ABSTRACT (İngilizce Özetler)

Politics and performative act: A critical contribution to Laclau’s theory of politics/populism through Mahir Çayan and Devrimci Yol
MEHMET SÜREYYA KARAKURT
In On Populist Reason, Ernesto Laclau attempts to define politics on a “post-foundational” basis, and in this respect, the work can be considered groundbreaking. It differs from traditional rationalist approaches in that it treats society not as a closed whole, but as a hegemonic construction that can never be fully closed. “Difference”, “equivalence”, and “antagonism” are the fundamental conceptual tools of his approach. Every hegemonic construction transforms the elements it incorporates into (legitimate) differences or components of social functioning. Those who cannot be incorporated, however, form an “equivalential chain” in opposition to the structure. Laclau defines antagonism as the emergence of such a split within society. According to him, the construction of a group occurs when an element within this equivalential chain comes to represent the totality of the chain. Since this representation is not based on a rational foundation, Laclau characterizes it as “symbolic” and explains the construction of this representation as the effect of the element’s transformation into an “empty signifier” or mere “naming.” However, he adds that affect plays a fundamental role in this construction: representation is a “radical investment” in this element. According to him, affective attachment and radical investment are effects of the pleasure experienced through this element. My text focuses primarily on this final point. After highlighting the problems in Laclau’s argumentation, it argues, with reference to the political experience of Devrimci Yol in the 1970s, that Laclau’s theory can be complemented by a theory of performative act. It attempts to substantiate this thesis by drawing on Sigmund Freud’s concepts of pleasure and displeasure, as well as his accounts of the infant – mother relationship.
Keywords: Populism, Ernesto Laclau, hegemony, antagonism, equivalence, performative act, left.

Populism and the populist mechanisms of hegemonic strategies
POLAT S. ALPMAN
This article discusses the limitations of ideological, discursive, political-strategic, and performative-style approaches in the literature on populism and argues that rightwing populism should be analyzed in relation to class relations, state forms, and dynamics of structural crisis. Within this framework, it maintains that right-wing populism operates through three basic mechanisms: selective redistribution, symbolic antagonism, and authoritarian state intervention. The comparative analysis developed through the experiences of Fidesz in Hungary, Bolsonaro in Brazil, and the AKP in Turkey shows that these mechanisms acquire different weights in different social formations. Symbolic antagonism comes to the fore in Hungary, authoritarian state intervention in Brazil, and the simultaneous articulation of all three mechanisms in Turkey. Through these comparisons, the article argues that right-wing populism does not abolish neoliberalism; on the contrary, by managing the social tensions, inequalities, and crisis dynamics generated by the neoliberal accumulation regime through specific political and ideological channels, it contributes to the political reproduction of this regime under conditions of crisis. In this sense, right-wing populism is not a temporary deviation external to capitalist democracies, but one of the specific political forms these democracies assume under conditions of crisis of representation, class dislocation, and loss of hegemony. While encompassing the categories of ideology, discourse, strategy, and style, the article proposes a relational analytical framework that examines these dimensions together within the processes of neoliberal crisis, class relations, state intervention, and hegemonic reproduction.
Keywords: Populism, hegemonic reproduction, selective redistribution, symbolic antagonism, authoritarian state intervention.

The theoretical and political legacy of Jürgen Habermas
VOLKAN ÇIDAM
This article examines the intellectual legacy of Jürgen Habermas in the context of his place within the tradition of Critical Theory and his public interventions. It first discusses Habermas’s role as a public intellectual in the political culture of postwar West Germany and analyzes the major political debates in which he intervened. For Habermas, the central intellectual concern behind these public debates was the question of how to prevent the recurrence of National Socialist barbarism. His engagement with the debates on politics of memory and democratic theory can be best understood within this intellectual/historical context. The second part of the article evaluates Habermas’s attempt to reconstruct Critical Theory through his theory of communicative action. His model of deliberative democracy builds on the theoretical framework; he first developed in his theory of communicative action. Contrary to common assumptions, the model of deliberative democracy does
not seek to replace social struggles and political conflicts with deliberation; on the contrary, social struggles occupy a central place in Habermas’s theory of democracy. The central argument of the article is that to fully comprehend the radical quality of Habermas’s wholistic social and political theory, it is necessary to situate his work within the framework of Critical Theory, whose aim is the emancipation of society and the individual.
Keywords: Jürgen Habermas, critical theory, theory of communicative action, deliberative democracy, public sphere, politics of memory.

The abstract analysis of the concrete situation: A discussion on Carl Schmitt
SERDAR TEKİN
In the face of an existential threat, the law becomes null and void, and political decision-makers may act as they see fit to cope with the situation at hand – this idea is widely endorsed by state actors today, whether they admit it or not. Their ideologues defend it in direct and indirect ways, justifying various practices of oppression and domination. In this essay, I explore how Carl Schmitt theoretically elaborated on this idea. I argue that, in doing so, he developed a specific mode of thinking that I call the “abstract analysis of the concrete situation.” Through a close reading of Schmitt’s early texts, the essay aims to subject this mode of thinking to critical scrutiny.
Keywords: Carl Schmitt, dictatorship, state of emergency, sovereignty, legitimacy.

Men’s language and women’s silence: An autoethnographic study of mansplaining in everyday life
GÜL ESVET ERSOY
The concept of mansplaining, derived from the combination of the words “man” and “explaining,” makes visible the gender-based practices of explanation and interruption that women have experienced for years but have only recently been able to name. This article treats mansplaining not merely as a rude form of communication, but as a structural barrier to women’s participation in knowledge production and public debate. Based on a subset of qualitative research conducted
within the scope of a doctoral thesis, the study analyses narratives selected from in-depth interviews with 30 women and 20 men, along with correspondence from a WhatsApp group of university graduates, metaphorically defined as the “Virtual Lecture Hall”, through an autoethnographic lens. Findings indicate that men push women’s expertise out of the discussion by emotionalizing it through discourses of “naivety,” “romanticism,” and “good intentions,” while harsh and dismissive argumentative styles trigger strategies of “disengagement” and withdrawal among women. When these performances are read alongside concepts such as epistemic injustice and self-silencing, it is observed that mansplaining erodes both individual
self-esteem and women’s sense of political efficacy in collective decision-making processes. The study argues that naming mansplaining provides women with an opportunity for “pause and intervention,” yet emphasizes that permanent transformation requires structural interventions beyond individual awareness.
Keywords: Mansplaining, epistemic injustice.