Beyond the Ontological Turn: Affirming the Relative Autonomy of Politics
| DOI | 10.1177/1478929917712933 |
| Published date | 01 November 2017 |
| Date | 01 November 2017 |
| Author | Gulshan Khan |
| Subject Matter | Symposium on The Politics of Poststructuralism Today |
https://doi.org/10.1177/1478929917712933
Political Studies Review
2017, Vol. 15(4) 551 –563
© The Author(s) 2017
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1478929917712933
journals.sagepub.com/home/psrev
Beyond the Ontological
Turn: Affirming the Relative
Autonomy of Politics
Gulshan Khan
Abstract
In this article, I critically evaluate a characteristic tendency that is found across the various traditions
of poststructuralism, both narrowly and more broadly defined. This is an increasing propensity to
be preoccupied with ontological questions and seemingly at the expense of either a refinement of
political concepts or a concrete analysis of forms of power and domination. I consider the reasons
for this development and stress how this characteristic feature of poststructuralism appears to
follow from the very fact of ontological pluralism. What we see in contemporary continental thought
is a proliferation of different traditions, and each side seeks to defend their position in ontological
terms. Following this, I advance the idea of a relative autonomy between ontology and politics, where
the former does not determine the latter in any direct or straightforward fashion. I argue that we
need to stress this relative autonomy to open a little space between ontology and politics, space
where we can return poststructuralism to a more concrete engagement with ‘the political’.
Keywords
ontology, politics, political, relative autonomy, domination
Accepted: 5 April 2017
It is commonly recognised that ‘poststructuralism’ has had wide impact across the human-
ities and social sciences.1 The extent of this has been disproportionate, with disciplines
such as literary criticism, media and cultural studies being altered more extensively by
poststructuralism than political science and international relations, although, as we shall
see, these disciplines have also been influenced to a considerable extent.2 Overall, I wel-
come these developments. However, in this article, I nonetheless feel bound to raise a few
objections about the general direction of poststructuralism. Indeed, I share the observa-
tion, advanced by several commentators,3 that those working with poststructuralism tend
– increasingly it seems – to be preoccupied with questions of ontology, and in my view,
School of Politics and International Relations, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
Corresponding author:
Gulshan Khan, School of Politics and International Relations, University of Nottingham, Law and Social
Sciences Building, University Park, Nottingham NG7 2RD, UK.
Email: gulshan.khan@nottingham.ac.uk
712933PSW0010.1177/1478929917712933Political Studies ReviewKhan
research-article2017
Article
To continue reading
Request your trial