Occidental Studies

The Disfiguration of the Concept of “the People” in Contemporary Democracy: A Critical Reading of Laclau, Mouffe, and Agamben

Document Type : Research Paper

Author

Mahdi Abbasi

Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran

10.30465/os.2026.54761.2111
Abstract
Introduction
The concept of “the people” has always occupied a central but contested position in democratic thought. Although democratic systems derive their legitimacy from popular sovereignty, the meaning and boundaries of the people have never been entirely fixed. In contemporary democracies, this ambiguity has intensified due to the decline of traditional parties, weakening representative relationships, growing distrust toward political institutions, and the rise of populist movements claiming to represent the “real people.” Therefore, the contemporary crisis of democracy is not only a crisis of representation but also a struggle over the meaning and boundaries of the people. This study examines whether the transformation of the concept of the people is merely a consequence of failures in representative institutions or whether it reflects deeper tensions within liberal democracy itself. The main argument is that this transformation results from the interaction of institutional, discursive, hegemonic, and exclusionary processes. To analyze this issue, the article critically examines the theories of Ernesto Laclau, Chantal Mouffe, and Giorgio Agamben.
Materials & Methods
The research uses a descriptive-analytical method based on critical analysis of theoretical texts. The main sources include the primary works of Laclau, Mouffe, and Agamben, as well as studies addressing populism, representative democracy, and critiques of these theories. Rather than simply describing the views of these thinkers, the study evaluates their explanatory capacity regarding a common question: how does the people become a contested political category?
The analysis is conducted through four dimensions: the crisis of representation, the discursive construction of the people, hegemonic competition, and mechanisms of inclusion and exclusion. This framework allows the study to examine both the contributions and limitations of each theoretical approach.
Discussion & Results
The findings show that the crisis of representation provides an important context for understanding contemporary democratic transformations, but it cannot independently explain the changing meaning of the people. The decline of political parties, weakening connections between citizens and representatives, and increasing distrust toward elites create conditions for new political claims, but they do not explain how particular definitions of the people are constructed. Laclau’s theory demonstrates that the people should not be understood as a naturally existing social unity. Instead, the people emerge through political articulation, in which diverse social demands are connected and transformed into a collective identity. This approach explains how political subjects are created, but it faces difficulties in distinguishing between democratic constructions of the people and exclusionary claims that deny pluralism.Mouffe emphasizes the central role of conflict in democratic politics. From her perspective, democracy does not eliminate conflict but institutionalizes it through agonistic competition among legitimate adversaries. This approach explains why attempts to suppress political disagreement may contribute to populist mobilization. However, it provides a less developed explanation of situations in which certain groups are excluded from legitimate political participation.Agamben shifts attention from political competition to the boundaries of political membership. His concepts of bare life and the state of exception demonstrate how political orders may create forms of exclusion by determining who receives full legal and political protection. Although this perspective highlights an important dimension of modern power, its broad application may overlook the capacity of democratic institutions to resist exclusionary practices.The comparative analysis indicates that these three approaches explain different aspects of the transformation of the people. Laclau clarifies how collective identities are constructed; Mouffe explains the role of conflict and hegemony; and Agamben reveals the importance of inclusion and exclusion. Together, they demonstrate that the contemporary transformation of the people is produced through the interaction of multiple political processes rather than a single cause.
Conclusion
The study concludes that the disfiguration of the concept of the people cannot be reduced either to the crisis of representation or to the rise of populism alone. The transformation should be understood as a multilevel process in which institutional crisis, political articulation, hegemonic struggles, and mechanisms of exclusion interact. In contemporary democracy, the people remain the source of legitimacy while simultaneously becoming the object of political struggles over who can define, represent, and belong to them.This perspective shifts the analysis of democratic crisis from the question of whether institutions adequately represent the people toward a deeper question: how is the political subject called “the people” constituted and contested? The article therefore provides an integrated understanding of the relationship among democracy, representation, populism, and political inclusion and exclusion.

Keywords

The People
Democratic Disfiguration
Crisis of Representation
Right-Wing Populism
Political Inclusion and Exclusion
Adibi, Mahsa, Tavassoli Roknabadi, Majid, & Taghavi, Seyed Mohammad Ali. (2019). Representation of the West in Ali Shariati’s Political Discourse. Faslname-ye Gharbshenasi-ye Bonyadi, 10(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.30465/os.2019.4244 [In Persian]
Agamben, G. (1998). Homo sacer: Sovereign power and bare life (D. Heller-Roazen, Trans.). Stanford University Press.
Agamben, G. (2005). State of exception (K. Attell, Trans.). The University of Chicago Press.
Canovan, M. (1999). Trust the people! Populism and the two faces of democracy. Political Studies, 47(1), 2–16.
Crouch, C. (2004). Post-democracy. Polity.
Hajizadeh, Jalal. (2011). Re-reading Critical Views and the Crises Facing Democracy. Gharbshenasi-ye Bonyadi, 2(1), 1–24. [In Persian]
Honig, B. (2009). Emergency politics: Paradox, law, democracy. Princeton University Press.
Howarth, D. (2015). Ernesto Laclau: Post-Marxism, populism and critique. Routledge.
Laclau, E. (2005). On populist reason. Verso.
Lefort, C. (1988). Democracy and political theory (D. Macey, Trans.). Polity Press.
Manin, B. (1997). The principles of representative government. Cambridge University Press.
Mouffe, C. (2000). The democratic paradox. Verso.
Mouffe, C. (2005). On the political. Routledge.
Mudde, C., & Rovira Kaltwasser, C. (2017). Populism: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press.
Müller, J.-W. (2016). What is populism? University of Pennsylvania Press.
Olbrich, E., & Banisch, S. (2021). The rise of populism and the reconfiguration of the German political space. Frontiers in Big Data, 4, Article 731349. https://doi.org/10.3389/fdata.2021.731349
Rosanvallon, P. (2008). Counter-democracy: Politics in an age of distrust (A. Goldhammer, Trans.). Cambridge University Press.
Taggart, P. (2000). Populism. Open University Press.
Urbinati, N. (2014). Democracy disfigured: Opinion, truth, and the people. Harvard University Press.
U.S. Department of Justice. (2020). Denaturalization cases and enforcement priorities. https://www.justice.gov
U.S. Department of Justice. (2020). Denaturalization cases and enforcement priorities. https://www.justice.gov

Home

Guide for Authors

Submit Manuscript

Reviewers

Contact Us