Neoliberalism Populism and the Crisis of Democracy through a Pragmatist and Critical Theory Approach
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18012/arf.v12i3.77586Palavras-chave:
Populism, Neoliberalism, Democratic Crisis, Pragmatism, Critical TheoryResumo
The rise of populism in Europe and North America over the past decade reflects a profound crisis in the foundations of modern liberal democracy. This article argues that contemporary populism must be understood as a reaction to the political, economic, and moral breakdowns caused by neoliberalism, a system that has commodified social life, eroded public institutions, and depleted citizens’ democratic imagination. Drawing on two major philosophical traditions of the 20th century, Pragmatism (John Dewey, Richard Rorty) and Critical Theory (Jürgen Habermas, Nancy Fraser, Axel Honneth), the article proposes a combined approach that is both critical and reconstructive. At the critical level, Critical Theory helps reveal how the systemic logic of neoliberalism has fragmented the “lifeworld” and replaced communicative rationality with instrumental rationality. At the reconstructive level, Pragmatism suggests possibilities for restoring civic trust and democratic community through education, dialogue, and collective action. From this, the article contends that the combination of a critical spirit and a pragmatic spirit can provide a comprehensive theoretical framework for understanding and responding to the democratic crisis in the post-neoliberal era.
Downloads
Referências
Bohman, J. 2011. “Methodological and Political Pluralism: Democracy, Pragmatism, and Critical Theory.” In Routledge International Handbook of Contemporary Social and Political Theory, 149–159. London: Routledge. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9780203875575-14/methodological-political-pluralism-james-bohman
Bragues, G. 2006. “Richard Rorty’s Postmodern Case for Liberal Democracy: A Critique.” Humanitas 19, no. 1–2: 158–181. https://doi.org/10.5840/humanitas2006191/212
Bumochir, D. 2019. “Nationalist Sentiments Obscured by ‘Pejorative Labels’: Birthplace, Homeland and Mobilisation against Mining in Mongolia.” Inner Asia 21, no. 2: 162–179. https://doi.org/10.1163/22105018-12340124
Dalton, R. J. 2018. Citizen Politics: Public Opinion and Political Parties in Advanced Industrial Democracies. Washington, DC: CQ Press. https://byvn.net/yyPU
Demenchonok, E. 2019. “The Quest for Genuine Democracy: A Promise of Democracy to Come.” In Civility, Nonviolent Resistance, and the New Struggle for Social Justice, 342: 234. https://brill.com/display/title/56229#page=244
Dinçer, Ö. n.d. “Digital Dynamics in Public Discourse: Analyzing the Relationship Between Digital Media and Counter-Public Spheres.” Yeni Medya, no. 17: 16–34. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/yenimedya/issue/88840/1509203
Foster, J. B., and H. Holleman. 2010. “The Financial Power Elite.” Monthly Review 62, no. 1: 1–19. https://byvn.net/jdcA
Fraser, N. 2017. “Feminism, Capitalism and the Cunning of History.” In Citizenship Rights, 393–413. London: Routledge. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781315260211-17/feminism-capitalism-cunning-history-nancy-fraser
Freire, P. 1970. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Herder and Herder.
Frega, R. 2014. “Between Pragmatism and Critical Theory: Social Philosophy Today.” Human Studies 37, no. 1: 57–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10746-013-9290-0
Gandesha, S. 2018. “Understanding Right and Left Populism.” In Critical Theory and Authoritarian Populism, 9: 49–70. London: University of Westminster Press. https://byvn.net/fX5B
Garnham, N. 2007. “Habermas and the Public Sphere.” Global Media and Communication 3, no. 2: 201–214. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1742766507078417
Giroux, H. A. 2023. “Critical Theory and Educational Practice.” In The Critical Pedagogy Reader, 50–74. London: Routledge. https://byvn.net/w8rO
Goldberg, S. R. 2019. “Dewey’s Ideas in Action! Continuing Professional Development in an International Community of Practice.” Education and Culture 35, no. 1: 71–100. https://doi.org/10.5703/educationculture.35.1.0071
Gottlieb, R. S. 1981. “The Contemporary Critical Theory of Jürgen Habermas.” Ethics 91, no. 2: 280–295. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/292228?journalCode=et
Habermas, J. 1985. The Theory of Communicative Action: Volume 2: Lifeworld and System: A Critique of Functionalist Reason. Vol. 2. Boston: Beacon Press.
Harvey, D. 2005. Spaces of Neoliberalization: Towards a Theory of Uneven Geographical Development. Vol. 8. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag. Hirsch Jr., E. D. 2008. “Rorty and the Priority of Democracy to Philosophy.” New Literary History 39, no. 1: 35–52. https://byvn.net/20lL
Honneth, A. 1998. “Democracy as Reflexive Cooperation: John Dewey and the Theory of Democracy Today.” Political Theory 26, no. 6: 763–783. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0090591798026006001
Laclau, E. 2005. On Populist Reason. London: Verso. https://byvn.net/8qf8
Marcelo, G. 2020. “Tasks for a Critical Theory of Democracy in Europe.” Azimuth: Philosophical Coordinates in Modern and Contemporary Age 16, no. 2: 171–187. https://www.torrossa.com/en/resources/an/4823378
Reason, P. 2003. “Pragmatist Philosophy and Action Research: Readings and Conversation with Richard Rorty.” Action Research 1, no. 1: 103–123. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/14767503030011007
Ridley, D. B. 2019. “The Method of Democracy: John Dewey’s Critical Social Theory.” PhD diss., University of Birmingham. http://etheses.bham.ac.uk/id/eprint/9817
Rorty, R. 1998. Achieving Our Country. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. https://www.grahamseibert.com/Reviews/Society/Achieving%20our%20Country.pdf
Rundell, J. 2020. “Jürgen Habermas.” In Social Theory, 133–140. London: Routledge. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781003117261-17/j%C3%BCrgen-habermas-john-rundell
Shalin, D. N. 1992. “Critical Theory and the Pragmatist Challenge.” American Journal of Sociology 98, no. 2: 237–279. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/230008
Shook, J. R. 2010. “Pragmatism, Pluralism, and Public Democracy.” Revue Française d’Études Américaines 124, no. 2: 11–28. https://doi.org/10.3917/rfea.124.0011
Shusterman, R. 1994. “Pragmatism and Liberalism between Dewey and Rorty.” Political Theory 22, no. 3: 391–413. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0090591794022003002
Urbinati, N. 2013. “The Populist Phenomenon.” Raisons Politiques 51, no. 3: 137–154. https://doi.org/10.3917/rai.051.0137.
Werhane, P. H. 2006. “A Place for Philosophers in Applied Ethics and the Role of Moral Reasoning in Moral Imagination: A Response to Richard Rorty.” Business Ethics Quarterly 16, no. 3: 401–408. doi:10.5840/beq200616331
Arquivos adicionais
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Seção
Licença

Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Política de Direito Autoral para os itens publicados pela Revista:
1.Esta revista é regida por uma Licença da Creative Commons aplicada a revistas eletrônicas. Esta licença pode ser lida no link a seguir: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
2.Consonante a essa politica, a revista declara que os autores são os detentores do copyright de seus artigos sem restrição, e podem depositar o pós-print de seus artigos em qualquer repositório ou site.
Política de Direito de Uso dos Metadados para informações contidas nos itens do repositório
1. Qualquer pessoa e/ou empresa pode acessar os metadados dos itens publicados gratuitamente e a qulquer tempo.
2.Os metadados podem ser usados sem licença prévia em qualquer meio, mesmo comercialmente, desde que seja oferecido um link para o OAI Identifier ou para o artigo que ele desceve, sob os termos da licença CC BY aplicada à revista.
Os autores que têm seus trabalhos publicados concordam que com todas as declarações e normas da Revista e assumem inteira responsabilidade pelas informações prestadas e ideias veiculadas em seus artigos, em conformidade com a Política de Boas Práticas da Revista.