{"id":243,"date":"2008-09-01T22:49:11","date_gmt":"2008-09-02T02:49:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/?p=243"},"modified":"2011-11-05T22:00:18","modified_gmt":"2011-11-06T03:00:18","slug":"logic-of-equivalence","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/2008\/09\/01\/logic-of-equivalence\/","title":{"rendered":"Logic of Equivalence, Logic of Difference"},"content":{"rendered":"

The logic of equivalence involves the simplification of signifying space, the logic of difference involves its expansion and complexification (citing LM 144).<\/p>\n

The political <\/em>logics of equivalence and difference (furnish) us with a conceptual grammar with which to account for the dynamics<\/em>of social change.\u00a0 They help show how social practices and regimes are contested, transformed, and instituted, thereby extending our grammar beyond social logics (145).<\/p>\n

Logic of Equivalence (LOE) and Logic of Difference (LOD)<\/span><\/h4>\n

–\u00a0 LOE (associative), captures the substitutive<\/em> aspect of the relation by making reference to an ‘us-them’ axis: two or more elements can be substituted for each other with reference to a common negation or threat.\u00a0 They are equivalent not insofar as they share a positive property (though empirically they may share something in common), but, crucially, insofar as they have a common enemy<\/span> … Entails the construction and privileging of antagonistic relations<\/strong>, which means that the dimension of difference on each side of the frontier is weakened, whether differences are understood as a function of demands or identities.\u00a0 For instance, a national liberation struggle against an occupying colonial power will typically attempt to cancel out the particular differences of class, ethnicity, region, or religion in the name of a more universal nationalism that can serve as a common reference point for all the oppressed; indeed, its identity may be virtually exhausted in its opposition to the oppressive regime.\u00a0 By contrast the LOD draws on other discourses in an attempt to break down these chains of equivalence<\/strong>.\u00a0 The age-old practice of ‘divide-and-rule’, for instance in which an occupying power seeks to separate ethnic or national groups into particular communities or indirect systems of rule, is invariably designed to prevent the articulation of demands and identities into a generalized challenge to the dominant regime (145).<\/p>\n

– LOD (syntagmatic), captures the combinatory<\/em> or contiguous aspect of the relation, which accounts not simply for differences in identity among elements, but also for keeping elements distinct, separate, and autonomous.\u00a0 Both dimensions are always present in the sense that each presupposes the other.<\/p>\n

LOE and LOD thus emphasize the dynamic process by which political frontiers are constructed, stabilized, strengthened , or weakened.\u00a0 They elucidate the way one or another dimension acquires greater or lesser significance, even while each presupposes the other. (citing Laclau 2005, 79) (144).<\/p>\n

In sum<\/span>, the political <\/em><\/strong>logics of equivalence and difference comprise a descriptive framing device which is derived from a particular understanding of discourse and the importance accorded to processes of signification.\u00a0 They enhance our approach to social science explanation by furnishing us with a conceptual grammar with which to account for the dynamics of social change.\u00a0 They help show how social practices and regimes are contested, transformed, and instituted, thereby extending our grammar beyond social logics (145).<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Thatcher Regime<\/span><\/p>\n

LOE<\/span><\/strong> was mobilized to shift terrain away from the post-war consensus<\/p>\n

range of diverse demands were linked together into a project that publicly contested the failing Keynesian welfare state project.<\/p>\n

linked together demands for<\/p>\n