Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Lasse Thomassen is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Lasse Thomassen.


Journal of Political Ideologies | 2005

Antagonism, hegemony and ideology after heterogeneity

Lasse Thomassen

This article examines the implications of the introduction of the category of ‘heterogeneity’ in Ernesto Laclaus most recent work. Laclaus theory of hegemony and discourse theoretical approach to ideology is often associated with the category of ‘antagonism’. I argue that heterogeneity should be the central category of hegemony and discourse analysis, and that antagonism can be seen as a strategy of ideological closure. In addition, heterogeneity—understood as the simultaneous condition of possibility and impossibility of hegemonic articulation—renders the theory of hegemony closer to Derridean deconstruction. Hegemony analysis and deconstruction are often presented as different and complementary theoretical moves. I argue that this is not the case, and that they can instead be seen as dealing with the same issues of the conditions of possibility and impossibility of the discursive constitution of ideology and identity.


European Journal of Political Theory | 2007

Within the Limits of Deliberative Reason Alone: Habermas, Civil Disobedience and Constitutional Democracy

Lasse Thomassen

In this article, I take Habermass treatment of civil disobedience as a litmus test of the way in which Habermas relates to the imperfectness of democracy. The case of civil disobedience, which Habermas deems to be a normal part of a mature constitutional democracy, shows that Habermas is ultimately unable to submit all decisions and distinctions to the public use of reason as envisaged in his deliberative account of democracy. As a consequence, I argue that we must take the imperfectness of democracy as constitutive and our conceptualization of civil disobedience and democracy must start from there. The reading of Habermas and the argument for an alternative approach are inspired by the work of Jacques Derrida, central to which is an idea of democracy and justice ‘to-come’ focusing our attention on the performative role of civil disobedience in creating more legitimate laws.


Political Theory | 2006

The Inclusion of the Other? Habermas and the Paradox of Tolerance

Lasse Thomassen

In his most recent work, Jürgen Habermas has proposed a deliberative account of tolerance where the norms of tolerance—including the threshold of tolerance and the norms regulating the relationship between the tolerating and the tolerated parties—are the outcomes of deliberations among the citizens affected by the norms. He thinks that in this way, the threshold of tolerance can be rationalized and the relationship between tolerating and tolerated will rest on the symmetrical relations of public deliberations. In this essay, and inspired by Jacques Derridas work on the concept of hospitality, I propose a deconstructive reading of Habermass writings on tolerance. I argue that Habermas is ultimately unable to provide a rational foundation for tolerance and that his conception of tolerance encounters the same problems he is trying to avoid, namely, the contingency of the threshold of tolerance and a paternalistic relation between tolerating and tolerated. Yet, contra Habermas, the deconstruction of tolerance does not result in its destruction and does not force us to give up on the concept and practice of tolerance.


Polity | 2011

The Politics of Iterability: Benhabib, the Hijab, and Democratic Iterations

Lasse Thomassen

In her recent work, Seyla Benhabib has appropriated Jacques Derridas notion of iterability—or iteration in Benhabibs terminology—whereby repetition always implies alteration. This gives her a dynamic conception of democracy and citizenship that is sensitive to otherwise excluded constituencies. Nevertheless, I take issue with the ways in which Benhabib limits the effects of iterability. She does so by separating the transformative effects of iterability from, first, the content of universal constitutional principles and, second, the subject understood as narrative ability. This gives rise to some theoretical difficulties, but it also has practical implications, which I illustrate in the context of the debates about the hijab, which Benhabib also discusses at length. I argue that Benhabib depoliticizes the universals and takes the agency of the subject as given when these should be in question.


Polity | 2005

Habermas and his Others

Lasse Thomassen

The author may be reached at [email protected]


Representation | 2017

Mind the gap: Lawrence Hamilton and aesthetic representation

Lasse Thomassen

Lawrence Hamilton’s conception of aesthetic representation is part of the representative and constructivist turns, and I use a critical reading of his work to examine how we can conceptualise the constitutive character of representation; and the implications for political institutions and activism of taking representation as constitutive. I show how Hamilton limits the effects of the two turns in two areas in particular: the notion of human needs and the focus on political institutions at the expense of activist politics. Video abstract Read the transcript Watch the video on Vimeo


Europe-Asia Studies | 2017

From protest to party: horizontality and verticality on the Slovenian Left

Alen Toplišek; Lasse Thomassen

Abstract This essay analyses the politics of horizontality—a key characteristic of recent forms of protest and activist citizenship—through the case of the 2012–2013 protests in Slovenia. The Slovenian case is illustrative because we can trace the emergence of the Initiative for Democratic Socialism and, subsequently, the United Left from protest through movement to party. Since we believe that horizontality and verticality are present in both movements and parties, we argue against a simple opposition between movements and parties. In particular, we focus on the reasons for the move from horizontalist ways of political organising to vertical structures.


The European Legacy | 2015

The Post-secular Debate: Introductory Remarks

Camil Ungureanu; Lasse Thomassen

Some scholars have recently expressed their doubts about the popular use of the term “post-secularism” and suggested that it is merely a short-lived fashion in social theory and philosophy, all too often used to gain access to research grants. Veit Bader may be perfectly right about the term itself, for in time it may indeed fall into disregard and disappear from use. Skepticism about its inflationary use is, we think, warranted. However, we also submit that, if severed from the temptation of proposing a new grand narrative, “post-secularism” can be useful for designating a socio-cultural phenomenon that will not wither away any time soon. Let us first consider the inflationary reading according to which the “return” of religion is interpreted as the shift to a new age or to a new type of society coming after the secular one. According to this influential reading, advanced by philosophers as different as Jürgen Habermas, John D. Caputo, and Gianni Vattimo, in this new age a transformed religion may play a fundamental role in the socio-political sphere and enable individuals to overcome unhelpful divisions between faith and reason. Habermas, for one, speaks of a new “post-secular society” in which religious and nonreligious citizens engage, predominantly in the social-public sphere, in a process of mutual learning and reconciliation through dialogue and the exchange of reasons. For Habermas, religious and non-religious citizens can attain agreements and enrich public discourse by means of a rational dialogue, understood, in large part, as leading to the translation of sacred language into secular language. In turn, by developing Jacques Derrida’s deconstructive reading of religion, Caputo interprets the end of the secular age as the abandonment of the belief in the death of God and of the death of religion as proclaimed by, among others, Feuerbach and Marx. For Caputo, we have entered a new post-secular age characterized by “the death of the death of God,” namely by a shift in focus away from God as Reality and Truth to God as Love. He argues that the deconstruction of the question of the existence of God, that is, the onto-theological critique of religion, has a liberating political-religious impact. Bracketing the question of the reality of God opens up the possibility of experiencing God as passionate, impossible love beyond the absolute certainties and rigid institutional hierarchies of the Church. Finally, Vattimo welcomes the “Age of Interpretation” in which democratic citizens abandon absolutist claims about religious or non-religious nature, accept the


The British Journal of Politics and International Relations | 2004

Lacanian Political Theory: A Reply to Robinson

Lasse Thomassen

In this response to Andrew Robinsons review of ‘The politics of lack,’ I argue that, although Robinson puts forward a number of interesting and succinct points about Lacanian political theory, his review rests on misunderstandings of post-structuralist political theory and misreadings of the texts under consideration. More specifically, I argue that his use of the labels ‘Lacanian’ and ‘theorist of lack’ is problematic; that his position rests on a misunderstanding of the relationship between ontology and politics in post-structuralist theory; and that it is a mistake to allege that Lacanian political theory is inherently conservative.


Archive | 2019

Discourse and Heterogeneity

Lasse Thomassen

Ernesto Laclau introduced the category of heterogeneity into his theory of hegemony in the late 1990s. He did so as a way to capture the limits of representation, and the argument was fully developed in On Populist Reason in 2005. The chapter argues that heterogeneity should be a central category of hegemony and discourse analysis, and that antagonism can be seen as a strategy of ideological closure that suppresses heterogeneity. I show the limitations of Laclau’s concept of antagonism, and how antagonism must be relativized. I then turn to examine the concept of heterogeneity. I end by discussing the usefulness of the category of heterogeneity in the wider context of how to do discourse theory and how to conceptualize the limits of representation.

Collaboration


Dive into the Lasse Thomassen's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Jacques Derrida

École Normale Supérieure

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Barry Buzan

London School of Economics and Political Science

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Chris Gifford

University of Huddersfield

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

George Lawson

London School of Economics and Political Science

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Mark Wenman

University of Nottingham

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Peter Woodcock

University of Huddersfield

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge