Las (in)consecuencias teóricas del populismo laclausiano
The work of Ernesto Laclau has been subject to criticism from left and right, from diverse theoretical frameworks. It is not our intention to develop those critics, but those that are done based on the same poststructuralist theory. We try to show that those critics are based on the theoretical inco...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Revista enfoques : ciencia politíca y administración pública Vol. 22; no. 40; pp. 81 - 96 |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Language: | Spanish |
| Published: |
2024
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | The work of Ernesto Laclau has been subject to criticism from left and right, from diverse theoretical frameworks. It is not our intention to develop those critics, but those that are done based on the same poststructuralist theory. We try to show that those critics are based on the theoretical inconsequence of Laclau. In this way, we present that some authors reprise different publications of Laclau to find his lack of logic sequence. Others would see his inconsequence in his compromise with poststructuralism and his intention to give an ultimate essenceto the concepts. Some authors observe that some psychoanalytical concepts are not developed in his theory, while other psychoanalytical interpretations are taken to explain his work. The question would be why he chose only some parts of psychoanalysis? Finally, we conclude and ask if every poststructuralist theory necessarily has a minimum level of normativity or if it was only the case of Ernesto Laclau.
La obra de Laclau ha sido sujeta a críticas tanto de izquierda como de derecha, desde distintos marcos teóricos. No es nuestra intención ocuparnos de esas críticas, sino de las que se realizan dentro del propio edificio teórico posestructuralista. Esbozamos que estas últimas en menor o mayor medida se fundamentan en la inconsecuencia teórica del mismo Laclau. De esta forma, buscamos mostrar que algunos autores retoman diversas publicaciones del mismo Laclau para señalar su falta de secuencia lógica. Otros verían la inconsecuencia en partir de una visión posestructuralista y dar una esencia última a los conceptos. Además, algunos se preguntarían por qué retoma algunas interpretaciones del psicoanálisis y no otras. Finalmente, concluimos y nos preguntamos si todo desarrollo posestructuralista precisa de un nivel mínimo de normatividad o si únicamente éste fue el caso de Ernesto Laclau. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0718-0241 |