Politológ ako lekár, psychiater a ideologický štátny aparát: kritický pohľad na problematické aspekty terminológie politickej krajnosti.
Political Scientist as Doctor, Psychiatrist and State's Ideological Apparatus: A Critical View on Problematic Aspects of Political Extremes Terminol

Summary/Abstract: The following article focuses on the problematic aspects of the terminology used to denote radical political forces. The aim of the paper is to offer a critical perspective on this terminology influenced especially by the thesis of post-marxist and post-structuralist authors such as Louis Althusser, Jacques Rancière, Slavoj Žižek or Michele Foucault. First, it points out the problematic aspects of the terminology itself. Second, building on Mudde´s distinction of four theoretical schools approaching the topic, it shows how and why different theoretical approaches lead to different terminology and explanations. Third, it offers a critique of the so-called theory of extremism which presents the dominant approach in the region of Central Europe. Fourth, it offers a critique of the role of experts in this matter. The central argument of the article is that some of the experts in the field usually from among political scientists often reminding the roles of medical doctors or psychiatrists serve as an ideological state apparatus by delegitimizing not only the antidemocratic but, and what is problematic at this point, also the pro-democratic and legitimate critique and opposition.

• Details
• Contents