This book examines how the democratic form and the struggle for democracy reflects, influences and shapes the struggle for social emancipation. In the context of increased exploitation, rising inequality, and intensified struggle for social justice in the aftermath of the economic crisis, the channelling of populism through liberal democratic institutions has had contradictory effects: giving rise to both Corbyn and Brexit, Sanders and Trump, Syriza and the Golden Dawn, to name but a few. How can we make sense of these developments? In response, this book approaches the idea of democracy from a socialist constitutionalist standpoint and explores institutional forms and principles that challenge and aim at the transformation of the extant social order. This process involves the challenging of well-established ideas of the liberal viewpoint, as well as an unwavering focus on the issue of class rule which enables the highlighting of limitations of -not only mainstream but also heterodox- contemporary approaches to constitutionalism and democracy. Ultimately, democracy is conceived as a process of struggle for creating the conditions, material as well as intellectual, for its actualisation. This significant work of legal and political theory will be of considerable interest to those working in these areas to make sense of contemporary developments, and to further the causes of social justice and social emancipation.

It has been nearly two centuries since Marx famously turned Hegel on his head in order to repurpose dialectics as a revolutionary way of thinking about the internal contradictions of our social relations. Despite critiques from post-structuralists, post-colonialists, and others, there has been a resurgence of dialectical thought among political theorists as of late. This resurgence has coincided with a rise in the mention of words like class warfare, socialism, and communism among the general public on the streets of Seattle in 1999, in Cairo’s Tahrir Square, in the actions of the Greek anarchists and the Spanish indignados, and in the rallying cry of "we are the 99%" of the Occupy Movement, and in academia. This book explores how it is that dialectical thought might respond to the critiques brought forth by those on the left who are critical of Marxism’s universalizing and authoritarian legacy. Brian C. Lovato singles out Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe as the key interlocutors in this ongoing conversation between Marxism and post-structuralism. Laclau and Mouffe argue that Marxist theory is inherently authoritarian, cannot escape a class-reductionist theory of revolutionary subjectivity, and is bound by a closed Hegelian ontology. Lovato argues the opposite by turning to two heterodox Marxist thinkers, Raya Dunayevskaya and C. L. R. James, in order to construct a radically democratic, dynamic, and open conceptualization of dialectical thought. In doing so, he advances a vision of Marxist theory that might serve as a resource to scholars and activists committed not only to combatting capitalism, but also to fighting against colonialism, patriarchy, white supremacy, and heteronormativity. The writings of Dunayevskaya and James allow for Marxism to become relevant again in these tumultuous early years of the 21st century.

1970s South Korea is characterized by many as the "dark age for democracy." Most scholarship on South Korea's democracy movement and civil society has focused on the "student revolution" in 1960 and the large protest cycles in the 1980s which were followed by Korea's transition to democracy in 1987. But in his groundbreaking work of political and social history of 1970s South Korea, Paul Chang highlights the importance of understanding the emergence and evolution of the democracy movement in this oft-ignored decade. Protest Dialectics journeys back to 1970s South Korea and provides readers with an in-depth understanding of the numerous events in the 1970s that laid the groundwork for the 1980s democracy movement and the formation of civil society today. Chang shows how the narrative of the 1970s as democracy's "dark age" obfuscates the important material and discursive developments that became the foundations for the movement in the 1980s which, in turn, paved the way for the institutionalization of civil society after transition in 1987. To correct for these oversights in the literature and to better understand the origins of South Korea's vibrant social movement sector this book presents a comprehensive analysis of the emergence and evolution of the democracy movement in the 1970s.

The concept of democratic freedom refers to more than the kind of freedom embodied by political institutions and procedures. Democratic freedom can only be properly understood if it is grasped as the expression of a culture of freedom that encompasses an entire form of life. Juliane Rebentisch’s systematic and historical approach demonstrates that we can learn a great deal about the democratic culture of freedom from its philosophical critics. From Plato to Carl Schmitt, the critique of democratic culture has always been articulated as a critique of its ãaestheticization“. Rebentisch defends various phenomena of aestheticization Ð from the irony typical of democratic citizens to the theatricality of the political Ð as constitutive elements of democratic culture and the notion of freedom at the heart of its ethical and political self-conception. This work will be of particular interest to students of Political Theory, Philosophy and Aesthetics.

The greater part of this dissertation provides a textual analysis of Hegel's Elements of the Philosophy of Right in terms of two dialectics of institutional phenomenology of freedom in the modern constitutional nation-state. These two dialectics together structure politics as the intermediary action that holds together the distinct institutions of state and civil society through a process of education in individual self-consciousness that is necessary for the informed action that unifies modern ethics altogether as political spirit. In this sense Hegel's text served as an argument for modern political institutions in post-Napoleonic Germany, but in another sense the text reveals Hegel's awareness of the dangers of modern political institutions as they contain the possibility of democratic revolution, and, as Hegel thought political and religious fanaticism - dangers which he simultaneously tried to deny for the sake of instituting a modern constitution altogether. Following the analysis of Hegel, Marx is interpreted in his "Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right" to be pointing out the inevitable democratic politics that would result not only from the Hegelian idea of the modern state as a whole, but from the particular institutional politics that are involved with organizing the constitutional nation-state at each intermediary level of political action. In the last chapter Tocqueville's Democracy in America and The Federalist Papers are interpreted as being concerned with the same dialectic analysis and problems as Hegel and Marx, which sets up the conclusion of this dissertation, wherein, it is argued that the problematics of institutionalized democratic political spirit can be seen as animating American political development at key moments of institutional and cultural change (the Progressive era and the Sixties). This argument is advanced by a deeper methodological analysis about the dialectics of political democracy, based on Hegel and Marx, which theoretically organizes different sorts of institutional and political action into 6 different 'logics' - which, it is argued, have acted and interacted in such a way to bring about those changes in American political history.

The current political climate of uncompromising neoliberalism means that the need to study the logic of our culture—that is, the logic of the capitalist system—is compelling. Providing a rich philosophical analysis of democracy from a negative, non-identity, dialectical perspective, Vasilis Grollios encourages the reader not to think of democracy as a call for a more effective domination of the people or as a demand for the replacement of the elite that currently holds power. In doing so, he aspires to fill in a gap in the literature by offering an out-of-the-mainstream overview of the key concepts of totality, negativity, fetishization, contradiction, identity thinking, dialectics and corporeal materialism as they have been employed by the major thinkers of the critical theory tradition: Marx, Engels, Horkheimer, Lukacs, Adorno, Marcuse, Bloch and Holloway. Their thinking had the following common keywords: contradiction, fetishism as a process and the notion of spell and all its implications. The author makes an innovative attempt to bring these concepts to light in terms of their practical relevance for contemporary democratic theory.