國立臺灣大學政治科學論叢

Abstract / Chinese PDF Download

Despite the  fact that  dispersion / heterogeneity is  not thoroughly  discussed  inLaclau  and  Mouffe’s  earlier  work  on  hegemony,  it  does  indeed  play  a  significantrole. I would contend that hegemony theory is, from the outset, constructed in theparticular way in which dispersion/heterogeneity is theorized. This paper attemptsto  demonstrate  that  although  Laclau  and  Mouffe  have  constantly  emphasized  theultimate impossibility of closure, their insistence on the necessity of antagonism andhegemonic formation has generated a seemingly inevitable effect: that dispersion /heterogeneity can only be perceived from the perspective of structure / system anddeemed as its lack or deficiency. The first part of this paper discusses the notion of‘regularity of dispersion’. This will then be followed by an explication of categoriesof   ‘antagonism’   and   ‘dislocation’   and   how   they   are   related   to   Laclau’sunderstanding   of   dispersion / heterogeneity.   The   third   part   focuses   on   thereformulation  of  the  category  of  heterogeneity  in  Laclau’s  latest  work,  and  willprovide a preliminary reflection on its theoretical as well as political consequences.