What's in the Cracks Between Concepts? Meeting Bourdieu and Laclau-Mouffe for a Multi-Level Analysis of Urban Conflicts
Unlike discourse theory, my analysis looks at conflicts not merely as antagonism of discursive systems trying to colonise more discursive elements, or political subjects trying to forge alliances through chains of equivalence, but as a struggle between whole structured fields that bring along their inner social complexity, dynamics and power structures. On the other hand the underlying principles of Laclau & Mouffe’s discourse theory help unsettle the rather static structuralist conceptual apparatus of Bourdieu. It gives us instruments to look at the in-between space of heteronomy that Bourdieu never seriously approached, and to postulate it as the most significant site of contention in a contemporary society.
Further, the question can be approached how a complex urban (or political) project may endure as ‘one’ and not fall apart in the polymorphic context of diversity of positions and conflicting interests constituting the very institutional and social ‘structure’.