{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019133151112846546, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002733307301835221, 'mean_word_length': 5.203389830508475, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
“Another World is Possible”: Theorizing the Radical Politics of Democracy, North and South

Perhaps the most radical moment in the history of political theory occurs in Plato’s Republic. As Socrates devises his Callipolis, he is asked how to implement this vision. He responds with the myth of the metals or the Noble Lie. What is so radical about this strategy, according to one provocative reading of this work, is that it reminds every theorist and citizen who reads this work that no form of political life is natural or necessary. It is conventional—a convenient way to organize ourselves collectively—all the way down. For Plato, this is a dangerous fact that needs to be disguised by the illusion of natural universality. A citizen who buys into the illusion is presented with a secure and just order justified by necessity. The theorist is distinct from the citizen because she or he is trained to never lose sight of the conventions at the base of their political order; and this conventionality with its corresponding suggestion that what is, need not be, is a primary incitement to political imagination. Translating imagined change to the polity into actual political change is a matter of altering conventions through either new consensus or dissensus, and it is a task performed outside of theory. Mainstream theories of liberal democracy, justice, and democratic politics tend to emphasize formal modes of consensus and conflict resolution in their descriptions of how a society might come to realize fundamental (usually liberal) values. Justice tends to be equated with peaceful resolution of political and economic disagreements. Democracy is conceived in terms of equality, solidarity, and deliberative or rational participation in decision-making. Order, stability, and coherence are the hallmarks of these theoretical enterprises. The theorists working in these models of the just democratic life are most interested in how political societies are formed, respond to problems that emerge domestically or from foreign sources, and perpetuate themselves over time. Radical democracy, by contrast, is a heterogeneous orientation to political life that is united by the belief that consensus and order hide more than they reveal about political societies. Theorists who identify with radical democracy contend that disagreement is the underlying engine driving and maintaining democratic forms of life and reshaping them perpetually. This focus on, and celebration of, dissensus is the New Political Science, Volume 31, Number 3, September 2009