ABSTRACT
In this part, I explore processes which offer the flexibility to be issue-dependent, to include those groups and individuals affected by the context and which welcome, rather than attempt to suppress, conflict. In so doing, I examine the implications of Benhabib’s (1996a) distinction between associational space as a space in which people work together in concert, and agonistic space, which she regards as competitive space. If, as Mouffe (1996) suggests, all space is inherently conflictual and agonistic once we go beyond the moral to consider the political dimension, does this imply that associative democratic decision-making is impossible? Does it mean that there is always ‘more than reason’, and that insider (associative democratic) and outsider (informal action) strategies should be legitimated to take place in parallel?
