Construir la democracia: los poderes constituyentes del pueblo desde un republicanismo plebeyo
The aim of this thesis is to answer the question about: ¿Who or What is the constituent power? And ¿what are its relationships with the constituted power, in the context of post metaphysics democracy? Constituent power has been a key concept to thinking about The people as the ultimate source of all...
| Autor: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | tesis doctoral |
| Estado: | Versión aceptada para publicación |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2020 |
| País: | Colombia |
| Recursos: | Universidad Nacional de Colombia |
| Repositorio: | Repositorio UN |
| Idioma: | español |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:repositorio.unal.edu.co:unal/79303 |
| Acesso em linha: | https://repositorio.unal.edu.co/handle/unal/79303 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palavra-chave: | 190 - Filosofía moderna occidental Poder constituyente Poder constituido democracia deliberativa Democracia radical Populismo Republicanismo plebeyo Constituent Power Constituted Power Deliberative democracy Radical Democracy Populism Plebian Republicanism |
| Resumo: | The aim of this thesis is to answer the question about: ¿Who or What is the constituent power? And ¿what are its relationships with the constituted power, in the context of post metaphysics democracy? Constituent power has been a key concept to thinking about The people as the ultimate source of all political power. Constituent power is intrinsically associated with democracy, insofar, the democracy in its most basic aception is the power of The people. With this purpose, I compare two models of democracy: the Jurgen Habermas deliberative democracy and Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe's radical democracy, but with special emphasis in Laclaus’s populism. In the first model, deliberative democracy, the constituent power is the communicative power expression of popular self-determination. In the second, Laclaus’s theory of Populism, power constituent is the name of the people, that describes the popular struggle for hegemony. These two models of democracy are postmetaphysic because both perspectives adopt a performative conception of popular power instead of a version of the people as a pre-existing political community. I evaluate both models under the postdemocratics conditions of our neoliberal contexts and I have shown their possible deficits. Facing this scenario, I explore the political possibilities of plebeian republicanism. ¿What is the contribution of plebeian republicanism to the problem? Plebeian republicanism embraces conflict and antagonism and enables us to understand The people as a political network of equivalent demands and aspirations capable of subverting and change injustices social orders because the demands come from those excluded, those without part in society. At the same time, the plebeian republicanism connects plebeian struggles with the republican tradition and his values of equal liberty. In this perspective, the republican tradition offers vocabularies and repertories to express popular demands in a register more compatible with democracy, besides this republicanism sustains institutionalization of popular will through institutions more open and porous to counter the hegemonic force of the popular. On the other hand, plebeian politics implies that republican principles of equality and liberty only conquer concretion through social struggles. I conclude that plebeian political and republicanism contribute a better understanding of the constituent power as counterhegemonic popular power without loss of his necessary connection with democratic institutions. |
|---|