Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

After (post) hegemony

  • Article
  • Published:
Contemporary Political Theory Aims and scope

Abstract

Hegemony is one of the most widely diffused concepts in the contemporary social sciences and humanities internationally, interpreted in a variety of ways in different disciplinary and national contexts. However, its contemporary relevance and conceptual coherence has recently been challenged by various theories of ‘posthegemony’. This article offers a critical assessment of this theoretical initiative. In the first part of the article, I distinguish between three main versions of posthegemony – temporal, foundational and expansive – characterized by different understandings of the temporal and logical implications of hegemony. I then offer a critical assessment of the shared presuppositions of these theories, including their ‘pre-Gramscianism’, their indebtedness to Laclau and Mouffe’s formulation of hegemony, and their characterization of hegemony in terms compatible with modern theories of sovereignty. I conclude by arguing that the contradictions and oversights of the debate on posthegemony encourage us to undertake a reassessment of the real historical complexity of hegemonic politics and its different traditions of conceptualization.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anon. (2015/2016). Discutir la hegemonía Perspectivas poshegemónicas y política latinoamericana. Políticas de la Memoria 16: 14–15.

  • Anderson, P. (2017). The H-Word. The Peripeteia of Hegemony. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arditi, B. (2007). Post-hegemony: politics outside the usual post-marxist paradigm. Contemporary Politics, 13(3), 205–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arditi, B. (2010). Populism is hegemony is politics? On Ernesto Laclau’s on populist reason. Constellations, 17(3), 488–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aricó, J. (2005 [1988]). La cola del diablo. Itinerario de Gramsci en América Latina. Buenos Aires: Siglo XXI.

  • Beasley-Murray, J. (2003). On posthegemony. Bulletin of Latin American Research, 22(1), 117–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beasley-Murray, J. (2010). Posthegemony: Political theory and Latin America. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, T. (1998). Culture: A Reformer’s science. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bianchi, A. (2008). O Laboratorio de Gramsci filosofia, historia e politica. São Paulo: Alameda.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bongiovanni, B., & Bonanate, L. (1993). Egemonia. Enciclopedia delle Scienze Sociali (Vol. III, pp. 470–477). Rome: Istituto della Enciclopedia Italiana.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boothman, D. (2008a). Translating the Lexical item: Arguing over dominance, domination and hegemony. In: G. Gobber et al. (eds.) L’analisi linguistica e letteraria, Proceedings of the IADA Workshop ‘Word Meaning in Argumentative Dialogue’ (Vol. 2). Milan: Università cattolica del sacro cuore.

  • Boothman, D. (2008). The sources for Gramsci’s concept of hegemony. Rethinking Marxism, 20(2), 201–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bosteels, B. (2013). Gramsci at the Margins. https://www.academia.edu/3631819/Gramsci_at_the_Margins

  • Bosteels, B. (2014). Towards a theory of the integral state. Historical Materialism, 22(2), 44–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brandist, C. (2015). The Dimensions of Hegemony: Language, Culture and Politics in Revolutionary Russia. Brill: Leiden.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Buci-Glucksmann, C. (1981 [1975]). Gramsci and the State. Tr. D. Fernbach. London: Lawrence & Wishart.

  • Burgos, R. (2004). Los gramscianos argentinos: Cultura y política en la experiencia de Pasado y Presente. Buenos Aires: Siglo Veintiuno.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler, J., Laclau, E., & Zizek, S. (2000). Contingency, hegemony, universality: Contemporary dialogues on the left. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cabezas, O. A. (2015). Gramsci en las orillas. Androgué: La Cebra.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cavooris, R. (2017). Intellectuals and political strategy: Hegemony, posthegemony, and post-Marxist theory in Latin America. Contemporary Politics, 23(2), 231–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chodor, T. (2014). Not throwing the baby out with the bathwater: A Gramscian response to post-hegemony. Contemporary Politics, 20(4), 489–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cortés, M. (2015). Un nuevo marxismo para américa Latina. José Aricó: traductor, editor, intelectual. Mexico City / Buenos Aires, Siglo Veintiuno.

  • Cospito, G. (2011). Il ritmo del pensiero. Per una lettura diacronica dei ‘Quaderni del carcere’ di Gramsci. Naples: Bibliopolis.

  • Cospito, G. (2016). Egemonia/egemonico nei “Quaderni del carcere” (e prima). International Gramsci Journal, 2(1), 49–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coutinho, C. N. (2012 [1999]). Gramsci’s political thought. Leiden: Brill

  • Dal Maso, J. (2016). El marxismo de Gramsci. Notas de lectura sobre los Cuadernos de la Cárcel. Buenos Ares: Ediciones IPS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Day, R. (2005). Gramsci is dead: Anarchist currents in the newest social movements. London: Pluto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Felice, F. (1972). Una chiave di lettura in “Americanismo e fordismo”. Rinascita – Il Contemporaneo, XXIX (42), 27 October.

  • De Felice, F. (1977). Rivoluzione passiva, fascismo, americanismo in Gramsci. In F. Ferri (ed.) Politica e storia in Gramsci (Vol. 1). Rome: Editori Riuniti.

  • Del Campo, J. (ed.). (1985). Hegemonía y alternativas políticas en américa latina. Mexico City: siglo veintiuno editores.

  • Del Roio, M. (2005). Os prismas de Gramsci: A formula politica da frente unica (1919–1926). São Paulo: Xamã.

    Google Scholar 

  • Derrida, J. (2011 [1967]). Voice and phenomenon. Evanston: Northwestern UP

  • di Meo, A. (2015). La “rivoluzione passive”. Una ricognizione sui significati. Critica Marxista, 2015(1), 59–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • D’Orsi, A. (Ed.). (2008). Egemonie. Naples: Edizioni Dante & Descartes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emerson, R. G. (2013). Post-hegemony and Gramsci: A bridge too far? Contemporary Politics, 19(4), 427–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferri, F. (Ed.). (1977). Politica e storia in Gramsci, (Vol. 1). Rome: Editori Riuniti.

    Google Scholar 

  • Francioni, G. (1984). L’officina gramsciana. Ipotesi sulla struttura dei ‘Quaderni del carcere’. Naples: Bibliopolis.

  • Freeland, A. (2015). Gramsci in the era of posthegemony? Historical Materialism, 23(2), 287–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frosini, F. (2008). Beyond the crisis of Marxism: Thirty years contesting Gramsci’s legacy. In J. Bidet and S. Kouvelakis (eds.) Critical companion to contemporary Marxism. Leiden: Brill.

  • Frosini, F. (2010) La religione dell’uomo moderno. Politica e verità nei ‘Quaderni del carcere’ di Antonio Gramsci. Rome: Carocci.

  • Frosini, F. (2012). Reformation, renaissance and the state: The hegemonic fabric of modern sovereignty. Journal of Romance Studies, 12(3), 63–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frosini, F. (2015). Hégémonie: Une approche génétique. Actuel Marx, 57, 27–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frosini, F. (2016a). De la mobilisation au contrôle: les formes de l’hégémonie dans les «Cahiers de prison» de Gramsci. Mélanges de l’École française de Rome - Italie et Méditerranée modernes et contemporaine 128(2).

  • Frosini, F. (2016). L’egemonia e i “subalterni”: Utopia, religione, democrazia. International Gramsci Journal, 2(1), 126–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frosini, F., & Liguori, G. (Eds.). (2004). Le parole di Gramsci: Per un lessico dei ‘Quaderni del carcere’. Rome: Carocci.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerratana, V. (1997). Le forme dell’egemonia. In Problemi di metodo. Roma: Editori riuniti.

  • Gordillo, G. (2013). Affective hegemonies. https://spaceandpolitics.blogspot.com/2013/11/affective-hegemonies.html

  • Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the prison notebooks. Ed. and tr. Q. Hoare and G. Nowell-Smith. New York: International Publishers.

  • Gramsci, A. (1975). Quaderni del carcere. Ed. V. Gerratana, Turin: Einaudi.

  • Gramsci, A. (2007–). Quaderni del carcere. Rome: Istituto della Enciclopedia Italiana.

  • Guha, R. (1982). On some aspects of the historiography of colonial India. In R. Guha (ed.), Subaltern studies I, writings on South Asian history and society. Delhi: Oxford University Press.

  • Guha, R. (1998). Dominance without hegemony. History and power in colonial India. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardt, M., & Negri, A. (2009). Commonwealth. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Inston, K. (2010). Rousseau and radical democracy. New York: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ives, P. (2009). Esperanto. In G. Liguori & P. Voza (Eds.), Dizionario gramsciano 1926–1937 (pp. 1926–1937). Rome: Carocci.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanoussi, D. (2000). Una introducción a los Cudernos de la Cárcel de Antonio Gramsci. México D.F.: Benemerita Universidad Autonoma de Puebla/International Gramsci Society/Plaza y Valdez.

  • Laclau, E. (1977). Fascism and ideology. In Politics and ideology in Marxist theory. London: New Left Books

  • Laclau, E. (1985). Tesis acerca de la forma hegemónica de la política. In: J. Del Campo (ed.), Hegemonía y alternativas políticas en américa latina. Mexico City: Siglo Veintiuno Editores.

  • Laclau, E. (2002). On Populist Reason. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laclau, E. (2004) Glimpsing the future. In S. Critchley and O. Marchart (eds.), Laclau: A critical reader. London: Routledge.

  • Laclau, E. (2014). The rhetorical foundations of society. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laclau, E., & Mouffe, C. (2014 [1985]). Hegemony and socialist strategy: Towards a radical democratic politics. London: Verso

  • Lelio, L. P. (2009). Consenso. In G. Liguori & P. Voza (Eds.), Dizionario gramsciano (pp. 1926–1937). Rome: Carocci.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lash, S. (2007). Power after hegemony: Cultural studies in mutation? Theory, Culture & Society, 24(3), 55–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lenin. (1964 [1904]). One step forward, two steps back. In Lenin collected works (vol. 7). Moscow: Progress Publishers.

  • Lih, L. (2017). The proletariat and its ally: The logic of Bolshevik ‘hegemony’. https://johnriddell.wordpress.com/2017/04/26/the-proletariat-and-its-ally-the-logic-of-bolshevik-hegemony/

  • Liguori, G., & Voza, P. (Eds.). (2009). Dizionario gramsciano 1926–1937. Rome: Carocci.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyotard, J.-F. (1984 [1979]). The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge. Trans. G. Bennington and B. Massumi. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

  • Mazzolini, S. (2019). Laclau lo stratega: Populismo ed egemonia tra spazio e tempo. In F. Cacciatore (ed.) Il momento populista. Ernesto Laclau in discussione. Milan-Udine: Mimesis.

  • Modonesi, M. (2013). Revoluciones pasivas en américa latina. Una approximación gramsciana a la caracterización de los gobiernos progresistas de iniçio de siglo. In M. Modonesi (ed.) Horizontes gramscianos. Estudios en torno al pensammiento de Antonio Gramsci. Mexico City: UNAM.

  • Moreiras, A. (2001) The exhaustion of difference: The politics of Latin American cultural studies. Durham & London: Duke UP.

  • Moreiras, A. (2006). Línea de sombre. El no sujeto del lo politico. Santiago de Chile: Palinodia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morton, A. (2007). Unravelling Gramsci: Hegemony and passive revolution in the global political economy. London: Pluto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mouffe, C. (Ed.). (1979). Gramsci and Marxist theory. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mouffe, C. (1979a). Hegemony and ideology in Gramsci. In C. Mouffe (ed.) Gramsci and Marxist theory. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

  • Negri, A. (2015). Egemonia: Gramsci, Togliatti, Laclau. EuroNomade. www.euronomade.info/?p=4956.

  • Negri, A. (2017). Marx and foucault. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, K. (2016). Imagined Sovereignties. The power of the people and other myths of the modern age. Cambridge: CUP.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Orellana, R. C. (Ed.). (2015). Poshegemonía. El final de un paradigma de la filosofía política en América Latina. Madrid: Bibloteca Nueva.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pocock, J. G. A. (1989). Politics, language and time. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Portantiero, J. C. (1981). Los usos de Gramsci. Buenos Aires: Folios ediciones.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spivak, G. C. (1988). Can the Subaltern speak? In C. Nelson and L. Grossberg (eds.), Marxism and the interpretation of culture. Urbana/Chicago: University of Illinois Press.

  • Starcenbaum, M. (2015/2016) Poshegemonía: Notas sobre un debate. Políticas de la Memoria 16: 27–38.

  • Stavrakakis, Y. (2014). Hegemony or post-hegemony? Discourse, representation and the revenge(s) of the real. In A. Kioupkiolis and G. Katsambekis (eds.), Radical democracy and collective movements today. The biopolitics of the multitude versus the hegemony of the people. Farnham: Ashgate.

  • Tapia, L. (2011). El estado de derecho como tiranía. La Paz: Autodeterminación.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thoburn, N. (2007). Patterns of production: Cultural studies after hegemony. Theory, Culture & Society, 24(3), 79–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, P. D. (2020). Gramsci’s revolutions, passive and permanent. Modern Intellectual History, 17(1), 117–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voza, P. (2004). Rivoluzione passive. In F. Frosini and G. Liguori (eds.), Le parole di Gramsci: per un lessico dei “Quaderni del carcere”. Rome: Carocci.

  • Williams, G. (2002). The other side of the popular: Neoliberalism and subalternity in Latin America. Durham: Duke UP.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, R. (1977). Marxism and literature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Worth, O. (2015). Rethinking hegemony. London: Palgrave.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

A previous version of this text was presented at the conference ‘Egemonia e modernità: Il pensiero di Gramsci in Italia e nella cultura internazionale’ in Rome in May 2017. I am grateful to the participants at this event for critical reflections and suggestions. I would also like to thank Gavin Arnall, Anxo Garrido, two anonymous reviewers and the editors of Contemporary Political Theory for comments that helped me to clarify the nature, focus and limits of my argument.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Brunel University London, Uxbridge, UB8 3PH, UK

    Peter D. Thomas

Authors
  1. Peter D. Thomas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter D. Thomas.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Thomas, P.D. After (post) hegemony. Contemp Polit Theory 20, 318–340 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41296-020-00409-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41296-020-00409-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation