Brisbane.
The first session here at ANZCA 2009 begins with a paper by Lincoln Dahlberg, whose interest is in the analysis of economic systems by various discourse theories. He begins by noting that Habermas after 1989 gave up on the possibility of post-capitalism, shifting to arguing for a democratic oversight of capitalism instead; critics say that at best this is a weak stance. His separation of spheres between culture and economy is also seen as flawed, according to his critics.
Laclau's theory provides what may be a more cogent theory of capitalism; it dispenses with that binary division, and more explicitly focusses on power and contestation of dominant forces and social relations, providing opportunities for how capitalism may be countered. What does it mean to think of capitalism and contestation in terms of discourse, then? In contrast to Habermas, Lincoln sees discourse as all meaningful practices, ideas, objects, and thus includes the economy in this; capitalism can therefore be seen as a hegemonic discourse in its own right, which positions its subjects. It is ideological in that it has become seen as natural.
 
      










