论文部分内容阅读
拉克劳对齐泽克的批评绝非概念辨析,而是直指当下的激进政治运动。思想家擅长于将辨析概念的范畴层面的二律背反:民粹主义、阶级斗争、物化,但绝非陷于语言游戏。拉克劳对齐泽克的批判首先直接指向了齐泽克的方法:拉康-精神分析、马克思-阶级斗争分析、黑格尔-辩证法,当今极左分子的暧昧的主张是源于怎样的世界政治的当下?在世纪之交的种种革命、政治运动、宗教运动的背后是相同的权力逻辑——民粹主义,而在当今资本主义的微观权力的背景下,异质性的缺失正是对激进政治的否定。如何实现激进政治的理念?如何超越资本权力?拉克劳呼唤革命的主体——人民,拉克劳同齐泽克的这场政治哲学对话的价值正在于此。
Laclau’s criticism of Zizek is by no means a conceptual analysis, but rather an immediate radical political campaign. Thinkers are adept at contradicting the category-level aspects of the concept: populism, class struggle, materialization, but by no means in a language game. Laclau’s criticism of Zizek first and foremost directly points to Zizek’s approach: Lacan-psychoanalysis, Marx-class struggle analysis, Hegelian dialectics, the ambiguous assertion of today’s left-wing elements stem from what kind of world politics At the turn of the century revolutions, political movements, and religious movements at the turn of the century are the same logic of power - populism. Against the background of today’s capitalist micro-powers, the lack of heterogeneity is precisely the result of radical politics Negation. How to Realize the Concept of Radical Politics? How to Surpass Capital Power? Laclau calls for the main body of revolution. The value of this dialogue between people, Lacroix and Zizek lies in this political and philosophical dialogue.