A Philosophical Reading of Jacques Rancière through the Political Freedom of Democracy Enlightenment

Artha Debora Silalahi; Suandi Silalahi

doi:10.22146/jsp.87636

A Philosophical Reading of Jacques Rancière through the Political Freedom of Democracy Enlightenment

https://doi.org/10.22146/jsp.87636

Artha Debora Silalahi^(1*), Suandi Silalahi⁽²⁾

(1) Faculty of Philosophy, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia
(2) Universitas Bina Bangsa, Indonesia
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract

This paper explores Jacques Rancière’s philosophical perspective on democracy, focusing on how his ideas challenge conventional understandings of political freedom and democratic order. Rather than viewing democracy as a fixed system with clear rules and outcomes, Rancière presents it as an ongoing, often disruptive process rooted in the assertion of political will. Through a critical-philosophical approach, this paper examines how Rancière’s thought sheds light on the tensions between law, political participation, and individual autonomy. It argues that democracy, for Rancière, is defined not by institutional structures but by the continuous struggle over who gets to speak, act, and be recognised in the political space. This reading reveals the unresolved and fragile nature of democratic life, where freedom and order are in constant negotiation. By situating Rancière within broader debates on political theory and democratic practice, the paper highlights how his critique opens new ways of thinking about the ethical and political challenges of contemporary democracy. In doing so, it also raises questions about how democratic ideals from the past can still hold value in addressing present-day issues, even as their meanings evolve. Ultimately, the paper argues that Rancière’s view encourages a more dynamic and inclusive understanding of democracy—one that remains open to rethinking and renewal.

Keywords

democracy; Jacques Rancière; political act; political freedom; political will

Full Text:

PDF

References

Agazzi, E. (2014). Scientific objectivity and its contexts. In Scientific Objectivity and its Contexts (Vol. 9783319046600). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04660-0

Albert, R., & Y. R. (2020). Constitutionalism Under Extreme Conditions: Law, Emergency, Exception. Springer International Publishing.

Arifuddin, M. T. (2016). Why Political Parties Colonize the Media in Indonesia: An Exploration of Mediatization. Jurnal Ilmu Sosial Dan Ilmu Politik , 20(1), 16–33.

Azwar, & Achmat, S. (2022). Does Democracy Reduce Corruption in Indonesia? Jurnal Ilmu Sosial Dan Ilmu Politik , 25(3), 195–208.

Barret, W. & H. D. A. (1962). Philosophy in the Twentieth Century Volume One. Harper & Row Publisher.

Bello, P. C. (2012). The Controversy about the Essence of Law: A Dispute between Hart and Dworkin. Indonesia Law Review, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.15742/ilrev.v2n1.11

Bloom, H. (1980). Deconstruction and criticism. Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Christie, G. C. (1969). Objectivity in the Law. In Source: The Yale Law Journal (Vol. 78, Issue 8). https://www.jstor.org/stable/795234

C.W, M. & F. C. L. M. J. (2011). Law, Order, and Freedom: A Historical Introduction to Legal Philosophy.

Davy, U. (2023). Decolonizing Equality: The Legacies of Anti-Colonial Struggles at International Labour Conferences 1920-1940. Human Rights Law Review, 23, 1–25.

Diamond, L. (2021). Democratic regression in comparative perspective: scope, methods, and causes. Democratization, 28(1), 22–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2020.1807517

Eriyanti, L. D., Makmur, H. M., & Intansari, D. A. (2022). Indonesia’s Political Position on the Protection Policy of Migrant Workers in ASEAN. Jurnal Ilmu Sosial Dan Ilmu Politik, 26(1).

Essink, J. A. Q. & J. T. (2023). The Indivisibility of Human Rights: An Empirical Analysis. Human Rights Law Review, 23, 1–18.

Fajardo, C. (2022). Jacques Rancière: Aesthetics, Time, Politics. Journal of Aesthetics & Culture, 14(1).

Goff, B. and M. L. (2016). Introduction: The Legacy of Greek Political Thought. Classical Receptions Journal, 1–10.

Habermas, J. (2012). The Crisis of the European Union in Light of the Constitutionalization of International Law. European Journal of International Law, 23(2), 335–348.

Höffe Otfried. (2001). Kant’s Cosmopolitan Theory of Law and Peace. Translated by Alexandra Newton. Cambridge University Press.

Kelz, R. (2019). Thinking about future/democracy: towards a political theory of futurity. Sustainability Science, 14(4), 905–913. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-019-00697-6

Knadler, S. (2011). Democracy hesitant: Sociological knowledge production, policy, and the public sphere. American Literary History, 23(1), 135–147. https://doi.org/10.1093/alh/ajq082

Kochi, T. (2017). Dreams and Nightmares of Liberal International Law: Capitalist Accumulation, Natural Rights, and State Hegemony. Law Critique, 28, 23–41.

L. Hyland, J. (1995). Democratic Theory: The Philosophical Foundations. Manchester University Press.

Lon L. Fuller. (1969). The Morality of Law, Rev. Ed. Yale University Press.

May, T. (2010). Review Book Dissensus: On Politics and Aesthetics. Continuum Publishing.

Molnar, A. & I. W. (2020). Governing Liberty through Accountability: Surveillance Reporting as Technologies of Governmentality. Critical Criminology, 28, 13–26.

Nickel, J. W. (1987). Making Sense of Human Rights: Philosophical Reflections on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. University of California Press.

O’Donnell, G. (1999). Democratic Theory and Comparative Politics. Kellog Institute for International Studies.

Pogge, T. (2008). World Poverty and Human Rights: Cosmopolitan Responsibilities and Reforms. Polity Press.

Power, T., & Warburton, E. (2020). The decline of Indonesian democracy. Democracy in Indonesia: From Stagnation to Regression? 1–20.

Rancière, J. (2009). A Few Remarks on the Method of Jacques Rancière. Parallax, 15(3), 114–123.

Rancière, J. (2010). Dissensus: On Politics and Aesthethics. Continuum.

Rawls, J. (1999). A Theory of Justice: Revised Edition. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Raz, J. (1988). The Morality of Freedom. In The Morality of Freedom. Oxford University PressOxford. https://doi.org/10.1093/0198248075.001.0001

Raz, J. (1979). The authority of lassw : essays on law and morality. Clarendon Press.

Raz, J. (2009). Between authority and interpretation: on the theory of law and practical reason. Oxford University Press.

Silalahi, A. D. (2024a). Comprehending the Epistemic Examination of the Final and Binding Principles in Indonesia’s Constitutional Court. Yustisia Tirtayasa Jurnal Tugas Akhir, 4(4), 39–55.

Silalahi, A. D., Mustansyir, R., Tjahyadi, S., Maharani, S. D. (2024b). Axiological Insights into Unveiling Independent Constitutional Judge Decisionism. Yustisia Jurnal Hukum, 13(3), 230–245.

Stone, A. (2022). Rights, Personal Rights and Freedoms: The Nature of The Freedom of Political Communication.

Sudibyo, A. (2019). Demokrasi dan Kedaruratan: Memahami Filsafat Politik Giorgio Agamben. CV Marjin Kiri.

Toulmin, S. (1976). Knowing and Acting: An Invitation to Philosophy. Macmillan Publishing.

Tucker, C. J. (1971). Value Judgement and Social Science: Structures and Processes. American Sociological Review, 36(1).

Utami, P. (2018). Hoax in Modern Politics: The Meaning of Hoax in Indonesia Politics and Democracy. Jurnal Ilmu Sosial Dan Ilmu Politik, 22(2), 85–97.

Widaningrum, A. (2017). Public Trust and Regulatory Compliance. Jurnal Ilmu Sosial Dan Ilmu Politik, 21(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.22146/jsp.28679

Wodajo, K. (2023). The User State: An Alternative Reading of The State Role and Duty in the Age of Platformized Harm. International Journal of Law and Information Technology, 1–21.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.22146/jsp.87636