Publications

Martin Nonhoff/Frieder Vogelmann: Editorial (Seite 3); Regina Kreide: Das Schweigen des politischen Liberalismus (Seite 5); Martin Nonhoff: Krisenanalyse und radikale Theorie der Demokratie (Seite 21); Jörg Schaub: Luftschloss Liberalismus. Warum das Denken in Krisenzeiten keinen Halt findet (Seite 38); Frank Nullmeier: Politische Theorie des Komparativs. Soziale Vergleiche und gerechte Gesellschaft (Seite 56); Frieder Vogelmann: Liberale Subjekte Eine affirmative Streitschrift (Seite 74); Wolfgang Kraushaar: Aus der Protest-Chronik: 24./25. März 1977, Buenos Aires (Seite 91)

This article describes the historical context that was decisive in Saharov’s commitment to warning party leaders of the dangers of the H-bomb and calling on them to respect human rights. He also attempts to explore the different ways in which Hruščev and Brežnev approached Saharov’s criticisms. Not only does he examine the three stages of the KGB model – educate, warn and only finally arrest renegades – he also sheds light on Andropov’s repeated appeals to Brežnev to speak with Saharov. Although Saharov, too, was keen to talk to Brežnev, the meeting between the two men never took place. In the end, it was against the backdrop of the Cold War that the Politbjuro decided on the best time to get rid of Saharov, doing as little damage as possible to the prestige of the Soviet Union, and thus re-establishing the limits of the dictable.

This article focuses on the question, which kind of diplomacy we have to deal with within the Warsaw pact states. Taking the invasion in Czechoslovakia in 1968 as an example, three theses are discussed: (1) Brezhnev transferred his inner-party concept of „trust in cadres“ and his „scenario of power“ based on trust to foreign politics and treated Dubček as a client whom he addressed in a patrimonial and familiar way. (2) He lost faith in Dubček when the latter established a new democratic discourse denying the central power of the party. (3) The diplomatic language within the Warsaw pact states referred more to socialist common values and party discipline than to the language and setting of international meetings with third party states.

Few political thinkers have influenced the international political and social science theory discourse of recent years as much as Chantal Mouffe and Ernesto Laclau – across paradigm boundaries. Both combine neo-Gramscian, (post-)structuralist and psychoanalytical theoretical elements and thus enable an explanation of political-discursive events, in particular the formation of hegemonies, on the one hand, and a normative theory of agonal democracy on the other.
The contributions in this volume provide an overview of Laclau’s and Mouffe’s key figures of thought, critically examine them and point out methodological and empirical connections.
This volume contains original texts by Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe, among others.

How do dominant political language and thought patterns emerge and how are they related to social power relations? This volume aims to get to the bottom of these questions about the functioning of discursive hegemonies by linking political science and discourse studies. The political-discursive characteristics and strategies of successful hegemonies are reconstructed on the basis of an examination of the hegemonic project “social market economy”. In addition, the exemplary analysis of the West German economic policy discourse of the post-war years illustrates how political science can benefit from discourse studies research.

In Bluhm, Harald & Jürgen Gebhardt (eds.) Politische Ideengeschichte im 20. Jahrhundert, 223–242. Baden-Baden: Nomos. ISBN: 978-3-8329-2181-1

Putting contradiction center stage, this series aims at challenging simplistic conceptualizations of the contradictive. The series editors agree that contradictions are not necessarily about being resolved but that they rather provide starting points for polyphonic conversations.