ABSTRACT
The positions of Marcel Gauchet and Alain Badiou in their debate over democracy and communism are evaluated. Gauchet’s arguments for the renewal of a democratic reformism oriented to collective goals are outlined, while Badiou’s claims for a revival of, what he terms, the ‘communist hypothesis’ are sketched. These two theorists’ respectively endeavour to rethink the praxis philosophy problem of explicating the nexus between the subject and history, but it leads to substantial disagreements in theoretical and political perspectives. This is evident in their different assessments of political forms: Badiou’s conception of communism is found to be internally antithetical and duplicitous. By contrast, Gauchet’s explication of political forms enables him to develop an original interpretation of democracy’s development and democracy’s current crisis. It is argued, nonetheless, that Gauchet overestimates the capacity of the institution of political representation to overcome this crisis. Similarly, while Badiou’s attempted revival of communism is irredeemably inadequate, his assumption that there remain deep-seated problems that are seemingly irresolvable within the capitalist social order is correct. The analysis proposes how the values and ideals of equality and solidarity broadly associated with communism, rather than Badiou’s communist hypothesis, and democratic creativity are relevant to addressing these problems.
