Two Theories of Hegemony: Stuart Hall and Ernesto Laclau in Conversation

Gianmaria Colpani

doi:10.1177/00905917211019392

Abstract

This essay stages a critical conversation between Stuart Hall and Ernesto Laclau, comparing their different appropriations of Antonio Gramsci’s theory of hegemony. In the 1980s, Hall and Laclau engaged with Gramsci and with one another in order to conceptualize what they regarded as a triangular relation between the rise of Thatcherism, the crisis of the Left, and the emergence of new social movements. While many of their readers emphasize the undeniable similarities and mutual influences that exist between Hall and Laclau, this essay focuses on the differences between their theories of hegemony and locates the starkest contrast between them at the level of theoretical practice. While the main lesson that Hall drew from Gramsci was the privileging of conjunctural analysis, Laclau proceeded to locate the concept of hegemony at a higher level of abstraction, developing a political ontology increasingly indifferent to any specific conjuncture. The essay argues that this difference between conjunctural analysis and political ontology has a significant impact on Hall’s and Laclau’s respective understandings of two key political formations: populism and identity politics. Thus by focusing on these two formations, the essay argues that Hall’s work should not be read as a derivative or even undertheorized version of Laclau’s, for this tendency obscures substantial differences between their interventions as well as the fact that Hall’s theory of hegemony, as a theory of the conjuncture, ultimately possesses stronger explanatory power than Laclau’s political ontology.

Highlights

In the summer of 2016, in the midst of the election that would make Donald Trump the forty-fifth president of the United States, historians N
While their work is marked by shared intellectual references, mutual theoretical influences, and similar political commitments, and while their theoretical interventions in the 1980s emerged from the same conjuncture, it is precisely the theoretical status of the conjuncture which sets their projects apart
Based on his conjunctural analyses of Thatcherism, for Hall it would make no sense to subsume the politics of gender, race, and sexuality into a project of left populism, for what characterizes populism in his view is a demobilization of popular sectors, not a recomposition and expansion of their struggles

Summary

Introduction

In the summer of 2016, in the midst of the election that would make Donald Trump the forty-fifth president of the United States, historians N. Instead, without ever retreating from the task of theorizing, always resisted a trading of conjunctural analysis for theoretical abstraction.4 Rather than searching for a new “political logic” in Gramsci’s Prison Notebooks, as Laclau and Mouffe do, Hall’s primary goal was to reactivate the theory of hegemony in the historically specific context of Thatcherism.

Results

Conclusion