This electronic version has been made available under a Creative Commons (BY-NC-ND) open access license. In the lead essay for this volume, Joshua Foa Dienstag engages in a critical encounter with the work of Stanley Cavell on cinema, focusing skeptical attention on the claims made for the contribution of cinema to the ethical character of democratic life. In this debate, Dienstag mirrors the celebrated dialogue between Rousseau and Jean D'Alembert on theatre, casting Cavell as D'Alembert in his view that we can learn to become better citizens and better people by observing a staged representation of human life, with Dienstag arguing, with Rousseau, that this misunderstands the relationship between original and copy, even more so in the medium of film than in the medium of theatre. Dienstag's provocative and stylish essay is debated by an exceptional group of interlocutors comprising Clare Woodford, Tracy B. Strong, Margaret Kohn, Davide Panagia and Thomas Dumm. The volume closes with a robust response from Dienstag to his critics.

Draws on the writings of Stanley Cavell to diagnose post-truth politics and offer philosophical resources to respond to its challenges.

Aesthetic and political representation are often treated separately, but this book argues that film offers a unique perspective through which to understand the dangers to equality and freedom that lurk in representative politics. The potential problems of representative democracy have long been debated: does it cultivate apathy and discourage citizen participation? What does it mean to be faithfully or well represented in a democracy? And how can appropriate, meaningful representation be achieved? Here, these questions are addressed from a new perspective. Representation, Joshua Foa Dienstag argues, can create the illusion of freedom and reciprocity in place of the real thing, and in both cinema and politics, what gives us pleasure is not the same as what secures or supports our existence as free and equal citizens. As this book shows, there are political dangers not visible within the current debates around democratic representation, dangers we can better understand and help to minimize by considering the way that human beings interact, emotionally, with their filmic representations. Dienstag looks at a series of films that directly confront issues of representation (Her, Blade Runner, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, Melancholia, and the Up documentary series) to diagnose these hazards and consider how best to respond to them. Each chapter looks at a specific film as emblematic of a different conception or problem of representation often ignored by mainstream political debates (such as reciprocity, happiness, boundaries, evil) to show that the relationship between representation and freedom is fraught with tension. This book continues Dienstag's earlier groundbreaking work on philosophical pessimism, understood not as something despairing, but as a rejection of the idea that these necessary tensions can be cured. Ultimately, Dienstag seeks to defend a kind of pessimistic politics that might produce a better sort of democratic representation than what we have today.

This electronic version has been made available under a Creative Commons (BY-NC-ND) open access license. Rainer Bauböck is the world’s leading theorist of transnational citizenship. He opens this volume with a question that is crucial to our thinking on citizenship in the twenty-first century: who has a claim to be included in a democratic political community? Bauböck’s answer addresses the major theoretical and practical issues of the forms of citizenship and access to citizenship in different types of polity, the specification and justification of rights of non-citizen immigrants as well as non-resident citizens, and the conditions under which norms governing citizenship can legitimately vary. This argument is challenged and developed in responses by Joseph Carens, David Miller, Iseult Honohan, Will Kymlicka and Sue Donaldson, David Owen and Peter J. Spiro. In the concluding chapter, Bauböck replies to his critics.

Drawing on recent developments in continental political thought ‘Disorienting Democracy’ rethinks democracy as a practice that can be used to counter the increasing poverty, inequality and insecurity that mark our contemporary era. In answer to concerns that the contemporary left is not strong enough for these so-called times of crisis this book argues that the left must urgently return to strongly redistributive policies but that this alone is not enough. To bring lasting change it must continually work to untangle its longstanding emancipatory ideals from the dominatory tendencies that have undermined and weakened it throughout the 20th century. In response, this book argues that the work of Jacques Rancière is key. Countering domination with a resolute assertion of the capacities of all he gives us a radical politics of emancipation that emerges through subjects who refuse to know their place. In appropriating alternative ways of living they disidentify with everyday consensus, rupturing and subverting our unequal order to force alternatives onto the agenda. Juxtaposing Rancière with other thinkers from Judith Butler to Jacques Derrida, Woodford draws out the practical implications of Rancière’s work for our current time. She develops dissensual practices that provoke us to not just assert that another world is possible, but to bring about that other world today. Challenging what it means to do political philosophy, rethinking the role of critical theory, ethics, education, literature and aesthetics for democracy, and rejecting the longstanding divide between theory and activism, this book will be of particular interest to graduates, scholars and activists.

Understanding democracy through film philosophy and political theory Shining new light on our understanding of cinema’s ways of political thinking, Intermedialities: Political Theory and Cinematic Experience puts modern political theory in conversation with the philosophy of film. Davide Panagia argues that there are no natural laws of association that can guarantee a template for democratic participation, as democracy is predicated not on stabilizing foundations but rather on the formation of expansive collectivities and institutions that are responsive to alterability. Instead, democracy requires a relational ontology, one that he elucidates by turning to philosophers of film like Stanley Cavell, Gilles Deleuze, Miriam Hansen, and Jean-Luc Godard—all of whom have articulated a political aesthetic of cinematic experience that is at once aspectual and compositional. Panagia reads these thinkers alongside a countertradition of modern political thought, represented by David Hume, Ludwig Wittgenstein, and Gilbert Simondon. His articulation of cinematic experience thus allows for a political aesthetic that is rooted in the migratory realities of undetermined relations.

Joshua Foa Dienstag engages in a critical encounter with the work of Stanley Cavell on cinema, focusing skeptical attention on the claims made for the contribution of cinema to the ethical character of democratic life.