title: Community Beyond Hegemony? Liberal Cosmopolitanism, Generic Emancipation and the Political
metadata.name: dc.contributor.author
metadata.value: Morozov, Viatcheslav
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.accessioned
metadata.value: 2019-11-13T10:29:12Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.available
metadata.value: 2019-11-13T10:29:12Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.issued
metadata.value: 2019-09
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.citation
metadata.value: Morozov V. Community Beyond Hegemony? Liberal Cosmopolitanism, Generic Emancipation and the Political. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. International Relations, 2019, vol. 12, issue 3, pp. 340–356.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.identifier.other
metadata.value: https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu06.2019.306
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.uri
metadata.value: http://hdl.handle.net/11701/16572
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.description.abstract
metadata.value: This article critically re-evaluates certain blind spots in the debate on the possibility of a
  cosmopolitan political community. It does so by addressing certain key areas where, in my
  view, remaining conceptual misunderstandings prevent a full articulation of the conflicting
  positions. In particular, I concentrate on the ontological differences between liberalism and
  poststructuralism which, as long as they are not laid plain, distort the exchange of ideas on
  the nature of the political and on the issues of identity, recognition and exclusion. I contend
  that in poststructuralist ontology antagonism remains the only force that can constitute
  an inside-outside boundary and thus establish an identity. Hence, one needs to agree with
  Sergei Prozorov when he insists that cosmopolitan politics can only be post-identitarian.
  I then analyse the differences between the two visions of generic post-identitarian politics
  identified by Prozorov — those of Alain Badiou and Giorgio Agamben. This analysis helps
  to highlight the thesis that even if we can conceive of a truly generic community that is not
  grounded in any identity and therefore does not presuppose external othering as a constitutive
  practice, we might still need antagonistic politics as the only means to make this community
  possible.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.description.sponsorship
metadata.value: This work was supported by institutional research funding (IUT20-39) of the Estonian Ministry
  of Education and Research.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.language.iso
metadata.value: en
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.publisher
metadata.value: St Petersburg State University
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.relation.ispartofseries
metadata.value: Vestnik of St Petersburg University. International Relations;Volume 12; Issue 3
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: cosmopolitanism
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: antagonism
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: identity
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: othering
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: hegemony
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.title
metadata.value: Community Beyond Hegemony? Liberal Cosmopolitanism, Generic Emancipation and the Political
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.type
metadata.value: Book
metadata.lang: en_GB
resources.filename: 340-356.pdf
resources.url: https://dspace.spbu.ru/bitstream/11701/16572/1/340-356.pdf
resources.format: Adobe PDF
resources.size: 647,59 kB