anil-sukumar-XdmR6L9C0hc-unsplash (1).jpg — Photo by anil sukumar on Unsplash

Shauna Robertson, of the University of Bath, UK, offers a simple introduction to the notion of ‘agonistic' memory’ , which is central to the DisTerrMem project. In international relations, how might an ‘agonistic’ approach to people’s memories of past disputes help nations and communities to move beyond ongoing cycles of violent conflict?

Memory studies in politics and international relations

People’s memories of the past play a key role in framing the current identities and viewpoints of nation states, communities and cultures. This, in turn, affects the potential for political democracy, international dialogue and transitions away from violent conflict.

Memory studies research looks at how the past is remembered or represented in the present, and how this shapes politics, national identity and international relations.

In post-conflict societies, memory can be key to making reconciliation possible and sustainable, but it equally has the capacity to exacerbate tensions. The DisTerrMem project is specifically concerned with how memories of past conflict can best support mutual understanding, respect and peacekeeping going forward.

Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe, Berlin

Antagonistic versus cosmopolitan memory

In recent years, research has explored the different modes in which we remember the past. An influential body of work has distinguished between two key approaches: antagonistic and cosmopolitan memory.

Antagonistic memory represents the past as a moral struggle between ‘us’ and ‘them’, where ‘the other’ is an enemy to be destroyed. Antagonistic memories can perpetuate feelings of hostility across generations, explaining the persistent nature of many conflicts.

Cosmopolitan memory represents the past as a moral struggle between abstract ideals or systems (such as democracy versus dictatorship), reaching out to ‘the other’ as fellow human beings and sufferers of evil. The cosmopolitan approach is often proposed as the best way to deal with a traumatic past, using storytelling and sites of remembrance to focus on ‘recasting social memory as a peace strategy’. However, this often relies on imposing a single overarching narrative of the past which may not be equally welcomed or embraced by all parties, which in turn can lead to a resurgence of antagonism. It has, nevertheless, been the dominant memory mode adopted by the European Union to create a shared sense of identity post-World War 2.

A third way: agonism

In 2016, Anna Cento Bull and Hans Lauge Hansen argued that the cosmopolitan approach to memory has provided fertile ground for populist neo-nationalist movements to emerge across Europe, and so it cannot be considered an effective alternative to the antagonistic mode.

Drawing on research undertaken as part of the EU-funded UNREST project, and on the work of Belgian political theorist Chantal Mouffe, they proposed a third mode: an agonistic approach to memory.

In agonism, conflict is seen as a necessary, or even desirable, feature of democratic politics. However, the nature of that conflict distinguishes it from the antagonistic approach.

Chantal Mouffe’s ‘agonistic pluralism’

Chantal Mouffe is the author of several influential works on agonistic political theory, including Agonistics: Thinking the World Politically (2013), The Democratic Paradox (2009) and On the Political (2005). At the centre of Mouffe’s work is the question, how should democratic politics deal with conflict?

Mouffe argues that political conflict in our society is inevitable, and the results are often far from negative. She asserts that a genuinely pluralistic, or diverse, society must allow for different positions that are fundamentally incompatible with one another. Moreover, conflict in democratic societies cannot and should not be eradicated since a defining feature of modern democracy is precisely the recognition and legitimisation of conflict.

Mouffe emphasizes, however, that democratic conflict should not involve seeing others as enemies to be destroyed, but rather as adversaries whose ideas may be fought, even fiercely, but whose right to exist and to defend those ideas should never be called into question. Mouffe called this kind of respectful conflict ‘agonistic pluralism’.

Agonistic memory

In their 2016 article, On Agonistic Memory, Anna Cento Bull and Hans Lauge Hansen applied Chantal Mouffe’s thinking to the field of memory studies.

In contrast to the antagonistic and cosmopolitan modes, agonistic memory represents the past as a socio-political struggle for dominance in which ‘the other’ is seen as an adversary rather than an enemy. It aims to bridge the divide between different viewpoints by allowing for the possibility of conflict without fixing the lines between friends and foes.

The agonistic approach rejects the desirability of developing a single overarching narrative of the past. Instead, it strives to acknowledge, and to work through, a variety of contrasting memories of the past. It promotes a radical approach allowing for multiple perspectives and is open to a dialogue with ‘the other’, a dialogue which it sees in open-ended terms without assuming it can lead to consensus.

An agonistic approach also incorporates the perspectives of perpetrators of conflict and violence, not to legitimize their actions but in order to understand the historical and socio-political contexts and passions that led to those actions. At the same time, it actively explores the contexts and passions that foster democratic institutions and processes, considering how these are culturally constructed and how they can be transformed.

This approach therefore invites us to explore the potential for transforming antagonism into agonism (in post-conflict societies), and for preventing the rise of antagonism (in democratic societies), by acknowledging and promoting different and conflicting perspectives on the past.

Agonistic memory: a brief introduction

Further reading

Chantal Mouffe’s agonistic pluralism

Agonistic memory: introductory articles

Agonistic memory: case studies