claiming and e*

claiming of entitlements in m-iad stuggles to pess its limits futhe with all the

histoical dilemmas! enigmas! and is$s of failue entailed! pehaps not captued b- the

mee notion of a %pogessive e8pansion'! but! athe! b- the ve- incompleteness and

is$s of failue and evesals involved in the seach itself.

Resoting to #sin! and slightl- ediecting his point in the passage below! the

stuggles in efeence stand! to m- mind! as empoweing legacies made available b- the

discusive space opened b- the emegence of that %named political space' of anti:uit-

1i.e.! the polis3! with citizenship %as some $ind of claim to such space' 1see p. 0! above32

%Lwhen the ancient Gee$ women :uestioned the concept of masculine nobilit- as thenatual attibute of waio*aistocats and instituted new wa-s of being citizens! whenRoman plebeians :uestioned the alleged supeioit- of the paticians and conductedthemselves as citizens in thei own assemblies! when the medieval popolo challengedthe paticians and constituted the cit- diffeentl-! o when the sansculottes claimed

HK



themselves as legitimate citizens with and against the bougeoisie! these acts wee beingendeed political! not in the name of establishing thei natual supeioit-! but ine8posing the abita- foundations of such supeioit-.' 1=P2 ?J3

To m- mind! e8posing the abita- foundations of such supeioit- was made possible b- the ve- idea of the polis and its fomidable legac- to futue geneations2 a named

political space! opening the discusive possibilit- fo anchoing the ve- notion of

%ma$ing claims to that space'.

#t is thus the polis(as(discursi*e(space what has shown ema$able esilience in

the alwa-s unsettling teain of collective e8peience. The histoical %oiginal' ma- not

have been that unified! inclusiona-! and enduing *and pehaps it could not have been!

beaing in mind Aendts insightful wanings about the failties of an- human atifice. Nonetheless! the idea has shown ema$able sta-ing*powe! and feed fom the

entapments of %tadition'! it has functioned as popelle of emancipato- po;ects and!

to be sue! fo envisioning %a wold in common'.

Contingent upon %action' *undestood in Aendts tems*! the polis can neve be

%complete'. #t thus seems waanted to detach fom its meaning an-thing a$in to a state

of completion that is! %full hamon-'! %full unit-'! et cetea*. #t seems best to eclaim

the polis as an oientation! a thust! o! bette -et! as discusive space that ma- achievesalience in cetain moments that ma- waant theoetical attention fo the

tansfomations and collective emembances* the- ma- be:ueath.

The 1eight3 points that follow complete m- undestanding of the polis!

citizenship! and public space.

1>3 Embedding the commons! unleashing the polis.* As agued foth in the

peceeding paagaphs 1Section >3! m- notion of %a wold in common' is teitoiall-

emplaced **the village! the town! the cit-! the neighbohood! the steets and! -es! the

nation*state**! which # do not view as conceptuall- pecluding senses of citizenship

tanscending the confines of such abodes. #n m- deplo-ment of the notion! the polis is

not made co*teminous with %the nation*state'! howeve. No is it undestood as in

Platos utopian conception* as some sot of %enlaged famil-'. To be sue! histoical

e8peience *and Aendts compelling endition of the plualit- pemise! which # full-

subscibe* authoizes de*lin$ing the notion of the polis fom %communit-'!

HJ



%nationalism'! o %ethnic unit-'. The notion is not deplo-ed hee as intechangeable

ubic with %civic epublicanism' eithe since! to m- mind! if the idea of the polis is to

be ecoveed as elevant to the comple8ities of toda-s human conglomeates! we need

to loo$ at the sites and wa-s of being political it ma- enable fa be-ond %the political

s-stem' and the %stength' of the %civic cultue' that ma- be pupoted to sustain it.

Feed fom its assimilation to %the epublic'! %the nation' o %a hamonious

famil-'! thin$ing the polis allows fo the location of discusive paametes anchoed

on egalitaianism as basis fo faming the place of the self*and*othes in shaed milieu8.

13 A discusive and pefomative polis. The wod %polis' is mobilized in the

in:ui- on which this pape is based! to mean that discusive space OO wheein the

enactment of a wold in common! anchoed on egalitaianism! becomes available. The polis functions! within m- famewo$! as a discusive moment that enables the cafting

and ecafting of meaningful spaces and modes of %living togethe' %being thee' in

concete elational spaces pemised on mutual ac$nowledgment*. That is! the

availabilit- of the polis as discusive space is made to est heein on the senses of

citizenship it enables to pefom. And the ange of pefomativitiesO? *moe ample o

moe naow* is made to est upon the space ganted to the egalitaian pemise in

specific moments and milieu8.

1H3 At sta$e! discusive hegemon-. # view the space fo enacting the polis as

contingent upon discusive hegemon-. O@ Since # ta$e it as pemise that undestandings

of that which %actuall- is' 1o %ought' to be3 held in common change ove time! and

that! moeove! diffeent conceptions ovelap in concete settings and moments!

discusive hegemon- ac:uies cental anal-tical value fo undestanding how the

meaning confeed to %citizenship' and %public space' ma- be stabilized in concete

moments and milieu8.

# cannot poceed without noting that the space of %a common wold' is

undestood hee as imagined place of unit-. As in the Athens so compellingl-

poblematized b- #sin! %Mundeneath Msuch imagined unit- thee Mma- be diffeence!

stife! and agon'1=P2O03. #n m- agument! discusive hegemon- is what ma$es %fi8ing'

that imagining possible! allowing it to ac:uies a %ealit-' of its own though the

pefomativities that constitute it.

HO



#f diffeent meanings of citizenship ae viewed as ma;o sta$es in stuggles fo

discusive hegemon-! then poblematizing the contentious meanings implicated in

concete stuggles to define who ae actuall- included *o denied* in %membeship in

some public and political fame of action' 1Pococ$! >00@2 HJ3! and how that stuggle

unfolds! becomes pat of the eseaches tas$.

1K3 Citizenship as elational space.O0 &ithin this famewo$ %being of the polis'

*that is! being political* is made to est on citizenship undestood as a basic two*fold

sense of mutual*ac$nowledgement and co*entitlement amongst people shaing an

emplacement in time and space. #n this definition! little does it matte if actual o

potential citizens wee actuall- bon! ca- documents attesting to he fomal political

ights! o pemanentl- inhabit a specific teitoial milieu. This does not mean a notionof citizenship pedicated upon some sot of blan$et e;ection of legal fomalities. #t does

mean to emphasize that meaningful senses of citizenship do not pimail- est on

individuals legal status but on the space povided b- the polis*as*discouse to lodge

within its coe paametes the elational pactices of those who happen to be emplaced

unde its puview.

#n othe wods! the senses of citizenship that matte fo thin$ing the polis ae not

egaded hee as %attibutes' of individuals! o goups of individuals. Again this doesnot mean posing the ludicous notion that individuals sensibilities! dispositions! and

actual pactices ae empiicall- %sepaate fom' an- conceivable set of maco*discusive

paametes hegemonic o othewise*. #t means to ague that it is methodologicall-

waanted to place senses of citizenship as a landscape of pefomativities anchoed in a

concete milieus %e8empla- model' *in Ashle-s sense 1>0@03 ?/! whee the hegemonic

elational space that fame individualsemplacement is what mattes consideing fo

undestanding the :ualit- and te8tue of public life! moe than individuals o set of

individuals views! values! o dispositions. #n othe wods! what mattes about %living

togethe' *the :ualit- and te8tue of public life* is viewed hee as contingent upon the

availabilit- of 1a discusive3 ancho stabilizing the fee flow of implicit paametes that

enable the self to safel- %be thee' *befoe! amongst! and alongside e:uall-*entitled

othes*.

Since m- undestanding of %living togethe' is pemised on the idea of %being

pesent in public' as pivotal component of citizenship! m- in:ui- is inteested in the

H?



senses of citizenship enabled b- the polis fo the collective enactment of %being thee'.

This undestanding of %senses of citizenship' encompasses an ample ange of pactices!

fom conventional involvement in politics 1voting! oganizing! contesting3! to

engagement in pupose*oiented collective tas$s 1paents school*committees!

neighbohood activities! mutual*aid societies! housing coopeatives! etcetea3 to simpl-

being thee in the sidewal$! mingling with stanges *paaphasing 6annah Aendt! in

shee human contiguit-*. A panopl- of wa-s of being pesent in public ma- be enacted

in a numbe of 1unconventional3 aenas and modes that waant attention ** including

the independent 1non*pofit3 theate! its actos and its publics! neighbohood stoes!

pubs and coffee*houses! poet- eadings and music festivals! the dail- outines and

dispositions of public school teaches! independent film*ma$es! musicians and atists**!

whethe o not the- ae active in o sh- awa- fom%politics'! the :ualit- and te8tue of

cit- life in the steets! its cones and its s:uaes! and the motions of passes*b- as the-

casuall- mingle with stanges* fo these ma- constitute the intetwined pefomativities

cental to the e8empla- models continuing capacit- to claim and eclaim the

hegemonic emplacement of its egalitaian ancho. Such aenas! as well as the ituals and

dispositions that configue thei motions whethe delibeatel- o not ma- signal! in

ve- tangible wa-s! collective esistance to the naowing of public space.

1J3 Plualit-! %duable ine:ualit-'! and the place of egalitaianism. Foms and senses

of citizenship ma- theoeticall- encompass a wide ange of categoical possibilities. ?> #

am specificall- inteested in consideing senses of citizenship pemised on plualit- as

coteminous with egalitaianism.

Sometime ago Nanc- Fase aticulated a h-pothetical definition of %egalitaian

societies' that encompasses the pivotal components of a notion that! seen as a thust of

contempoa- emancipato- politics! seems unob;ectionable to me2

'=- egalitaian societies # mean nonstatified societies! societies whose basicfamewo$ does not geneate une:ual social goups in stuctual elations of dominanceand subodination. Egalitaian societies! theefoe! ae societies without classes andwithout gende o acial divisions of labo. 6oweve! the- need not be cultuall-homogeneous. n the conta-! povided such societies pemit fee e8pession andassociation! the- ae li$el- to be inhabited b- social goups with divese values!identities and cultual st-les! and hence to be multicultual.' 1Fase! >002>J3

A sophisticated thin$e such as Fase is full- awae! of couse! about the

distance between that %ideal' situation and the concete poblems she is see$ing to

H@



addess in he %citi:ue of actuall- e8isting democac-'! to paaphase the title of the

essa- whee that h-pothetical definition is offeed. Fo pesent puposes! Fases

passage helps me peface the fou pemises that undepin m- undestanding of

egalitaianism! which follows.

1i3 # stat b- ac$nowledging! with Till-! that %Mall social elations involve

fleeting! fluctuating ine:ualities'1Till-! >0002O3. These ae not at the coe of Till-s

masteful theoization of ine:ualit-! howeve. The ones that concen him ae %duable

ine:ualities'! that is! %those that last fom one social inteaction to the ne8t'! and that

pesist in the stuctuing of collective inteactions and peoples lives %ove whole

caees! lifetimes! and oganizational histoies' 1#bid.3.

1ii3 # futhe ac$nowledge! with Till-! that %Mlage! significant ine:ualities'coespond to a panopl- of %categoical diffeences' along class! ethnicit-! gende! age!

nationalit-! educational level! and %othe pinciples of diffeentiation'! %athe than to

individual diffeences in attibutes! popensities! o pefomances.'1Till-! >0002?!03

1iii3 Since the pevasive stuctual incidence of %duable ine:ualities' cannot be

uled*out b- vitue of desie! the %wold in common' # see$ to thematize must be

thought within an %actual' wold whee such %pinciples of diffeentiation' loom lage.

(oe specificall-! # ac$nowledge that contempoa- po;ects of emancipation and

esistance to ine:ualit- ae necessail- thought and enacted within a capitalist wold

ode and class*based societies! with no pesent o imminent possibilit- of easue

egadless of thei thust towads altenative futues! and the potentiall- stategic

significance of such thusts.

1iv3 #t follows that posing egalitaianism as pecluded b- mateial and s-mbolic

ine:ualit- is! fo puposes of this in:ui-! methodologicall- uled*out. Egalitaianism

ma- be undestood! howeve! as ma;o counte*foce to the natualization of ine:ualit-

be it though the big epics of ma;o evolutiona- moments! ongoing gass*oots

stuggles! %small' da-*to*da- stuggles! o though the stabilization of the polis as

discusive space anchoed on plualit- as egalitaianism*. This in:ui- is thus pemised

on the idea that! as anchoing pinciple of political inteactions! the pefomativities

egalitaianism allow can significantl- destabilize and disupt mateial and s-mbolic

ine:ualit-.

H0



=ased on those pemises! the notion of egalitaianism as deplo-ed hee is not

lin$ed to citizenship as some sot of %ideolog- of e:ualit-'. #t does not est! eithe! on a

theo- of natual ights! in the libeal sense. No is it egaded as an inheent popet-

of individuals.? (- undestanding encompasses thee meanings! as follows.

Fo one thing! # locate egalitaianism as a elational field! enacted in public! a

collective featue made up of senses of citizenship anchoed in the ac$nowledgement of

plualit- *with Aendt! not onl- the conditio sine ua non but the conditio per uam of

public life. This ac$nowledgement! incidentall-! is mastefull- captued in a collo:uial

phase deepl- embedded in the concete milieu that pompted m- seaches 7ugua-s

1fomel- hegemonic and toda- seveel- embatteed3 polis*2 %naides es m4s ue

naides2 1%no one is moe than an-bod- else'3. 7ltimatel-! # view egalitaianism as the political condition that ma$es

citizenship meaningful. That is! in ma$ing the enactment of the notion that %no one is

moe than an-bod- else' politicall- available! egalitaianism as anchoing pinciple of

public life confims a collective sense of e:ualit-2 being %amongst e:uals' because

othes confe to the self the condition of e:ualit- as such.

#f! following this logic! %being e:ual' is a political condition *ganted b- othes*!

its meaningful unfolding ests upon ituals of ac$nowledgement. #t is! then!

pefomativel- constituted. A milieu wheein such confeal is allowed to flow though

the e8empla- model ganted b- the polis as discusive space* sustains collective well

being. This has two ma;o implications. Fo one thing! and since # am not efeing to %a

famil-' but as a space of inteactions that goes be-ond %people we $now'! citizens ae

the stanges themselves. Fo anothe! ituals of ac$nowledgment do not suffice. The

mateial stuctues enabling the enactment of such ituals is e:uied 1see point @!

below3.

1O3 The place of stanges in this in:ui-. #n m- deplo-ment of %citizenship'!

citizens and stanges ae made coteminous. Again! beaing in mind the undestanding

of the d-namics of citizenship agued foth in peceeding paagaphs! the idea of

citizenship as %a given' constituted b- legal*pape*caies of %poof' of %belonging' to

%a political communit-' with all its constitutional peogatives and obligations! is not

ve- useful fo puposes of this in:ui-. Among othe things! in comple8 milieu8 we ae

K/



all foeign to cicumstances and conditions that nonetheless we have to ac$nowledge as

co*shaed! that is! as %public'. #t is as stanges that we have to coe8ist in an- comple8

milieu. #t is stanges who have to poduce a wold in common.?H

# thus find it waanted to destabilize the distinction between %citizen' and%stange'?K! fo without incopoating the notion of plualit- amongst stanges

citizenship emains conceptuall- e8cluding. #n m- eading! then! %stanges' ae not the

alteit- of citizenship. The- ae the citizens themselves. 6ow this catego- wo$s and

the implications it ma- hold fo undestanding political life cannot be detemined a

pioi. Consideing its eventual inteest fo an anal-tics of citizenship must await its

deplo-ment in concete eseach teains.

Fo the time being suffice it to note! fist! that within this easoning the a8is ofdiffeentiation at the stabilization moment of the polis discusive space does not est on

categoies such as %stanges'! %outsides'! and %aliens'! as in #sins supeb account of

citizenship. And! second! that the de*stabilization of the polis as anchoing discouse of

public life is! indeed! signaled at that moment when active stategies of %otheing'

undestood hee as a shift in the meaning of stanges! encompassing the simultaneous

pivatization of citizenship and the tansfomation of stanges into %outsides'* come to

the foe. #n othe wods! #sins categoical distinction becomes elevant once thediscusive space of the polis looses hegemon- as anchoing pinciple of public life and

the stange*as*citizen 1of a wold in common3 disappeas fom view. Again! the fom

such moment ma- ta$e cannot be detemined a pioi. Suffice it hee to note that! within

m- agument! if egalitaianism is pefomativel- poduced! so is inegalitaianism2 it

flows fom discouses that in the da- to da- encountes amongst people emplaced in

shaed milieu8 1egadless of egimes and s-stems in place that consecate e:ualit-

befoe the law3! subsidiaize! dismiss o pepetuate stanges as alien to %ones wold'!

o as outsides to a wold of %citizens' and to anticipate that such d-namics ae lin$ed

not onl- with the pivatization of encountes! but with the efaming of mateial scacit-

1the efaming of povet-! salient within it3! as discusive claims attempt to shift the a8is

of citizenship to naow the meaning and meaningfulness of citizenship and things

public.

1?3 A note about the place of %class' and %the state'. As declaed above! m-

notion of egalitaianism is pemised! with Till-! on %duable ine:ualit-'. A $e-

K>



component of m- agument the polis egalitaian pemise* might fall flat in its face!

howeve! unless attention is ganted to the mateial dimensions of

e:ualit-ine:ualit-.?JAn egalitaian polis is not thin$able without ac$nowledging the

cental ole of the state as the institutional assemblage of mechanisms fo dischaging

distibutive and edistibutive functions and oveseeing the commons mateial

patimon- fom its basic infastuctue to the potection of its natual esouces! to the

administation of pospeit- and scacit-! to the the distibution of the impact of scacit-

duing toubled times.?O

#f pa-ing attention to the ealm of necessit- and mateial ine:ualit- is consideed

pivotal! leading to ac$nowledge both the cental function of the state as the

administative embodiment of the commons! and the methodological elevance ofincopoating the :uestion of class! seveal eseach*:uestions emege2 &hat fom of

state*ma$et elations accompanies the polis in its diffeent momentsI 6ow is the state

mobilized! institutionall- at diffeent points in time! to deplo- its distibutive and

edistibutive functions in suppot of the polis egalitaian anchoI 6ow does the

oganizational undepinnings of the state function when an egalitaian pemise has

achieved discusive hegemon- without having eased the conditions that ma$e*up fo

the pesistence of class contadictionsI 6ow does it affect the mateial and s-mbolic

dimensions of classI 6ow is egalitaianism pefomed in a class*based woldI &hat

does it mean in the da- to da- e8peience of the people whose lives ae infomed b- that

t-pe of logicI &hat ae the limits of egalitaianism in challenging %duable ine:ualit-'I

6ow tenable is the egalitaian pemise once the basic mateial conditions that enable the

polis hegemonic moment loose goundI 6ow can a peipheal state sustain its discusive

lin$age with egalitaianism given! pecisel-! its peipheal condition! with all the

implications that condition holds fo the tenuousness of its emplacement within the

intenational political econom-I

1@3 The place of the public.?? (- undestanding of the public ests on the

following pemises.

Fist * no comple8 life setting is thin$able without a space of inteactions

configued b-and constituting %that which is held in common' at an- point in time. #n

this stud-! that which is held in common is named % things public'. %Things public' ae

undestood hee as the tangible and intangible theads 1mateial and s-mbolic3 that

K



weave*togethe moe o less tenuousl- o fiml-! in a moeo less encompassing! o in

moeo less meaningful wa-s* the inteactions among stanges in an- concete milieu!

at an- point in time.

Second* #n an- comple8 life*setting diffeent discouses of the public coe8ist.ne of the cental concens of m- in:ui- is the space ganted to things public! that is!

whethe the pevailing discouse1s3 ende them significant! meaningful! o! convesel-!

feaed! e;ected o dismissed. Since %that which is held in common' and the logic of

inclusion! e8clusion and otheing that the discusive teain enables at an- point in time

vaies acoss time and place! the space of %things public' in concete milieu8 that is!

public space* ma- be moe o less encompassing! wea$e o stonge! of highe o

lowe densit-! moe naow o wide in scope.Thid* # suspect fom the stat that the space of things public will tend to

appoach eithe the stongest o the wea$est end of a h-pothetical continuum depending

upon the :ualit- and scope of the inteactions that ma$e up that space *to povide oom!

to goup! elate and sepaate 1in the Aendtian sense3 those who shae a ph-sical

emplacement in a specific milieu 1i.e.! inhabitantscitizen*stanges3! at an- point in

time. &hile %stength' does not necessail- ule*out e8clusion! a wea$ public space

dovetails with naow foms of citizenship! including its eduction to the highl-* poblematic abitainess of pivatized foms of esolving the pedicament of selves*

and*othes thown*togethe in eluctantl- shaed ph-sical spaces! occup-ing thei

enegies in eithe escaping! secluding*themselves*fom! o seceeding fom a public

ealm endeed! at best! subsidia-! and! at wost! a place of un*sought encountes 1the

%solution' of those who can choose to opt*out3 o! altenativel-! stuggling to suvive

within the naow confines of ph-sical topogaphies and s-mbolic teitoies endeed

meaningless as sites of a hadl-*imaginable commons 1the pedicament of those who

have no choice3.

(- deplo-ment of the public ultimatel- ests on a h-pothetical 1ideal3 bluepint

of seveal things at once. #t means a la-eed spatialit- whee multiple publics! thei

aenas! and thei enabling conditions intesect. That la-eed spatialit- is undestood! in

tun! as the connecting tissue of the m-iad mateial and s-mbolic zones that povide a

place fo stanges to safel- be. The multiple publics and thei aenas encompass a wide

ange of pefomativities * fom %issue*fomation' *contesting! oganizing! debating!

KH



and deciding* to ;ust %being thee'! pesent in public! in shee human contiguit-!

without having to invo$e ones name in ode to pata$e of a space that nutues

though those pefomativities* a common wold. This inevitabl- ontological and

nomative* h-pothetical bluepint funishes a point of depatue to in:uie about the

place and space of things public in the ealm of concete e8peience.?@

#f! as agued in this pape! the meaningfulness of citizenship ests on stanges

1the ma$es of the commons3! egalitaianism 1the pinciple that anchos a dignified

coe8istence though mutual ac$nowledgement3! and %living togethe' o con*i*encia

1the aim of the polis3?0! a cucial probl5matiue has been identified2 the poduction of

con*i*encia amongst stanges! its 1tansfomative3 duabilit-! and its continuing

defense amidst foeve*shifting sands. The sto- # attempt to tell elsewhee **on theconfiguation! hegemon-! subse:uent de*stabilization! and cuent pedicament of the

polis*as*discusive*space in the 7ugua-an milieu 1whee! as the fist decade of the >st

centu- daws to a close! the ema$able polis of -este-ea stuggles to suvive afte

decades of unpescedented stess3! mobilizes the notions disclosed in this pape!

endeavouing to shed light on the ma;o significance of the sta$es involved.

KK



>(- pemises and points of depatue ae infomed b- what might be egaded as an eclecticism of sots that dissociates itself fomindividualist ontologies and positivism! stands in affinit- with stands of citical theo- 1used hee boadl- to encompass neo*ma8isttheo-! the Fan$fut School stand of citical theo-! citical constuctivism and postuctualism3 and daws fom seveal fields politicaltheo-! compaative politics! intenational political econom-! intenational elations! sociolog-! anthopolog-! and cultual studies. #tshould be noted! of couse! that these labels ae meel- indicative. "istinguishing between fields of stud- becomes an inceasingl-abita- e8ecise as disciplina- boundaies have been challenged in the past few decades in m-iad wa-s! on a divesit- of gounds. #deal moe e8tensivel- with these topics in the boo$*chapte on which this pape is based 1pelimina- title :´Contra Viento y Marea6.

Memories of Citizenship: the Resilience of Public Space in an Embattered Polis. The ru!uayan E"perience# $%&'()'$'# chapte 2%Thin$ing the Polis'3. To paaphase! -et again! 9al (a8s famous wods in The Ei!hteenth +rumaire of 7ouis +onaparte! %humans do not ma$e histo-unde conditions of thei own choosing'.

H =ut what happens when that hegemon- is lostI The stud- on which this pape is based tells a sto- about the as-mmetical stuggle between the poweful logic of neolibealism and the legac- of a humble abode the 7ugua-an polis*! a battle that confonts wa-s ofundestanding and enacting the commons with a discouse that seiousl- theatens the meaningful suvival of its egalitaian pemise.Standing at the pesent *theshold* moment # see$ to account fo the place of things public in the embatteed polis! and fo the esilienceof public space amidst embatteement esilience confonting the dislocating logics unleashed b- authoitaianism! fist! and globalcapitalism in its neolibeal moment! second*! to suggest that the fomidable legac- be:ueathed b- the discusive space of the polis at itshe-da- 1wa-s of %doing politics' and %being political'3 is a tangible collective esouce! still! that e:uies attention as site of esistancefo the maintenance! up$eeping! activation! ec-cling and enewal of public life! with significant pactical and theoetical* implications.

K &ithin Political Science! boadl- undestood! #ntenational Relations seems at the foefont at pesent in tems of the significant inoadsmade b- citical theo- in the past two decades o so. n the ise of the citical challenge to the mainsteam of #ntenational Relationssince the >0@/s 1and the diffeent stands of cuent citical theo- intenational political econom-! feminism! geen theo-!

postuctualism! etcetea3! see Richad &-n ,ones! Critical Theory and 8orld Politics 1=oulde! Co.2 4-nne Rienne! //>3! amongothes. As fo constuctivism! a ve- good oveview *that situates it in elation to its oots in citical theo-* ma- be found in Reus*Smitschapte 1%Constuctivism'3! in Scott =uchill! Richad "eveta$! Andew 4in$late et. al.! //> 1see! especiall- pp. /0*H/ and p. J!on the convegence between constuctivism and the English School in intenational elations theo-3. n the divisions within citicalintenational theo- and constuctivism between modenists and postuctualists! and the distinction between the %citical intepetivism'of modenists and the %adical intepetivism' of postuctualists! see Reus*Smit! 1//>32 >K*>O! ?*@. (- affinities withconstuctivism ae with its %citical' 1as opposed to %conventional'3 stand. n the distinction between %citical' and %conventional'constuctivism see Ted 6opf! %The Pomise of Constuctivism in #ntenational Relations Theo-'! -nternational Security H1>3! >00@ 2>?>*//.J Thee ae! of couse! moe adical vesions of multicultualism than 9-mlic$as. Fo %adical multicultualism' citizenship as identit-

ta$es pecedence ove citizenship as legal status of membeship. Thus! %L&esten societiesLmust allow Leach ethnic goups ight todevelop its own cultue! and! in the pocess! acceed to the eduction of its &esten*centism'! abandoning %Lthe ve- notion of ama;oit- cultue' 1Shafi! >00@2>03.O "avid 6eld and "aniel Achibugi have been engaged along with othe scholas in a collective political po;ect the- have temed%cosmopolitan democac-'. See "aniele Achibugi and "avid 6eld! eds # Cosmopolitan 9emocracy: ,n ,!enda for a e; 8orld <rder1Polit- Pess! >00J3! and "aniele Achibugi! %"emos and Cosmopolis' 1 e; 7eft Re*ie;! >H! ,anua-*Febua- //2 K*H@3. Theinteesting wo$ of othe political theoists in connection to post*national democac- and ;ustice is well illustated b- Roland =lei$e!%<isualizing Post*National "emocac-'! in (ot Schoolman and "avid Campbell 1eds3 The e; Pluralism: 8illiam Connolly and theContemporary =lobal Condition 1"u$e 7nivesit- Pess! //@3 and Nanc- Fase! %Refaming ,ustice in a Globalizing &old'! e;

7eft Re*ie; HO! Novembe*"ecembe //J2O0*@@. Cuent debates on cosmopolitanism ae well illustated in "aniel Achibugi 1ed.3 9ebatin! Cosmopolitics 14ondon2 <eso! //H3! and Steven <etovec and Robin Cohen 1eds.3 Concei*in! Cosmopolitanism 18fod7nivesit- Pess! //3. ? Postuctualist political theoists do not necessail- disavow the state! advocating! athe! tans*statist mobilization aound issues ofglobal concen to pessue the state. A pominent e8ample is &illiam Connoll-s influential wo$. See "avid Campbell and (oton

Schoolman 1eds.3 The e; Pluralism: 8illiam Connolly and the Contemporary =lobal Condition 1"uham and 4ondon2 "u$e 7nivesit-Pess! //@3 especiall- (oton Schoolmans lead essa-! %A Plualist (ind'.

@ See! fo instance =abaa Aneil %Global Citizenship and Empie'! Citizenship Studies >>1H3! ,ul- //?2 H/>*H@! on the challenging ofEmpie though an altenative theo- of global citizenship and Se-la =enhabib! %Twilight of Soveeignt- o the Emegence ofCosmopolitan NomsI Rethin$ing Citizenship in <olatile Times'! Citizenship Studies >>1>3! Febua- //?2 >0*HO! on the stengtheningof popula soveeignt- though the aticulation of the local! the national and the global. n %globalization fom below'! see A;unAppaduai! %Gassoots Globalization and the Reseach #magination'! Public Culture >1>32>*>0! ///. See! also! Richad "eveta$ andRichad 6iggott! %,ustice 7nboundI Globalization! States and the Tansfomation of the Social =ond'! -nternational ,ffairs! ?J1H3! >0002K@H*K0@.



0 See Richad Stahle*Shol$! 6a- E. <anden! and Glen "avid 9uec$e %Globalizing Resistance. The New Politics of Social(ovements in 4atin Ameica'! 7atin ,merican Perspecti*es HK! //?2 J*>O Sonia E. Alvaez! Evelina "agnino! and Atuo Escoba1eds3 Cultures of Politics# Politics of Cultures. Re(Visionin! 7atin ,merican Social Mo*ements 1=oulde! Co.2 &estview Pess! >00@3!Pat Thee 1%Globalization! Tansnationalism! and Civil Societ-'3! especiall- Sonia E. Alvaez %4atin Ameican Feminisms Go Global2Tends of the >00/s and Challenges fo the New (illennium' 1pp 0H*HK3! Gustavo 4ins Ribeio %C-becultual Politics2 PoliticalActivism at a "istance in a Tansnational &old' 1pp. HJ*HJ3! and "avid Slate! %Rethin$ing the Spatialities of Social (ovements2Vuestions of 1=3odes! Cultue! and Politics in Global Times' 1pp. H@/*K/>3 Evelina "agnino %(eanings of Citizenship in 4atinAmeica'! #"S &o$ing Pape J@! Novembe //J Ampao (en)ndez*Cai+n %The tansfomation of political cultue'! in (anuelAntonio Gaet+n (. And Edwad Newman! 9emocracy in 7atin ,merica. 1 Re>Constructin! Political Society 1To$-o2 7nited Nations7nivesit- Pess! //>2 K0*??3 and Ampao (en)ndez*Cai+n! Repensar la Polis. 9el Clientelismo al Espacio P?blico 1(ontevideo2Cento 4atinoameicano de Econom5a 6umana! //?3! chaptes @ and 0.>/ See! fo instance! Timoth- =ennans ,t @ome in the 8orld 1Cambidge2 6avad 7nivesit- Pess! >00?3 and his chapte1%Cosmopolitanism and #ntenationalism'3 in "aniele Achibugi 1ed.3 9ebatin! Cosmopolitics 1New o$ and 4ondon2 <eso! //H2 K/*J>3. See also Caig Calhouns s-mpathetic though sobeing assessment of %cosmopolitan democac-'! in %#s it Time to =e PostnationalI'!in Stephen (a-! Tai: (odood! and ,udith S:uies 1eds3 Ethnicity# ationalism and Minority Ri!hts 1Cambidge! 792 Cambidge7nivesit- Pess! //K 2H>*JO3. See also Caig Calhoun! %The Class Consciousness of Fe:uent Tavelles2 Towads a Citi:ue ofActuall- E8isting Cosmopolitanism'! in "aniele Achibugi 1ed.3 9ebatin! Cosmopolitics! 2 @O*>>O and (atin 9ohle! %Fom the

National to the Cosmopolitan Public Sphee'! in "aniel Achibugi! "avid 6eld! (atin 9ohle! eds Re(ima!inin! Political Community:Studies in Cosmopolitan 9emocracy 1Cambidge2 Polit- Pess! >00@3. n the chiaoscui of tansnationalism as empoweement stateg-see (ichael Pete Smith and 4uis Eduado Guanizo 1eds.3 Transnationalism from +elo;# 1New =unswic$! N.,.2 Tansaction Publishes!>00@3.

>> Fo (ichael &alze these %cucial social fomations' ae %the econom-! the nation! the state! and civil societ-Lbut we do not at thismoment live comfotabl- in an- of them' 1&alze! %The Civil Societ- Agument'! in Geshon Shafi! ed. The Citizenship "ebatesL20>3. Though &alze is efeing hee to %advanced capitalist societies'! # find his comments applicable elsewhee *and! moespecificall-! to 4atin Ameica*.

> As intenational citical theoists have pointed out! one of the basic poblems with ealist and neo*ealists pespectives is theinatualization and eification of the state and the intenational s-stem %b- teating stuctues which have a specific and tansito- histo-as if the- wee pemanent! nomal! o givenpolitical fi8tues' 1=uchill! //>2 0H3. Among these citics! see Robet &. Co8! %SocialFoces! States and &old de2 =e-ond #ntenational Relations Theo-'! Millennium# >0 1>0@032>O*JJ. Fo a postuctualist citi:ue seeRichad 9. Ashle-! %The Povet- of Neoealism'! -nternational <r!anization! H@1>0@K32 J*@O.

>H See Engin #sin! %Cit-.State2 Citi:ue of Scala Thought'! Citizenship Studies ! //?! >>132 >>*@. #sin notes that %Mscala thoughtepesents these bodies as though all e8ist in actual spaces as such at a given scale of epesentation. ,ust because these bodies can beepesented b- scale in catogaphic tems! the assumption is that these bodies e8ist in the fom in which the- ae epesented.' 1p. >>3.>K As #sin 1//?2 >>3 comments! Feguson and Gupta 1>00J3 %have used veticalit-and encompassment to identif- two metaphos toillustate how we eif- states. The- ague that the metaphos of veticalit- and encompassment wo$ togethe to poduce a ta$en*fo*ganted spatial and scala image of a state that both sits above and contains its localities! egions and communities'. See Feguson! ,. andGupta A! %Spatializing States2 towad an ethnogaph- of neolibeal govenmentalit-'! in ,.W. #nda 1ed3 ,nthropolo!ies of

Modernity:Aoucault ! =o*ernmentality# and 7ife Politics# (alden! (a.2 =lac$well Publishes! //J2 >/J*>H>! p. >>O3. Though Fegusonand Guptas idea is suggestive! # find So-sals point that %Mthe wold is still lagel- oganized on the basis of spatiall- configued

political units and topogaphic mati8es still infom the models and pa8is of national and intenational actos' methodologicall-waanted! paticulal- since %L nation*states as authoized actos function concuentl- with inte and tansnational nomative stuctues!odeing and oganizing individual lives.' See asemin NuhXglu So-sal! %Towad a Postnational (odel of (embeship'! in GeshonShafi 1ed.3 The Citizenship 9ebates 1>00@32 >@0*/! p.>0J.>J Conside! fo instance! #is (aion oungs comment that %Mthe idea of the ancient Gee$ polis often functions in both moden andcontempoa- discussion as a m-th of lost oigins! the paadise fom which we have fallen and to which we desie to etun.' 1oung!>00@2 @@! Note K3.>O Thus! Geshon Shafi comments that %Min man- wa-s the Gee$ appoach esembles the communitaian discouse on citizenship whilethe Roman appoach is li$e the libeal vesion of ou times in factL the libeal*communitaian debate might be fuitfull- seen as amoden e*enactment of the impeial*polis division' 1Shafi! >00@2 J3. See also (ichael &alze! %The Communitaian Citi:ue of4ibealism'! Political Theory! >@1>3! Febua- >00/2 O*H.

>? The wo$s of othe thin$es of plualit- have also achieved pominence in the past few decades. To mention but a few! it is the case of,ohn Rawlss within the libeal tadition 1see! fo instance! ,ohn Rawls # , Theory of Bustice! Cambidge! (ass2 =el$nap! >0?> and



Political 7iberalism! New o$2 Columbia 7nivesit- Pess! >00H3. #t is also the case of (ichael &alzes Spheres of Bustice 1New o$!=asic =oo$s! >0@H3! among the communitaians and of Enesto 4aclau and Chantal (ouffes post*ma8ist theoization of adicaldemocac- 1see thei @e!emony and socialist strate!y. To;ards a radical democratic politics ! 4ondon2<eso! >0@J3. Among the

postuctualists! see 4-otad and his idea of multiplicit- and the impossibilit- of consensus 1in ,ean*Fancois 4-otad The PostmodernCondition: , Report on no;led!e ! (inneapolis2 7nivesit- of (innesota Pess! >0@K3. Also fom 4-otad! see %Notes on4egitimation'! in Reine Schumann! ed. The Public Realm 1Alban-2 State 7nivesit- of New o$ Pess! >0@032>O?*>@/. n Rawlssaccount of ;ustice and its e8clusiona- implications see Chantal (ouffe %"econstuction! Pagmatism and the Politics of "emocac-'! inChantal (ouffe! ed.! 9econstruction and Pra!matism 14ondon and New o$! Routledge! >00O2>*>32 0*>>.>@

The emeging bougeoisie of the Enlightenment ae pivate citizens who become %a public' though thei opinion*foming debates on

mattes of common inteest! effecting a shift in the locus of the public 1fom the monopol- of the state3 though thei newl-*ac:uiedcapacit- to impact in %political affais'. =ecoming a pat of such sphee had as pee:uisites that potential paticipants be pepaed toengage in e8changes based on %eason' and access to infomation the nascent pinted pess pla-ed a pivotal ole*! in ode to achievedemocatic consensus! as e:uals! on mattes of 1public3 concen. See ,amie wen "aniels inteesting points on the classical bougeois

public sphee as postulated b- 9ant! and of 6abemass engagement of 9ant in that connection 1in wen "aniels %Rituals of"is:ualification2 Competing Publics and Public 6ousing in Contempoa- Chicago'! in (i$e 6ill and &aen (ontag! Masses# Classes#and the Public Sphere2 O@*O03.

>0 #n his leaned intoducto- essa- to the volume put togethe to celebate the publication in English of The Structural Transformation!Caig Calhoun notes that its significance emained in its aim2 eaching be-ond %the flawed ealities' of the bougeois public sphee of the>?th though mid /th centuies! %to ecove something of continuing nomative impotance'! namel-! % an institutional location fo

pactical eason in public affais and fo the accompan-ing valid! if often deceptive! claims of fomal democac-.'1Calhoun! >002>3.

&ith the benefit of hindsight! almost two decades afte Calhoun made that affimation the ma;o significance of 6abemaspublic spheemight be bette placed! pehaps! in the impessive bod- of wo$ it inspied and the citi:ues it launched since **not to mention the impactit had! via tansnational netwo$s of scholas and gass*oots activists! in the institutionalization of intenational foums! of %subalten

publics'! to use Fases e8pession 1>002>H3! whee the idea of %dialogue' and %consensus building' as stateg- to influence local!national and intenational polic-*ma$es as well as %wold public opinion' on a wide ange of issues! is endeed pivotal./#t ma- fist be noted! following Ele-! that %6abemass concentation on /ffentlich0eit as a specificall- bougeois catego- subsumesfoms of popula democatic mobilization that wee alwa-s alead- pesent as contending and subvesive altenatives to the classicallibeal oganization in which 6abemass ideal of the public sphee is confined.' 1Ele-! >002 HH/*HH>3. #n line with Ele-s point!Calhoun notes that %Limpotant pats of the stuggle to establish some of the featues that 6abemas descibes as integal to bougeois

publicit-! li$e feedom of the pess! in fact wee caied out lagel- b- activists in the so*called plebeian public sphee' 1Calhoun!>002H03. Calhoun then moves to ma$e a ma;o point! namel-! that %Mthe hegemon- of bougeois publicit- was alwa-s incomplete ande8ecised within a field constituted patl- b- its elation to othe insugent discouses'1#bid.3.> This is made :uite clea in 6abemass %The Public Sphee2# e; =erman Critiue H1>0?K32K0.

See Nanc- Fases %Rethin$ing the Public SpheeL' Chantal (ouffe! The Return of the Political #is (aion oung! Bustice andthe Politics of 9ifference and sca Negt and Ale8ande 9luge Public Sphere and E"perience2 To;ard an ,nalysis of the +our!eois and

Proletarian Public Sphere. See also Geoff Ele-! %Nations! Publics! and Political CultuesL'! section on %Gende and the Public Sphee'2H/?*H>/.

H Fo an illuminating teatment of these! among othe shifts! see (i$e 6ill and &aen (ontags #ntoduction to Masses# Classes andthe Public Sphere. # am patiall- dawing fom thei e8cellent chapte in this section.K That is! %Mthe- no longe poduce effects at all in civil societ- in which the distinct goups that emege ae neithe ooted in opposingand ieconciliable inteests! no foged in stuggle against legitimate o illegitimate powe.' 1#bid3.J See! especiall-! 6abemass The -nclusion of the <ther .1Cambidge! (A2 (#T Pess! >00@3! and his %Rema$s on 4egitimation

though 6uman Rights'. The Modern Schoolman. Special #ssue. %Globalization'2 ?J 13. ,anua-! >00@2 @?*00.

O n this point also see "allma-s citi:ue of 6abemass conceptualization of eason and the life*wold 1in Fed "allma-! +et;een Areibur! and Aran0furt ! chs. >! K! and J3.

? The ift between %ationalit-' and action in 6abemas conception of the public sphee! with some distubing implications fo the



pactice of ;ustice*see$ing contestation and esistance! ae bought into sta$ elief in &aen (ontags supeb chapte %The pessue ofthe steet2 6abemass Fea of the (asses'! in (i$e 6ill and &aen (ontag! eds.! Masses# Classes# and the Public Sphere2 >H*>KJ.

@ (ouffes points of contention with 6abemass ationalist emphasis on consensus ae pesuasivel- made in Chantal (ouffe! ed.! 9econstruction and Pra!matism 14ondon and New o$2 Routledge! >00O32 0*>/. That volume povides a supeb discussion of "eidasdeconstuction and Rot-s pagmatism! two ma;o thin$es and appoaches which! thei ma;o divegences aside! stand togethe in theiadical confontation with ationalist theoies. See! especiall-! (ouffes #ntoduction to the volume2 >*> and ,ac:ues "eida! %Rema$s

on "econstuction and Pagmatism'2 ??*@@.

0 &hich does not peclude ac$nowledging the idea of voicing opinions! delibeating positions and eaching consensus as impotantcomponents of a wold in common.H/ #sin easons as follows2Thoughout centuies an unstable combination of solidaistic! agonistic! and alienating stategies andtechnologies of citizenship such as stigmatization! maginalization! heoization! itualization! acialization! pofessionalization!univesalization! confatenization and mediatization constituted citizens as those who managed to inculcate vitues though othes asstanges and outsides. Slaves! women! peasants! atisans! postitutes! vagabonds! sansculottes! wo$es! and s:ueegees wee constitutedas poblematized beings! intepellated and enticed to conduct themselves in ;ust and vituous wa-s conducive to social! political! andspatial odes envisioned b- citizens.' 1=P2i83

H>This is m- eading of #sins teatment of alteit- and it does neithe epesent his e8plicit aguments no what he chooses to emphasize inhis discussion of the logics of e8clusion and closue.HThis affinit- stems fom m- own undestanding of politics and the political. =oowing fom Claude 4efot 1>0@@3! # find it useful tonote the distinction between %politics' 1la politiue3 and %the political' 1le politiue3 whee politics %is about the specific behavios!stategies! and policies of political actos and institutions'1Gabadi! //>2 0J3! and %the political is the constitutive famewo$ andsociopolitical space within which politics happens and though which meaning is assigned to events' 1#bid.3.

HH #sin is inteested in citizenship as alteit-. 6e is also inteested in the stategies and technologies deplo-ed in %becoming' political. # aminteested! athe! in how %being political' ma- be enacted in concete milieu8! once an egalitaian discouse achieves hegemon- and onthe :uestion of whethe and how that discouse endues in its post*hegemonic moment. Thus! # am inteested in investigating 1i3 the logicof stabilization of a discusive ancho that ests on egalitaianism 1ii3 the logic of destabilization of such discusive ancho and 1iii3 themoment of confontation of both logics! with :ueies about whethe and how this %thid moment' poduces %otheness'. That is! the

d-namics of %otheing' *in #sins tems* become impotant! fo m- puposes! mainl- as an outcome of the eosion o loss of thatdiscusive ancho 1moment iii3. And at that moment! #sins pesuasive aguments about alteit- notwithstanding! the politics of e8clusion*and %civic death'* ma- become a salient datum of political e8peience that no %positive ecove-' of alteit- can affod to ignoe.

HK Among the illustations offeed b- Aendt in he teatment of action in the moden age! popula upisings and evolutiona- momentsloom lage 1the Ameican Revolution! the evolutiona- clubs of the Fench Revolution! the Pais Commune>@?>! the ceation of sovietsduing the Russian Revolution and of councils duing the Spanish Civil &a! the Fench Resistance to 6itle in the nd &old &a! andthe 6ungaian Revolt of >0JO3. #n this egad! see comments b- "EntUves 1The Political Philosophy1: O@3 and (anuel Cuz!%#ntoducci+n2 6annah Aendt! pensadoa del siglo'2 i*8vii3! intoduction to the Spanish edition of The @uman Condition 1=uenos Aies2Paid+s! //K3.HJ See (anuel Cuz a popos a numbe of attempts to categoize Aendts thin$ing. As he notes! thee is %no apolog- of individualism' o%libeal*consevative' thought in Aendts wo$. Cuz finds 6abemass view of 6anna Aendt as a %adical democat' waanted 1see(. Cuz! %#ntoducci+nL'2 v!vii3.HO #n the civic epublican tadition 1going bac$ to Aistotle and embodied in the thought of (achiavelli! Rousseau! (ontes:uieu!Toc:ueville! and in the witings of >@ th centu- Ameican epublican thin$es3! an authentic bod- politic obtains when a citizen- gathestogethe to %delibeate' and %decide'. &hat mattes about political activit- is not ageeing o shaing conceptions of the good! but thee8ecise of agenc- and the development of ;udgment though conceted action. "EntUves! among othes! sees as cental components inAendts conception of citizenship %the connection between political action! undestood as the active engagement of citizens in the publicealmLand the e8ecise of effective political agenc-'1 "EntUves! The Political PhilosophyL2 >0*/3. 6e thus finds that %Mif thee is atadition of thought with which Aendt can be identified! it is the classical tadition of civic epublicanism' 1#bid2 3. The fe:uent and!to m- mind! e:uivocal* assimilation of Aendts thin$ing to communitaianism goes hand in hand with the similal- fe:uent e:uation of%moden civic epublicanism' with the fail-*ecentl-*evived communitaian citi:ue to libealism 1 see that e:uation made! fo instance!in Geshon Shafi! %#ntoduction'! in Geshon Shafi! ed. The Citizenship 9ebates2>/3.H? Aendts biogaphe Elisabeth oung =uhel suggests that the development of Aendts philosoph- might well be undestood b-esoting to the notion of paiah. See Elisabeth oung*=uehls %Fom the Paiahs Point of <iew2 Reflections on 6annah Aendts 4ife



and &o$' 1in (elv-n A. 6ill! ed. @annah ,rendt: The Reco*ery of the Public 8orld# New o$! St. (atins Pess! >0?03.H@ A compehensive teatment of Aendts conception of modenit- ma- be found in "EntUves! The Political PhilosophyL! chapte >.See! especiall-! his anal-sis of 6abemas and Aendts conceptions compaed 1pp. O*@3. A pathbea$ing teatment of 6annah Aendtsconception of modenit- fom a leading feminist and citical theoists pespective ma- be found in Se-la =enhabibs The Reluctant

Modernism of @annah ,rendt 1>00O3. =enhabib pesuasivel- agues that Aendt %was no philosophe of antimodenit-'1p. >H@3! but!athe %a eluctant modenist! but a modenist nonetheless who celebated the univesal declaation of the ights of man and citizen whotoo$ it fo ganted that women wee entitled to the same political and civil ights as men who denounced impeialist ventues in Eg-pt!#ndia! South Afica and Palestine who did not mince he wods in he citi:ue of the bougeoisie and of capitalism o in hecondemnation of moden nationalist movements Mand who celebated the evolutiona- tadition! which she li$ened to a fata moganathat appeas and disappeas at une8pected moments in histo-' 1pp. >H@*>H03'.H0 Since m- commenta- meel- outlines Aendts citi:ue of modenit- it does neglect a numbe of components! two of which should atleast be mentioned in passing. Aendts indictment of modenit- includes totalitaian foms of govenment. 6e eflections encompasse8tensive teatment of institutionalized foms of teo and violence. #t should also be noted that Aendts thin$ing include he concensabout moden science and technolog-s seach fo ovecoming eath*boundedness. She thus pondes on %eath alienation'! which! foAendt! undepins %the whole development of natual science in the moden age' 16C2OK3! compounding the poblem of %woldalienation'. As she wites! %Mmoden natual science owes its geat tiumphs to having loo$ed upon and teated eath*bound natue foma tul- univesal viewpoint! that is! fom an Achimedean standpoint ta$en! willfull- and e8plicitl-! outside the eath' 16C2>>3. Accodingto Aendt! howeve! %man can onl- get lost in the immensit- of the univese! fo the onl- tue Achimedean point would be the absolutevoid behind the univese' 1see +et;een Past and Auture! p. [email protected]/ See also Aendts %The Concept of 6isto-'! in +et;een Past and Auture 2 @0*0/.K> #n addition! she daws fom 6eidegges deconstuctive hemeneutics in ode to fee inheited categoies %fom the distotingincustations of tadition' so as %to ecove those pimodial e8peiencesL which have been occluded o fogotten b- the philosophicaltadition' 1"EntUves! >00K 2 K3. Fo a supeb postmoden eading of 6eidegges influence in Aendt see "ana R. <illa! ,rendt and

@eide!!er: The Aate of the Political . Fo an illuminating discussion of 6eidegge and Aendt! within the conte8t of cuent debates! see&a-ne Gabadi! e!otiatin! Postmodernism# chapte H.

K =iefl-! as fa as # $now this view uns counte to the position of distinguished Aendtian scholas. "EntUves position is illustative.#n the couse of compaing Aendt and 6abemass stance on modenit-! "EntUves notes that while 6abemass is affimative and%futue*oiented'! stessing the %incomplete' po;ect of modenit-! Aendts is past*oiented! whee modenit- %appeas as a deficient

po;ect that stands in need of edemption' 1"EntUves! p. ?3. # diffe fom that assessment of Aendts po;ect. Since in m- eading ofAendt the idea of continuit- and change stand as false antagonisms and this! to m- mind! is one of the most compelling contibutions ofhe political theo-*! # find it waanted to view he po;ect of ecove- as %futue*oiented'.KH #n Aendts thin$ing! the %human condition' does not mean %human natue'. 6e teatment of the human condition ma- be egaded asan e8ecise in phenomenological anthopolog-. n this point see "EntUves! The Political Philosophy1 2 HJ..

KK Aendts conditions ae %life'! %natalit-'! %motalit-'! %plualit-'! %woldliness'! and %the eath'. Fo pesent puposes! # find itwaanted to highlight the condition of plualit-.KJ n Aendts conception of feedom see also %&hat is Feedom' 1chapte K! in +et;een Past and Auture3.KO Aendts views on t-ann- ! epesentative govenment! and he pefeence fo diect democac-! ae undepinned b- he ob;ections toan- fom of egime that e8iles the citizen fom the public sphee. &ithin this famewo$! she ponounces heself against the idea of the%philosophe*$ing' o the %wisemen'! that %$now how to goven' . Fo Aendt! the poblem with these foms of govenment is not thatthe- ae cuel since! in he view! most of the time the- ae not! but! athe! that the- ma- function too well. 6e ob;ections ae to foms ofegime that favou the notion that citizens should concen themselves with thei pivate affais while govenments attend public affais!thus e8iling the citizen- fom the public sphee.K?Aendt wo$s with seveal definitions of the public 1%govening'! %managing public affais'! %deciding'! on the one hand! %appeaing'!on the othe3. 6e deplo-ment of the notion becomes elusive at times. The thust of he thin$ing becomes moe appaent if one does notta$e he e8plicit definitions at face*value but! athe! attempts to sift fom he e8tensive paagaphs how he assessment of things public

pla-s*out in faming the illustations she povides.

K@ #t efes %to the human atifact! the fabication of human hands! as well as to the affais which go among those who inhabit the man*made wold togethe'16C2J3. Fo! in Aendts thin$ing! %to live togethe in the wold means! essentiall-! that a wold of things is

between those who have it in common! as a table is located between those who sit aound it the wold! li$e eve- in*between! elates andsepaates men at the same time' 16C2?3.K0 See he discussion of diffeent notions of powe in The @uman Condition! chapte J. See! also! Crises of the Republic! pp. >KH*JJ.Thee points ae woth noting. Fist! that ogans of self*govenment! town*hall meetings! wo$escouncils! demonstations! and stugglesfo ;ustice and e:ual ights ae all pat and pacel of Aendts notion of powe. Second! it should be noted! at least in passing! that inAendts view the loss of powe cannot be compensated b- mateial powess! and it can become available to small and poo counties!



poviding them an advantage ove %poweful' and %ich nations'. Thid! it should also be bon in mind that some of he passages on thenotion of powe in The @uman Condition petaining %the powe of the wea$'! those who %$now nothing and can do nothing' ! ae :uiteelusive. Aside fom identif-ing them with an ochlocac- thee is ve- little else she sa-s. =e that as it ma-! it is clea that in Aendtsvision if t-ann- eplaces powe with violence! ochlocac- eplaces powe with foce fo Aendt! pevese fom of acting togethe due tothe pessues and the tic$s of cli:ues*.J/ At the is$ of stetching Aendts own thin$ing too fa! # still find it waanted to suggest that he idea of the polis opeates as ametapho not onl- with egad to concete teitoial abodes. To be sue! she emphasizes commitment to place! does not believe in global!undiffeentiated! cultuall- homogeneous human aangements! and in he view %men cannot become citizens of the wold as the- ae

citizens of thei count-'16C2J?3 Nonetheless! he polis seems to function! at times! as discusive space capable of lodging the poduction of a %wold in common' outside! be-ond! above! o below the ealm of conventional sites fo the enactment of %politics'.These speculations should not be ta$en too fa! howeve! in that the- should not authoize to set aside the gounded :ualit- of theAendtian polis. Nevetheless! the idea that space is not cudel- topogaphic! leaves much oom fo elaboating upon he insights on

public space.

J> % LThe oganization of the polis! ph-sicall- insued b- the walls that enclosed it and ph-siognomicall- guaanteed b- its laws so thatsubse:uent geneations would not change its identit- be-ond ecognition* is a $ind of oganized emembance. #t insues the motal actothat his passing e8istence and momenta- geatness will not eve lac$ of the ealit- that poceeds fom one being seen! head! and ingeneal! appeaing befoe a public of othe menL' 16C2 >0@3 Aendts efeences to the polis affoding individuals a chance fo glo- has

been the sub;ect of much attention *and contoves-*. # comment on that futhe below.

J Aendt opposes he notion of popet- to its conventional meaning in tems of wealth. Fo Aendts view on pivate popet- asopposed to wealth see he masteful anal-sis of the futilit- of mateial iches in 6C2J@*O?.JH Aendt views hedonism 1pivate foms of life undepinned b- an ove*iding seach fo pleasue and %the absence of pain'3 as themost adical fom of non*political life. 6edonism thus stands as the anathema of the polis in he thin$ing. See 6C! chapte H! section >J.

JK The standad efeences ae 7lich =echs ealiest statements on the topic 1 Ris0 Society: To;ards a e; Modernity# 4ondon! Sage>003 ! and Anthon- Giddens! The Conseuences of Modernity! Cambidge2 Polit- Pess! >00/.JJ #t should be emembeed that in Aendts view modenit- featues the %victo-' of animal laborans. And with such victo- the %woldof fabication' and the %wold of action' ae eplaced in favou of poductivit- and wealth. Fo Aendt the social ealm encompassesthose activities fomel- egaded as belonging stictl- to the sphee of epoduction emplaced in the household. As =enhabib notes! foAendt modenit- has bought %the occluding of the political b- the social and the tansfomation of the public space of politics into a

pseudospace of inteaction in which individuals no longe act but meel- behave as economic poduces! consumes! and uban cit-dwelles'1=enhabib! >002?J3. Aendt states that %the utte e8tinction of the ve- diffeence between the pivate and public ealms' comesabout with %the submesion of both in the sphee of the social'16C2 O03.

JO Refeences to some leading feminist scholas fail- ecent %ecove-' of Aendt appea in Note J?! below. The thust of the eal-feminist citi:ues to Aendts public space is captued in (a- R-ans comment that given Aendts definition of the publicpivatedichotom- she seems to %banish women' fom the public. See (a- P. R-an! %Gende and Public Access2 &omens Politics in

Nineteenth*Centu- Ameica'! in Caig Calhoun! ed. @abermas and the Public Sphere: O>3. #n he contibution to the same volumeSe-la =enhabib notes that %Aendts agonistic model is at odds with the sociological ealit- of modenit-! as well as with moden

political stuggles fo ;ustice' 1p. 0J3! and futhe contends that %Aendts pesistent denial of the womens issueand he inabilit- to lin$togethe the e8clusion of women fom politics and this agonistic and male*dominated conception of public space ae astounding' 1p. 0O!

Note >H3. The Note appeas in efeence to Aendts %associational view of public space' as that which %emeges wheneve and wheeve!in Aendts wods! men act togethe in concet' 1p. ?@3. Continues =enhabib2 %The nea absence of women as collective political actosin Aendts theo- 1individuals li$e Rosa 4u8embug ae pesent3 is a difficult :uestion! but to begin thin$ing about this means fistchallenging the pivatepublic split in he thought! as this coesponds to the taditional sepaation of sphees between the se8es1menYpublic life womenYpivate sphee3' 1p. 0O! Note >H3 M A few -eas late! in The Reluctant Modernism of @annah ,rendt !=enhabib would ecove the associational component of Aendts public space as elevant fo thin$ing social movements! includinggendes. A good oveview of the eal- feminist citi:ues ma- be found in (a- G. "ietz! %Feminist Receptions of 6anna Aendt'! in=onnie 6onig! ed. Aeminist -nterpretations of @annah ,rendt 17nivesit- Pa$2 Penns-lvania State 7nivesit- Pess! >00J3. Also! seeCaol Pateman! %Feminist Citi:ues of the PublicPivate "ichotom-'! in Stanle- #. =enn and Geald F. Gaus! eds. ! Public and Pri*ate inSocial 7ife# 1New o$2 St (atins Pess! >[email protected]?Elisabeth oug*=uehl comments Aendts missgivings about the :uestion of women becoming a movement sepaate fom othe

political stuggles 1oung*=uehl! >0?O2?H3 and (aia (a$us suggests that 6annah Aendt shaed with Rosa 4u8embug thatconviction that the :uestion of women should not stand apat fom othe! moe encompassing stuggles 1see (aia (a$us! %The Anti*Feminism of 6annah Aendt' Thesis Ele*en# No. >?! >0@?2 ?O*@?! p. @3. Since the mid >00/s feminist scholas have begun to ecoveAendts elevance to feminist theo- 1 see! fo instance! 4isa ,ane "ischs @annah ,rendt and the 7imits of Philosophy ! #thaca2 Conell



7nivesit- Pess>00K =onnie 6onig! ed.! Aeminist -nterpretations of @annah ,rendt ! >00J and Se-la =enhabibs The Reluctant Modernism1 3. =enhabib ecoves the associational component of Aendts public space and agues that a line must be dawn betweenthe public and the pivate *at sta$e is whee! how! b- whom! and fo what pupose that bounda- is to be dawn*.J@ &a-ne Gabadi offes a leaned discussion of postmoden eadings of Aendt! such as =onnie 6onigs Political Theory and the

9isplacement of Politics 1#thaca2 Conell- 7nivesit- Pess! >00H3! which! accoding to Gabadi! has shed light on the Nietzscheandimension in Aendts thin$ing 1 see Gabadi! e!otiatin! Postmodernism2 JO3. Gabadis account of Nietzsche! Aendt! and Foucaultsdeplo-ment of agonism is paticulal- illuminating. # engage those views in the stud- on which this pape is based. Fo pesent puposessuffice it to note! with Gabadi! that whethe seen as something to be embaced o! on the conta-! managed and contained! %Mthe will tostuggle has alwa-s been an integal featue of politicsL' 1#bid2 >H>3.J0 # ta$e slight e8ception to "EntUves view that in The @uman Condition Aendt puts foth the agonal model of action! moe than theassociational 1see "EntUves! The Political Philosophy1 2 >/*>>3. Though she ma- have paid inceasing attention to the associationalcomponent in late witings! in m- eading of The @uman Condition the two models ae put foth in a wa- that * unesolved tensionsnotwithstanding* leaves no doubt as to the significance she attibutes to both.O/ See (atin ,a-s distubing view of Aendts e8istentialist affinities! and 4eon =otsteins counte*aguments which! to m- mind!succeeds in setting the ecod staight about Aendts lac$ of s-mpath- fo mee %heoism' and egotistical seaches fo glo-. See (atin,a- and 4eon =otstein! %6anna Aendt! pposing <iews2# Partisan Review! KJ 1H3! Summe >[email protected]> Thee is no indication in Aendts political theo- that she valued action fo actions sa$e! o that she dismisses the instumentalcomponents of action. &hat Aendt is at pains to emphasize! time and again! is that the action*powe*feedom t-ad cannot hold unlessaction tanscends the meel- instumental. She thus ac$nowledges that action must concen itself %with the mattes of the wold of thingsin which men move! which ph-sicall- lies between them and out of which aise thei specific! ob;ective! woldl- inteests.' &oldl-inteests! fo Aendt! %constitute! in the wodsmost liteal significance! something which inte*est! which lies between people andtheefoe can elate and bind them togethe' 1 6C2>@3.O Finall-! ta$ing distance fom heoization does not mean ignoing the place of agon in its panopl- of meanings conflict! competition!

stuggle! esistance! tension 1#sin! //2HH3* as ma;o featues of political life. Neithe does it mean setting aside the pefomativecomponents of he thin$ing to be sue! %being public'%disclosue' hold cente stage in he conception of the polis*. nce the agonisticis ac$nowledged as significant component of public life! a set of inteesting :uestion aises! fo puposes of this in:ui-. 6ow would thee8pessive and communicative components of Aendts theo- of action opeate in a concete contempoa- milieu pemised onegalitaianismI &hat constitutes the pemissible as modes of conflict! competition! esistance! tension! and %distinction' in a conceteegalitaian milieuI

OH # eason as follows. =eaing in mind the oveall thust of he thin$ing! one must stive not to ta$e eve- single desciption Aendtma$es of the Gee$ polis as ;udgements on he pat. 6e own ema$s a popos Foustel de Coulangess comments in The ,ncient City1Coulanges!>0JO2HHJ3 in defense of a statement b- Aistotle ema$s that appea as a footnote to one of he chaptes in 6C stand! inetospect! as a waning about the need to e8ecise the utmost cae when assessing he own poblematic passages2 %7nli$e othe authos!Coulanges highlights the time and effot e:uied b- the activities of a citizen in anti:uit-! and adds that the aistotelian statement that no

one that had to wo$ fo a living could be a citizen! is the simple confimation of a fact and not the e8pession of a pe;udice' 16C2 ?! Note O@ emphasis added3. To m- mind! this ema$ is applicable to the unfolding of Aendts own depiction of the Gee$ polis. At theis$ of belaboing the obvious! Aendt poblematic passages! desciptions! and silences meit to be constued within the wide logic of hethin$ing * as one stives to do when confonting the wo$ of an- wite*. Appl-ing Coulanges ema$s a popos Aistotle to suchdesciptions and thus e8empting them fom indicating a condonation on Aendts pat*! ma- enable the eade to ecove the cu8 of hemetapho.

OK #n this connection see Aendts The <ri!ins of Totalitarianism whee she notes that no appeal to %natual ights' could be advanced befoe the Nazi egime b- those butall- depived fom civil and political ights. E8clusion fom membeship in the bod- politic meant! pecisel-! that the e8cluded had no ights. The- lac$ed! fo all intent and puposes! %the ight to have ights' 1see The <ri!ins ofTotalitarianism! New o$2 6acout =ace ,ovanovich! >0?H2 O0*@K! and p. H//3.OJ As #sin notes! %Mwhen one consides the entie histo- of ancient Geece fom the fist settlement in Cete b- (inoans aound H///=.C. to the (acedonian con:uest of the Gee$ poleis in H =.C.! the peiod between the emegence of politics and citizenship aound the

eight centu- =.C.! and its eventual declinein the fouth is ema$abl- shot.' 1=P2JJ3. OOA useful account of the ta;ecto- of discouse anal-sis ma- be found in ,acob Tofing! %"iscouse Theo-2 Achievements! Aguments!and Challenges'! in "avid 6owath and ,acob Tofing 1eds.3 9iscourse Theory in European Politics. -dentity# Policy# and =o*ernance1New o$2 Palgave! //J32>*H. Socio*linguistics! and content*anal-sis would ma$ a fist geneation 1the classical efeence hee is! ofcouse! le R. 6olstis Content ,nalysis for the Social Sciences and @umanities! Reading! (ass.2 Addison*&esle-! >0O03. Citicaldiscouse anal-sis would ma$ a second geneation 1see! fo instance! Noman Faiclough! Critical 9iscourse ,nalysis! 4ondon24ongman! >00J3. The postuctualist tun 1with ,ac:ues "eida! ,ulia 9isteva! Roland =athes! ,ac:ues 4acan! and (ichel Foucault atthe foefont3 would ma$ the thid geneation. These $inds of categoizations! of couse! ae meel- efeential. As it is $nown! NomanFaicloughs citical discouse anal-sis daws! among othes! fom (ichel Foucault and postuctualism. =e that as it ma-! Tofingscategoies ae helpful! fo pesent puposes! in calling attention to the specificit- of postuctualist undestandings of discouse as opposed



to the %fist' and %second' geneation of discouse anal-sis. The cental place ganted to discouse in this stud- is dawn fom the post*stuctualist font of citical theo-. #n m- in:ui- discouse efes %to a specific seies of epesentations and pactices though whichmeanings ae poduced! identities constituted! social elations established! and political and ethical outcomes made moe o less possible.'1=ialasiewicz! Campbell! Elden et. al.! //?2 K/O3. =ialasiewicz! Campbell! Elden! Gaham et. al. wan about the peils of attibuting to

postuctualists deplo-ment of discouse a belief that %eve-thing is language'! that %thee is no ealit-'! and that no politico*ethicalstance can thus be ta$en due to a pesumed %linguistic idealism'. These $inds of ob;ections! as the- able- put it! %demonstate howundestandings of discouse ae bedeviled b- the view that intepetation involves onl- languageLThese dichotomies ofidealismmateialism and ealismidealism emain poweful conceptions of undestanding the wold. #n pactice! howeve! a concen withdiscouse does not involve a denial of the wolds e8istence o the significance of mateialit-' 1=ialasiewicz! Campbell! Elden! Gaham

et. al.! //?2 K/O3.

O?Fom C-nthia &ebe 1>00@3 and "avid Campbell 1>00@a! >00@b3! # boow the notion of pefomativit-. The notion fees me fom the peils of essentializing the polis! citizenship and public space. This allows me to posit that thee is no %identit-' to eithe the polis!citizenship o public space in an- meaningful sense* %behind'! %pio to' o %aside' fom thei pefomative enactment. #t is pefomativeenactment which ma$es the polis appea as %eal' and constitutes it. The polis! citizenship! and public space become %eal' andmeaningful* though pefomativit-. #n boad tems what inteests postuctualists is %how pevailing modes of sub;ectivit- neutalize oconceal thei abitainess b- po;ecting an image of nomalc-! natualness! o necessit-' 1"eveta$! //>2 >0O3. # am ta$ing an admittedl-is$- step in subveting the use of Ashle-s %e8empla- model' 1see paagaphs below! and note ?/3 and &ebes and Campbells%pefomativities' b- lin$ing them to the discusive pactices implicated in the enactment of senses of citizenship and the stabilization ofthe discusive space of the polis that is! beeft fom the woisome ethical coelates of %e8empla- models' and pefomativities inconnection to how %pevailing modes of sub;ectivit-Lneutalize o conceal thei abitainess'. =e that as it ma-! # find the conceptualis$ woth ta$ing! in light of the theoetical possibilities opened! in m- view! b- the insightful deplo-ment of such notion in thei

pathbea$ing wo$.

O@ # povide e8tensive teatment of this point in the chapte on which this pape is based. Albeit long*standing debates about the uses ofhegemon- in Gamsci! his conceptualization is best undestood as %the oganization of consent' 1=aett! //K2 OO3. As Geoff Ele- and9eith Nield put it! almost thee decades ago! Gamscian hegemon- %is chaacteized b- uncetaint-! impemanence! and contadiction.'1Ele-!>002 HH3. 6egemon- %is not a fi8ed and immutable conditionLbut is an institutionall- negotiable pocess in which the social and

political foces of contest! bea$down and tansfomation ae constantl- in pla-.'1Ele- and Nield! >0@/2O03. %#n this sense'! continuesEle-! %hegemon- is alwa-s in the pocess of constuction! because binging the pocess to closue would entail eithe a utopia of socialhamon- o the eplacement of hegemonic b- coecive ule. 6egemon- is alwa-s open to modification! and unde specific cicumstancesma- be moe adicall- tansfomed o even 1though not ve- often3 bea$ down altogethe.' 1Ele-!>002 HH*HK3.

O0 Thee is an abundant liteatue in social geogaph-! neo*ma8ist theo-! and postuctualism! launching pesuasive aguments as to thecental impotance of spatialit- in accounting fo social elations . Fo an e8cellent ecent oveview! within an eve e8panding liteatue!see ,avie Au-eo! %Spaces and Places as Sites and b;ects of Politics'! in Robet Goodin and Chales Till- 1eds .> <"ford @andboo0 ofConte"tual Political ,nalysis! //O! ch. H/. # stat fom two basic notions2 space as politicall- constituted! and the political as spatiall-configued. # deive these ideas fom 6eni 4efebves b- now familia emphasis on the social constuction of spatialit- 1see 6eni4efebve! The Production of Space# tans. "onald Nicholson*Smith! oiginall- published in Fench! >0?K 8fod =lac$well! >00>3! and"oeen (asse-s emphasis! in tun! on the spatial constuction of the social 1see "oeen (asse-! Space# Place# and =ender !(inneapolis! (n2 7nivesit- of (innesota Pess! >00K3.The spaces # am inteested in ae ph-sical 1sidewal$s! cones! s:uaes! pa$*

benches! bus*stops! buildings! neighbohood zones! cit-*aeas! etcetea3! s-mbolic 1as in! fo instance! the changing epesentational powe confeed to pefomativities associated with an ample! unassuming! illustated middle*class in a concete collective abode ovetime3! and discusive 1as in the wide o naowe scope ganted to the polis! citizenship! and things public at diffeent moments ofcollective e8peience3. ?/ Fom Ashle- 1>0@03 # boow the idea of hegemon- as %e8empla- model'. #n %#mposing #ntenational Pupose2 Notes on aPoblematic of Govenance'! Ashle- 1>0@03 uses hegemon- to mean %the po;ection and ciculation of an e8empla- model! which

functions as a egulative ideal'1"eveta$! //>2>0O3. The specific components of the e8empla- model ae not %fi8ed'. The- ae%histoicall- and politicall- conditioned'1#bid3. #n Ashle-s fomulation! then! hegemon- becomes %an ensemble of nomalized$nowledgeable pactices'! %a pactical paadigm' of %political sub;ectivit- and conduct.'1Ashle-!>0@02O03. To m- mind! if ane8empla- model is implicated in an- discusive aangements moment of hegemon-! it follows that such model needs not bedisempoweing and bent on dominations associated with ine:ualit- and e8clusion as cental featues. #n cetain histoical conditions! ane8empla- model can be anchoed in egalitaianism. # am paticulal- inteested in undestanding how an e8empla- model anchoed inegalitaianism ma- function at diffeent moments of the discouses ta;ecto-! duing and afte its hegemonic moment m- assumption

being that! at an- point in time! discouses have to opeate within a powe field configued b- contending discouses.



?> Ranging fom senses of mutual affiliation and solidait- to othe membes of a commons! to esistance! estangement! isolation! lac$ ofinteest! e8clusion! etcetea undestood! within this stud-s famewo$! not as inheent chaacteistics of individuals! but as featues ofthe $inds of pactices endeed b- concete elational spaces.? n the inceasing untenabilit- of the taditional libeal e:uation between %e:ualit-' and %sameness' in light of the emegence ofcitizenship claims as %the ight to diffeence' and its implications fo the ve- meaning of %e:ualit-'* see #sins illuminating account andefeences theein 1=P2 OK! OJ3. See also ,ac:ues RanciUes anachic conception of e:ualit- which deseves mention! at least in

passing! fo its oiginalit- ! theoetical impot! and the inceasing attention it has elicited 1see! fo instance! ,ac:ues RanciUe! ! <n theShores of Politics! 4ondon2 <eso! //? @atred of 9emocracy# 4ondon2 <eso! //O ! 9is(a!reement. Politics and Philosophy. tans.,ulie Rose! (inneapolis! (inn2 7nivesit- of (innesota Pess >00@3. Fo a leaned commenta- on RanciUes thin$ing! see Pete6allwad! %Staging #ne:ualit-. n RanciUes Theatocac-' e; 7eft Re*ie;! H?! ,anua-*Febua- //O2 >/0*>0.3 <e- s$etchil-! foRanciUe e:ualit- 1defined in tems of eve-ones capacit- fo thin$ing3 is a point of depatue! athe than a goal. Thus! as 6allwade8plains! fo RanciUe %e:ualit- is not the esult of a faie distibution of social functions o places so much as the immediate disuptionof an- such distibution it efes not to place but to the placeless o out of place! not to class but to the unclassifiable o out*of*class'16allwad! %Staging #ne:ualit-L'2 >>/3. #t should also be noted that RanciUes stating pemise 1%eve-one thin$s'3 encompasses anotion of feedom asfo self*dissociation. That is! %thee is no necessa- lin$ between who -ou ae and the ole -ou pefom o the place-ou occup- no one is defined b- the foms of thoughtless necessit- to which the- ae sub;ected' 16alwad! #bid2 >>/*>>>3. The inteestof RanciUes ideas notwithstanding! his focus of attention is not the :uestion of egalitaianism emplaced as collective empoweement!

but! athe! the intellectual emancipation of the self.?H =- this # do not mean that meaningful pesonal elations %fiendships'* ma- not develop in the couse of %being thee' amongstanges. # simpl- mean to suggest that # do find the %fiend vesus enem-' dialectic 1famousl- poposed b- Cal Schmitt as the divingfoce of politics3 convincing! much less so the idea that %being togethe' encompasses o pesupposes %fiendship'. See Cal Schmitt!The Concept of the Political 1Chicago2 7nivesit- of Chicago Pess >0H>00O3. n this point see also Engin #sin 1=P2H3! who does notfind Chantal (ouffes attention to Cal Schmitts notion of the political theoeticall- waanted. See (ouffes The Return of the

Political ! chapte @! and %#ntoduction2 Schmitts challenge'! in Chantal (ouffe 1ed.3 The Challen!e of Carl Schmitt 14ondon2 <eso>00032 >*O.?K The foundations fo a sociolog- of the stange wee povided b- Geog Simmel 1see %The Stange'! in "onald 4evine! ed.! =eor!Simmel on -ndi*iduality and Social Aorms# The 7nivesit- of Chicago Pess! >0?>2>KH*>K03. Suffice it to note hee that %negative'depictions of %stanges' tend to ta$e hold in the collective imagina- within the conte8t of the socioeconomic h-pediffeentiation!displacement! commodification! and senses of %the public' as places of fea bought about b- the cuent moment of wold*wideneolibeal hegemon-. &hat # see$ in these paagaphs is to povisionall- destabilize! fo conceptual puposes! the anal-tical implicationsof such $inds of depictions and the notion of stanges that undepin them*! as methodological tool fo ethin$ing the :uestion ofcitizenship.

?J(- methodological stateg- fo incopoating the mateial*esouces component to this in:ui- is two*fold. n the one hand! theelationship between the state! the ma$et! and the public accompanies the empiical leg of m- in:ui- thoughout. Fo pesent puposes!# want to simpl- leave stated fou basic consideations about that elationship. Fist! that! following Co8! one dimension of the state thatmeits special attention is its function as %an intesub;ectivel- constituted entit- ceated b- collective human esponse to mateialconditions.'1Sinclai! >00O2 03. Second! that %ma$ets ae often the poducts of states! not thei altenative o ivals' 1=uchill! //>2 K03.That is! ma$et*pone! o welfae*pone states ae political choices. Thid! that in this in:ui- the polis as discusive space encompassesnaatives of the state.

?O n the othe! and consideing that the sto- to be told in this boo$ unfolds in a class*based wold with the mateial and s-mbolicine:ualities it entails # engage the :uestion of class and esot to class*anal-sis which! as ecentl- ewo$ed b- Potes 1///! //H3!

becomes an invaluable methodological tool in the empiical leg of the stud- on which this pape is based.

??

The chapte on which this pape is based includes a discussion of the place of the pivate within m- agument! which # decided not toinclude hee. =iefl-! though!# ac$nowledge! with =enhabib 1>002@K3 that %Mall stuggles against oppession in the moden wold being b- edefining what had peviousl- been consideed pivate! nonpublic! and nonpolitical issues as mattes of public concen! as issues of ;ustice! as sites of powe that need discusive legitimation'. And # futhe ac$nowledge the boundaies between the pivate and the publicas fluid! and that which is defined as %pivate' o %public' as a cucial political :uestion.

?@ #t also e8plains wh- wo$ing with Gamscis notion of civil societ- would be athe estictive fo pesent puposes. As it is well$nown! diffeent stands of political thought attach diffeing meanings to the notion of %civil societ-'. #n the Gamscian sense! civil



societ- efes to %the totalit- of social institutions and associations! both fomal and infomal! that ae not stictl- poduction*elated nogovenmental o familial in chaacte.'16ube! >00J2 >?3. And fo those who follow Gamscis definition of civil societ-! %a dense civilsociet- is one that is ich in such institutions and associations.' 1#bid3. Public space as deplo-ed in this stud- encompasses %civil societ-'!in the Gamscian sense! but goes be-ond it. (- fomulation diffes! futhemoe! in that the significance # waant to the function of thestate as pivotal enable of %things public' and thei space! ma$es wo$ing with the state*ma$et*civil societ- t-ad poblematic fo pesent

puposes.

?0 # find no altenative but to e8pess the idea in Spanish. Fo one thing! thee is no single wod in English that e8pesses %living togethe'.Fo anothe! both con*i*encia 1and %living togethe'3 ae distinct fom the wea$e wod %convivialit-'. Convivialit- suggests %gettingalong well'! being convivial! amiable! a hamonious milieu! etcetea. That is not what # want to sa- at all. # could not pose the aim of the

polis as %convivialit-' that would seem athe tivial fo such a huge entepise*. # can! howeve! bing m-self to suggest the aim of the polis aguabl-! its foemost aim* as con*i*encia2 a collective of citizen*stanges stuggling to ma$e! up$eep!! maintain! e8pandelational space in the comple8 milieu8 the- inhabit! and dignif-ing collective life as that ve- stuggle unfolds.

REFERENCES

Ale;ando! Robeto.>00H. @ermeneutics# Citizenship and the Public Sphere. Alban-2 S7N Pess.

Alvaez! Sonia E.>00@. %4atin Ameican Feminisms Go Global2 Tends of the >00/s and Challenges fo the New (illennium'! in Sonia E. Alvaez! Evelina "agnino! and Atuo Escoba 1eds3 Cultures of Politics# Politicsof Cultures. Re(Visionin! 7atin ,merican Social Mo*ements. =oulde2 &estview Pess2 0H*HK.

Appaduai! A;un. ///. %Gassoots Globalization and the Reseach #magination'! Public Culture > 2>*>0

Achibugi! "aniele 1ed.3. //H. 9ebatin! Cosmopolitics. 4ondon2 <eso.

Achibugi! "aniele! and "avid 6eld 1eds.3. >00J. Cosmopolitan 9emocracy: ,n ,!enda for a e; 8orld<rder. Cambidge2 Polit- Pess.

Achibugi! "aniele.//. %"emos and Cosmopolis'! e; 7eft Re*ie; >H! ,anua-*Febua-2 K*[email protected]! 6annah. >0?H. The <ri!ins of Totalitarianism! New o$2 6acout =ace ,ovanovich.

Aendt! 6annah. >0?. Crises of the Republic. New o$2 6acout =ace ,ovanovich

Aendt! 6annah. >0O@. +et;een Past and Auture. New o$2 <i$ing Pess.

Aendt! 6annah.>0J@. The @uman Condition. Chicago2 The 7nivesit- of Chicago Pess.

Aneil! =abaa. //?. %Global Citizenship and Empie'! Citizenship Studies >>1H3! ,ul- 2 H/>*H@.

Ashle-! Richad 9. >0@0.%#mposing #ntenational Pupose2 Notes on a Poblematic of Govenance'! in E.*.Czempiel and ,.N. Rosenau 1eds.3=lobal Chan!es and Theoretical Challen!es.4e8ington! (A2 4e8ington=oo$s2 J>*0/.

Ashle-! Richad 9.>0@K. %The Povet- of Neoealism'! -nternational <r!anization! H@ 132 J*@O.

Au-eo! ,avie. //O. %Spaces and Places as Sites and b;ects of Politics'! in Robet Goodin and Chales Till-1eds.3 <"ford @andboo0 of Conte"tual Political ,nalysis2 JOK*J?@.

=a$e! 9eith (ichael.>00.%"efining the Public Sphee in Eighteenth*Centu- Fance2 <aiations on a Theme b- 6abemas'! in Caig Calhoun 1ed.3! @abermas and the Public Sphere. Cambidge! (ass2 The (#T Pess2>@>*>>.



=aett! (ichUle //K. %#deolog5a! pol5tica! hegemon5a2 de Gamsci a 4aclau - (ouffe'! in Slavo; Zi[e$! comp. -deolo!Da. n mapa de la cuestin. =uenos Aies2 Fondo de Cultua Econ+mica2 OH*0K.

=atolovich! C-stal. ///. %#nventing 4ondon'! in (i$e 6ill and &aen (ontag 1eds.3 Masses# Classes# andthe Public Sphere. 4ondon and New o$2 <eso2 >H*K/.

=auman! \-gmunt. >000. -n Search of Politics. Cambidge2 Polit- Pess.

=auman! \-gmunt. >00@. =lobalization: The @uman Conseuences. New o$2 Columbia 7nivesit- Pess.

=ech! 7lich.>00. Ris0 Society: To;ards a e; Modernity. 4ondon2 Sage.

=enhabib! Se-la. //?. %Twilight of Soveeignt- o the Emegence of Cosmopolitan NomsI Rethin$ingCitizenship in <olatile Times'! Citizenship Studies >>1>3.Febua-2 >0*HO

=enhabib! Se-la. >00O. The Reluctant Modernism of @anna ,rendt. Thousand a$s! Ca2 Sage.

=enhabib! Se-la.>00. %(odels of Public Space2 6anna Aendt! the 4ibeal Tadition! and ,Dgen 6abemas'! inCaig Calhoun 1ed.3! @abermas and the Public Sphere !Cambidge! (ass2 The (#T Pess!2?H*0@.

=ialasiewicz! 4uiza! "avid Campbell! Stuat Elden! Stephen Gaham et. al. //?. %Pefoming Secuit-2 The#maginative Geogaphies of Cuent 7S Stateg-'! Political =eo!raphy O1K32 K/J*K.

=lei$e! Roland. //@. %<isualizing Post*National "emocac-'! in (ot Schoolman and "avid Campbell 1eds3

The e; Pluralism: 8illiam Connolly and the Contemporary =lobal Condition "uham! NC2 "u$e 7nivesit-Pess2>>*>K.

=lei$e Roland. ///. Popular 9issent# @uman ,!ency and =lobal Politics. Cambidge! 792 Cambidge7nivesit- Pess.

=o-te! 6a- C.>00. %The Pagmatic Ends of Popula Politics'! in Caig Calhoun 1ed.3! @abermas and the Public Sphere .Cambidge! (ass2 The (#T Pess2 HK/*HJJ.

=ennan! Timoth-.//>. %Cosmopolitanism and #ntenationalism'! The e; 7eft Re*ie; ?! ,anua-*Febua- 2?J*@K.

=ennan! Timoth-.>00?. ,t @ome in the 8orld .Cambidge2 6avad 7nivesit- Pess.

=uchill! Scott. //>. %#ntoduction'! in Scott =uchill! Richad "eveta$! et. al. Theories of -nternational Relations. New o$2 Palgave2>*@.

Calhoun! Caig.//K. %#s it Time to =e PostnationalI'! in Stephen (a-! Tai: (odood! and ,udith S:uies 1eds3! Ethnicity# ationalism and Minority Ri!hts. Cambidge! 792 Cambidge 7nivesit- Pess2H>*JO.

Calhoun! Caig.//H. %The Class Consciousness of Fe:uent Tavelles2 Towads a Citi:ue of Actuall- E8istingCosmopolitanism'! in "aniele Achibugi 1ed.3 9ebatin! Cosmopolitics 2 @O*>>O

Calhoun! Caig.>00. %#ntoduction2 6abemas and the Public Sphee'! in Caig Calhoun! ed.! @abermas and the Public Sphere.Cambidge! (ass2 The (#T Pess2 >*K@.

Campbell! "avid. >00@a. 8ritin! Security: nited States Aorei!n Policy and the Politics of -dentity.(inneapolis and 4ondon2 7nivesit- of (innesota Pess .

Campbell! "avid >00@b. ational 9econstruction: Violence# -dentity# and Bustice in +osnia. (inneapolis27nivesit- of (innesota Pess.

Campbell! ".>00@c. %&h- FightI 6umanitaianism! Pinciples! and Post*stuctualism'! Millennium ? 1H32 K0?*J>.

Castells! (anuel.///. The -nformation ,!e. Economy# Society and Culture. <ol. >! The Rise of the et;or0Society. Cambidge! (ass.2 =lac$well.

Connoll-! &illiam. >00>. %"emocac- and Teitoialit-'! Millenium /1H32 KOH*K@K.



Co8! Robet &.>00Oa. %Gamsci! 6egemon-! and #ntenational Relations2 an Essa- in (ethod'. #n Robet &.Co8 with Timoth- ,. Sinclai! ,pproaches to 8orld <rder. Cambidge2 Cambidge 7nivesit- Pess2 >K*>KH.

Co8! Robet &. >00Ob. %Towads a Posthegemonic Conceptualization of &old de2 Reflections on theRelevanc- of #bn 9haldun'. #n Robet &. Co8 with Timoth- ,. Sinclai! ,pproaches to 8orld <rder.Cambidge2 Cambidge 7nivesit- Pess2>KK*>?H.

Co8! Robet &. >0@?. Po;er# Production and 8orld <rder. Social Aorces in the Ma0in! of @istory. New o$2

Columbia 7nivesit- Pess. Co8! Robet &. >0@>. %Social foces! states and wold odes2 be-ond intenational elations theo-'!

(illennium >/13! Summe2>O*>JJ.

Cuz! (anuel. //K. #ntoduction to 6anna Aendt ! 4a Condici+n 6umana. =uenos Aies2 Paid+s2i*8vii.

"agnino! Evelina.//J.%(eanings of Citizenship in 4atin Ameica'. #"S 8or0in! Paper J@.

"allma- Fed.>00>. +et;een Areibur! and Aran0furt:To;ard a Critical <ntolo!y. =oston2 7nivesit- of(assachusetts Pess.

"aniel! ,amie wen.///. %Rituals of "is:ualification2 Competing Publics and Public 6ousing in Contempoa-Chicago'! in (i$e 6ill and &aen (ontag 1eds3! Masses# Classes# and the Public Sphere 14ondon2 <eso!///32 O*@

"EntUves! (auizio Passein.>00K. The Political Philosophy of @anna ,rendt . 4ondon and New o$2Routledge.

"eida! ,ac:ues.>00O. %Rema$s on "econstuction and Pagmatism'! in Chantal (ouffe 1ed.3! 9econstructionand Pra!matism. 4ondon and New o$2 Routledge2 ??*@@.

"eveta$! Richad.//>. %Citical Theo-'! in Scott =uchill! Richad "eveta$! Andew 4in$late et. al. Theoriesof -nternational Relations.Palgave.

"eveta$! Richad and Richad 6iggott.>000. %,ustice 7nboundI Globalization! States and the Tansfomation ofthe Social =ond'! -nternational ,ffairs! ?J1H32 K@H*K0@.

"ietz! (a- G.>00J. %Feminist Receptions of 6anna Aendt'! in =onnie 6onig 1ed.3 Aeminist -nterpretations of @annah ,rendt .7nivesit- Pa$2 Penns-lvania State 7nivesit- Pess.

"isch!4isa ,ane.>00K. @annah ,rendt and the 7imits of Philosophy ! #thaca2 Conell 7nivesit- Pess.

Ele-! Geoff. >00. %Nations! Publics! and Political Cultues2 Placing 6abemas in the Nineteenth Centu-' inCaig Calhoun 1ed.3! @abermas and the Public Sphere.Cambidge! (ass2 The (#T Pess2 @0*HH0.

Ele-! Geoff and 9eith Nield >0@/. %&h- "oes Social 6isto- #gnoe PoliticsI'! Social @istory J2K0*?.

Feguson! ,. and Gupta A.//J. %Spatializing states2 towad an ethnogaph- of neolibeal govenmentalit-'! in,.W. #nda 1ed3 ,nthropolo!ies of Modernity:Aoucault# =o*ernmentality# and 7ife Politics. (alden! (a.2=lac$well Publishes2 >/J*>H>.

Fase! Nanc-.//J. %Refaming ,ustice in a Globalizing &old'! e; 7eft Re*ie; HO! Novembe*"ecembe2O0*@@.

Fase! Nanc-.>00. %Rethin$ing the Public Sphee2 A Contibution to the Citi:ue of Actuall- E8isting"emocac-' in Caig Calhoun 1ed.3! @abermas and the Public Sphere .Cambidge! (ass2 The (#T Pess2 >/0*>K.

Gabadi! &a-ne. //>. e!otiatin! Postmodernism. (inneapolis2 7nivesit- of (innesota Pess.

Giddens! Anthon-.>00>. Modernity and Self(-dentity. Stanfod! Ca. 2 Stanfod 7nivesit- Pess.

Giddens! Anthon-.>00/. The Conseuences of Modernity. Cambidge2 Polit- Pess.



Giddens! Anthon-. >0@?. , Contemporary Critiue of @istorical Materialism. <ol.>. Po;er# Property and theState .4ondon2 (acmillan.

6abemas >00@a. The -nclusion of the <ther . Cambidge! (A2 (#T Pess

6abemas! ,Dgen. >00@b. %Rema$s on 4egitimation though 6uman Rights'. The Modern Schoolman. Special#ssue. %Globalization'2 ?J 13. ,anua-. @?*00.

6abemas! ,Dgen.>0@0. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere tans. Thomas =uge and F.4awence. Cambidge! (ass2 (#T Pess.

6abemas! ,Dgen.>00. %Futhe Reflections on the Public Sphee'! in Caig Calhoun 1ed.3! @abermas and the Public Sphere .Cambidge! (ass2 The (#T Pess2 K>*KO>

6abemas! ,Dgen.>00. %Concluding Rema$s'! in Caig Calhoun 1ed.3! @abermas and the Public Sphere .Cambidge! (ass2 The (#T Pess2 KO*K?0.

6abemas! ,Dgen.>0?K. %The Public Sphee'! e; =erman Critiue >1H32 K0*JJ.

6allwad! Pete.//O. %Staging #ne:ualit-. n RanciUes Theatocac-'! The e; 7eft Re*ie;! H?! ,anua-*Febua-2 >/0*>0.

6ansen! (-iam. >00H. %Foewod' to s$a Negt and Ale8ande 9luge! Public Sphere and E"perience:

To;ard an ,nalysis of the +our!eois and Proletarian Public Sphere! tans. Pete 4aban-! ,amie wen "aniel!and Assen$a $siloff. (inneapolis2 7nivesit- of (innesota Pess.i8*8li.

6ave-! "avid. >00/. The Condition of Postmodernity .Cambidge! (ass.2 =lac$well.

6ill! (i$e and &aen (ontag. ///. #ntoduction! %&hat &as! &hat #s! the Public SpheeI Post*Cold &aReflections'! in (i$e 6ill and &aen (ontag! eds.! Masses# Classes# and the Public Sphere. 4ondon2 <eso!///2 >*>/.

6onig! =onnie. >00H. Political Theory and the 9isplacement of Politics. #thaca2 Conell 7nivesit- Pess.

6onig! =onnie 1ed.3 >00J. Feminist #ntepetations of 6anna Aendt .7nivesit- Pa$! Pa2 Penns-lvania State7nivesit- Pess.

6ube! Evel-n. >00J. %Assessments of State Stength'! in Pete Smith 1ed.3 7atin ,merica in Comparati*e

Perspecti*e. =oulde2 &estview Pess2 >OH*>0J.#sin! Engin F. //?.FCit-.State2 Citi:ue of Scala Thought'! Citizenship Studies >>132 >>*@

#sin! Engin F. //. +ein! Political. =enealo!ies of Citizenship. (inneapolis2 7nivesit- of (innesota Pess.

,a-! (atin and 4eon =otstein.>0?@. %6anna Aendt! pposing <iews'! Partisan Re*ie;!KJ1H3. Summe2 HO@*@/.

9ec$! (agaet E. and 9ath-n Si$$in$.>00@. ,cti*ists beyond +orders. ,d*ocacy et;or0s in -nternational Politics. #thaca and 4ondon2 Conell 7nivesit- Pess.

9ohle! (atin.>00@. %Fom the National to the Cosmopolitan Public Sphee'! in "aniele Achibugi! "avid6eld! (atin 9ohle 1eds.3 Re(ima!inin! Political Community: Studies in Cosmopolitan 9emocracy.Cambidge2 Polit- Pess.

9-mlic$a! &ill. //?. Multicultural <dysseys: a*i!atin! the e; -nternational Politics of 9i*ersity. 8fod28fod 7nivesit- Pess.

9-mlic$a! &ill. //>. Politics in the Vernacular: ationalism# Multiculturalism and Citizenship. 8fod28fod 7nivesit- Pess

9-mlic$a! &ill.>00@. %(ulticultual Citizenship'! in Geshon Shafi! ed. The Citizenship 9ebates: , reader.(inneapolis2 7nivesit- of (innesota Pess.



4aclau! Enesto and Chantal (ouffe.>0@J. @e!emony and Socialist Strate!y. To;ards a Radical 9emocratic Politics.4ondon2 <eso.

4essig! 4awence. //>. The Auture of -deas: The Aate of the Commons in a Connected 8orld. New o$2Random 6ouse.

4ins Ribeio! Gustavo.>00@. %C-becultual Politics2 Political Activism at a "istance in a Tansnational &old'!in Sonia E. Alvaez! Evelina "agnino! and Atuo Escoba 1eds3 Cultures of Politics# Politics of Cultures. Re(

Visionin! 7atin ,merican Social Mo*ements.=oulde! Co.2 &estview Pess2 HJ*HJ.4efebve! 6eni.>00>. The Production of Space# tans. "onald Nicholson*Smith. 8fod2 =lac$well.

4-otad! ,ean Fan]ois. >0@0. %Notes on 4egitimation'! in Reine Schumann 1ed.3 The Public Realm. Alban-2State 7nivesit- of New o$ Pess2 >O?*>@/.

4-otad! ,ean Fan]ois.>0@K. The Postmodern Condition: , Report on no;led!e. (inneapolis2 7nivesit- of(innesota Pess.

(asse-! "oeen.>00K. Space# Place# and =ender . (inneapolis2 7nivesit- of (innesota Pess.

(a$us! (aia.>0@?. %The Anti*Feminism of 6annah Aendt'! Thesis Ele*en! >?2 ?O*@?.

(en)ndez*Cai+n! Ampao.//?. Repensar la Polis. 9el Clientelismo al Espacio P?blico. #ntoducto- Essa-

b- Paulo Ravecca. (ontevideo2 Cento 4atinoameicano de Econom5a 6umana.(en)ndez*Cai+n! Ampao. //>. %The tansfomation of political cultue'! in (anuel Antonio Gaet+n (.and Edwad Newman 9emocracy in 7atin ,merica. GRe>Constructin! Political Society. To$-o2 7nited Nations7nivesit- Pess2 K0*??.

(en)ndez*Cai+n! Ampao and Fenando =ustamante.>00J. %Puposes and (ethods of #nta*RegionalCompaison'! in Pete Smith 1ed.3 7atin ,merica in Comparati*e Perspecti*e. e; ,pproaches to Method and ,nalysis. =oulde! Co.2 &estview Pess2 J0*@/.

(ouffe! Chantal.>000. %#ntoduction2 Schmitts challenge'! in Chantal (ouffe 1ed.3 The Challen!e ofCarl Schmitt . 4ondon2 <eso2 >*O.

(ouffe! Chantal.>00O. %"econstuction! Pagmatism and the Politics of "emocac-'! in Chantal (ouffe! 1ed.3!

9econstruction and Pra!matism.4ondon and New o$2 Routledge2 >*>(ouffe! Chantal.>00H. The Return of the Political . 4ondon2 <eso.

Negt! s$a and Ale8ande 9luge.>00H. Public Sphere and E"perience: To;ard an ,nalysis of the +our!eoisand Proletarian Public Sphere! tans. Pete 4aban-! ,amie wen "aniel! and Assen$a $siloff . (inneapolis27nivesit- of (innesota Pess.

Pateman! Caol.>0@H. %Feminist Citi:ues of the PublicPivate "ichotom-'! in Stanle- #. =enn and Geald F.Gaus 1eds.3! Public and Pri*ate in Social 7ife. New o$2 St (atins Pess.

Pococ$! ,.G.A.>00@. %The #deal of Citizenship since Classical Times'. #n Geshon Shafi 1ed.3 The Citizenship 9ebates (inneapolis2 7nivesit- of (innesota Pess.

Potes! Ale;ando.//>. %#ntoduction2 the debates and significance of immigant tansnationalism'2 =lobal

et;or0s >1H3! >@>*>0H.Potes! Ale;ando and 9ell- 6offman.//H. %4atin Ameican Class Stuctues2 Thei Composition and Changeduing the Neolibeal Ea.' 7atin ,merican Research Re*ie;! H@1>3 Febua- //H2K>*@.

Potes! Ale;ando and =-an Robets. //O % Coping with the Fee (a$et Cit-. Collective Action in Si8 4atinAmeican Cities at the End of the Twentieth Centu-! 7atin ,merican Research Re*ie; K>132 J?*@H.

Potes! Ale;ando.///. %The Ressilient #mpotance of Class2 A Nominalist #ntepetation.'! Political Po;er andSocial Theory >K2 K0*@K.



RanciUe! ,ac:ues ! <n the Shores of Politics! 4ondon2 <eso.

RanciUe! ,ac:ues.//O. @atred of 9emocracy 4ondon2 <eso! //O

RanciUe! ,ac:ues.>00@. 9is(a!reement. Politics and Philosophy. tans. ,ulie Rose! (inneapolis!(inn2 7nivesit- of (innesota Pess.

Rawls! ,ohn.>0?>. , Theory of Bustice! Cambidge! (ass2 =el$nap.

Rawls! ,ohn.>00H. Political 7iberalism! New o$2 Columbia 7nivesit- Pess! >00H3.Reus*Smit! Chstian. //>. %Constuctivism'! in Scott =uchill! Richad "eveta$! Andew 4in$late et. al.Theories of -nternational Relations. Palgave.

Robetson! Roland.>00J. %Glolocalization2 Time*Space and 6omogeneit-*6eteogeneit-'! in (i$e Feathestone!Scott 4ash and Roland Robetson 1eds.3! =lobal Modernities! 4ondon2 Sage2 J*KK.

R-an! (a- P.>00. %Gende and Public Access2 &omens Politics in Nineteenth*Centu- Ameica' in CaigCalhoun 1ed.3! @abermas and the Public Sphere !Cambidge! (ass2 The (#T Pess2 J0*@@.

Sassen! Sas$ia.>00O. 7oosin! Control: So*erei!nty in an ,!e of =lobalization. New o$2 Columbia 7nivesit-Pess.

Sassen! Sas$ia. //>.The =lobal City: e; Hor0# 7ondon# To0yo. Pinceton! N.,.2 Pinceton 7nivesit- Pess.

Scull-! Stephen. >00/. @omer and the Sacred Ciity. Edited b- G. Nag-. #thaca! N2 Conell 7nivesit- Pess.

Shafi! Geshon. >00@. %The Evolving Tadition of Citizenship'! in Geshon Shafi 1ed.3. The Citizenship 9ebates. (inneapolis2 7nivesit- of (innesota Pess2 >*@.

Schille! "an.>000. 9i!ital Capitalism. et;or0in! the =lobal Mar0et System. Cambidge! (a.2 (#T Pess.

Schmitt! Cal.>0H>00O. The Concept of the Political.Chicago2 7nivesit- of Chicago Pess.

Simmel! Geog.>0?>. %The Stange'! in "onald 4evine 1ed.3! =eor! Simmel# <n -ndi*iduality and Social Aorms. The 7nivesit- of Chicago Pess2>KH*>K03.

Sinclai!Timoth-.>00O.'=e-ond #ntenational Relations Theo-2 Robet &. Co8 and Appoaches to &oldde'! in Robet &. Co8 with Timoth- Sinclai! ,pproaches to 8orld <rder. Cambidge2 Cambidge

7nivesit- Pess2 H2>@.

Slate! "avid.>00@. %Rethin$ing the Spatialities of Social (ovements2 Vuestions of 1=3odes! Cultue! andPolitics in Global Times'! in Sonia E. Alvaez! Evelina "agnino! and Atuo Escoba 1eds3 Cultures of Politics# Politics of Cultures. Re(Visionin! 7atin ,merican Social Mo*ements . =oulde! Co.2 &estview Pess2 H@/*K/>3

Smith! (ichael Pete and 4uis Eduado Guanizo 1eds.3.>00@. Transnationalism from +elo;. New =unswic$! N.,.2 Tansaction Publishes.

Smith! &illiam C. and Robeto Paticio 9ozeniewicz.>00?. Politics# Social Chan!e and Economic Restructurin! in 7atin ,merica.(iami! Floida2 Noth*South Cente Pess.

So-sal! asemin Nuhoglu.>00@.%Towad a Postnational (odel of (embeship'. #n Geshon Shafi! ed. TheCitizenship 9ebates (inneapolis2 7nivesit- of (innesota Pess.

So-sal! asemin Nuhoglu. >00K. 7imits of Citizenship. Mi!rants and Postnational Membership in Europe.Chicago2 The 7nivesit- of Chicago Pess.

Stahle*Shol$! Richad! 6a- E. <anden! and Glen "avid 9uec$e.//?. %Globalizing Resistance. The NewPolitics of Social (ovements in 4atin Ameica'! 7atin ,merican Perspecti*es HK! //?2 J*>O.

Stange! Susan.>00?.%The Eosion of the State'! Current @istory 0O 1O>H3.Novembe2 HOJ*HO0.



Stange! Susan. >00O. The Retreat of the State. The 9iffusion of Po;er in the 8orld Economy 1Cambidge2Cambidge 7nivesit- Pess3

Till-! Chales. >00@. 9urable -neuality. =e$ele- and 4os Angeles2 7nivesit- of Califonia Pess.

Tofing! ,acob.//J. %"iscouse Theo-2 Achievements! Aguments! and Challenges'! in "avid 6owath and,acob Tofing 1eds.3 9iscourse Theory in European Politics. -dentity# Policy# and =o*ernance . New o$2Palgave! //J2>*H.

<etovec! Steven and Robin Cohen 1eds.3.//. Concei*in! Cosmopolitanism. 8fod2 8fod 7nivesit- Pess.

<illa! "ana R. >00O. ,rendt and @eide!!er:The Aate of the Political . Pinceton! N.,.2 Pinceton 7nivesit-Pess.

<illa! Ra^l 6. ///. %The Right to the Cit- in 4os Angeles2 "iscouse and Pactice of a Chicano AltenativePublic Sphee'! in (i$e 6ill and &aen (ontag 1eds.3! Masses# Classes# and the Public Sphere.4ondon2<eso2K>*O>.

&alze! (ichael. >00@. %The Civil Societ- Agument'. #n Geshon Shafi 1ed.3! The Citizenship 9ebates.(inneapolis2 7nivesit- of (innesota Pess.

&alze! (ichael.>00/. %The Communitaian Citi:ue of 4ibealism'! Political Theory! >@1>3! Febua-2 O*H.

&alze! (ichael.>0@H. Spheres of Bustice. New o$! =asic =oo$s.&ebe! C-nthia. >00@.'Pefomative States'! Millennium ? 1>32??*0J.

&olin! Sheldon.>0@H.%"emocac- and the Political'! Salma!undi O/. Sping*Summe2 H*/.

&-n ,ones! Richad1ed3.//>.Critical Theory and 8orld Politics. =oulde! Co.2 4-nne Rienne.

oung*=uehl! Elisabeth. >0?0. %Fom the Paiahs Point of <iew2 Reflections on 6annah Aendts 4ife and&o$'! in (elv-n A. 6ill 1ed.3 @annah ,rendt: The Reco*ery of the Public 8orld.. New o$! St. (atinsPess.

A#$%&' M*+-C%&& studied Political Science and #ntenational Relations 1=.A.!>0?H! 7nivesit- of (innesota(.A.! >0?J! Ph.". >0@J! The ,ohns 6op$ins 7nivesit-3. She has held senio positions in teaching! eseach and polic-thoughout 4atin Ameica and has seved as intenational consultant to 7NESC! the #ntenational 4abou ganization!

the 7nited Nations "evelopment Pogam! and the Fod Foundation! among othes. #n Ecuado she was the "iecto of theFacultad 4atinoameicana de Ciencias Sociales! F4ACS 1>0@?*>00>! >00>*>00J3. #n Chile she was <isiting Pofesso ofCompaative Politics at the 7nivesit- of Chiles #nstituto de Ciencia Pol5tica whee she was thice the ecipient of the %=estTeache of the ea Awad'! confeed b- the gaduate students in Political Science 1Classes of >000! /// and //>3. Sheis also a fome Fellow of the #nstituto de Estudios Peuanos in 4ima! Pe^. #n the 7.S. she was %The 6ubet 6. 6umphe-"istinguished Pofesso of #ntenational Studies' at (acaleste College 1///*//H3. She has also taught at Gottebog7nivesit-s "octoal Pogam in Political Science 1Gottebog! Sweden3. 6e involvement in pofessional associations in4atin Ameica include he tem as <ice*Pesident of the Chilean Association of Political Science 1>00@*///3. Also inChile she was Senio Advise to the Gaduate School of #ntenational Studiess Committee fo Cuicula Refom at the7nivesit- of Chiles #nstituto de Estudios #ntenacionales.She has published si8 boo$s as authoco*autho o editoco*edito! and moe than si8t- chaptes and aticles in collective volumes and pofessional ;ounals. Among he publications2

7a Conuista del Voto en el Ecuador: de Velasco a Roldos! a stud- of the politics of clientelism in Ecuado fom the >0K/sto the >0@/s! declaed b- he pees %=est =oo$ of the ea in the Social Sciences' 1Ecuado! >0@O3 7a CaIa de Pandora.

El retorno de la transicion chilena ! co*edited with Alfedo ,oignant 1Santiago2 Planeta*Aiel!>0003 and Repensando la Polis2 del clientelismo al espacio publico 1(ontevideo2 C4AE6! //?3.At pesent she is completing a boo$ on citizenship! public space! and the itinea- of the polis in 7ugua- 1 Memorias de ciudadanDa. 7a resiliencia del espacio p?blico en la polis !olpeada. 7a e"periencia uru!uaya# $%&'()'$'3 at the Cento 4atinoameicano de Econom5a 6umana! C4AE6!( id 7 # A //@ h i d h % d = d 6i i ' Chil hi h A d f

the places and spaces of citizenship and the public in the new global era

Documents