This book explores the impact of poststructuralism on contemporary political theory by focussing on problems and issues central to politics today. Drawing on the theoretical concerns brought to light by the ‘poststructuralist’ thinkers Foucault, Derrida, Lacan, Deleuze and Max Stirner, Newman provides a critical examination of new developments in contemporary political theory: post-Marxism, discourse analysis, new theories of ideology and power, hegemony, radical democracy and psychoanalytic theory. He re-examines the political in light of these developments in theory to suggest new ways of thinking about politics through a reflection on the challenges that confront it. This volume will be of great interest to students of postmodernism and poststructuralist theory in political science, philosophy, sociology, philosophy and cultural studies.

The political writings of the French poststructuralists have eluded articulation in the broader framework of general political philosophy primarily because of the pervasive tendency to define politics along a single parameter: the balance between state power and individual rights in liberalism and the focus on economic justice as a goal in Marxism. What poststructuralists like Michel Foucault, Gilles Deleuze, and Jean-François Lyotard offer instead is a political philosophy that can be called tactical: it emphasizes that power emerges from many different sources and operates along many different registers. This approach has roots in traditional anarchist thought, which sees the social and political field as a network of intertwined practices with overlapping political effects. The poststructuralist approach, however, eschews two questionable assumptions of anarchism, that human beings have an (essentially benign) essence and that power is always repressive, never productive. After positioning poststructuralist political thought against the background of Marxism and the traditional anarchism of Bakunin, Kropotkin, and Proudhon, Todd May shows what a tactical political philosophy like anarchism looks like shorn of its humanist commitments—namely, a poststructuralist anarchism. The book concludes with a defense, contra Habermas and Critical Theory, of poststructuralist political thought as having a metaethical structure allowing for positive ethical commitments.

Post-structuralism is recognised as a major force within literary and cultural studies. This book is the first to apply the theory to politics and to show the ways in which it can illuminate political theory and analysis. As such it is likely to become a key text in the development of this area, providing a stimulating introduction to the subject. Authors explore the two-way relationship, showing not only that post-structuralism can enhance the study of politics, but also that advocates of post-structuralism can benefit from being open to the lessons political studies can teach. The book aims to* Clarify the relationship of contemporary theory to politics* Open up a new intellectual interface* Create a space for exchange between disciplines* Provide a statement of the role of post-structuralist theory in politicsCovering three main sections - What is Post-structuralist Political Theory?; Post-structuralism and Political Analysis; and The Question of the Political - the authors draw on themes raised by Continental thinkers such as Derrida, Nancy and Deleuze, and Anglo-American thinkers such as Butler and Connolly in their questioning of the theoretical and empirical understanding of contemporary politics.Key Features:* First systematic examination of post-structuralism to see what it may mean for political studies* Advances its own rigorous and theoretically informed position* Cutting edge: provides a vibrant introduction to this area of political thought and analysis* Brings clarity to the two-way relationship between post-structuralism and politics

Unstable universalities, available for the first time in paperback, examines the theme of universality and its place in radical political theory. Saul Newman argues that both Marxist politics of class struggle and the postmodern politics of difference have reached their historical and political limits, and that what is needed is a new approach to universality, a new way of thinking about collective politics. By exploring various themes and ideas within poststructuralist and post-Marxist theory, the book develops a new and original approach to universality – one that has important implications for politics today, particularly on questions of power, subjectivity, ethics and democracy. In so doing, it engages in debates with thinkers such as Laclau, Žižek, Badiou and Rancière over the future of radical politics. It also applies important theoretical insights to contemporary events such as the emergence of the anti-globalisation movement, the ‘war on terrorism’, the rise of anti-immigrant racism, and the nihilistic violence which lurks at the margins of the political.

Offering an introduction to the major poststructuralist thinkers, this text shows how Foucault, Derrida, Lacan and Zizek expose the depoliticization found in conventional international relations theory. poststructuralists are concerned with the big questions of international politics: it is precisely their work that analyzes the political and explains the processes of depoliticization and technologization.

Articulates the intersection of anarchism and poststructuralism in order to frame a new approach to politics: 'postanarchism'.

This book examines the political perspective of French thinker and historian Jacques Ranci&ère. Ranci&ère argues that a democratic politics emerges out of people&’s acting under the presupposition of their own equality with those better situated in the social hierarchy. Todd May examines and extends this presupposition, offering a normative framework for understanding it, placing it in the current political context, and showing how it challenges traditional political philosophy and opens up neglected political paths. He demonstrates that the presupposition of equality orients political action around those who act on their own behalf&—and those who act in solidarity with them&—rather than, as with the political theories of John Rawls, Robert Nozick, and Amartya Sen, those who distribute the social goods. As May argues, Ranci&ère&’s view offers both hope and perspective for those who seek to think about and engage in progressive political action.