Pluralism and Dissident Narratives in the Latin American Public Sphere

Abstract

This article argues that the concept of the ‘public sphere’ is fundamental to understand the present possibilities of democratization that emerge from the interventions of social movements in Latin America. In particular, it proposes that the most adequate model of the public sphere in this regards is that of the ‘counter-public spheres.’ This model, I argue, is superior to the bourgeois model, as well as to the ‘plebeian’ and ‘proletarian’ alternatives, insofar as it is the one that better allows to assess the contributions and transformative potential of the aforementioned movements. In a first step, I point out the weaknesses of the alternative models. Then, I argue that the model of the ‘bourgeois public sphere,’ developed by Habermas 1) is not able to account for the pluralism and multiculturalism that characterize contemporary Latin American societies; and 2) does not allow to comprehend the value of phenomena such as cultural consumption, the discussion of cultural objects, the narrative/poetic uses of language, or aesthetic modes of expression. This is problematic, given that these phenomena are constitutive of the Latin American context and play a fundamental role in the construction and forms of expression of a diversity of counter-hegemonic groups in the region. Finally—relying on the work of Negt and Kluge, Fraser, and on some feminist contributions—the model of the ‘counter-public spheres’ is shown to be more adequate to apprehend the characteristics of the region’s public space. First, because it is based in a more comprehensive idea of ‘universalism,’ one that is sensitive to social and cultural difference. Second, because, counter to the argumentative bias of Habermas’ model, the counter-public spheres model allows to understand the rational and democratic contributions of alternative forms of expression, representation, and social interaction.