Structural Domination

Abstract

This panel will examine the coherence and the desirability of the concept of ‘structural domination’. As republicanism matures as a revived political theory attention is being increasingly given to this concept. Structural domination appears attractive to radical-orientated republicans as it offers a way to connect the republican aim of a society governed by civic equals with the critique of some of most intractable forms of power which create un-freedom and undermine or prevent the manifestation of this status in contemporary societies – for example the power maintained by capitalist economies, or race, class and gender norms. Those who advocate the coherence and desirability of the concept of structural domination argue that power which can be established on an arbitrary basis does not necessarily have to be maintained in interpersonal relationships between agents. Advocates this concept argue domination can also be a non-personal structural relationship, maintained by institutions not exerting a particular will, or by certain social and cultural norms, which also are not the product of identifiable agents’ or institutions’ will. This panel will examine whether structural domination is a coherent concept. It will ask if it shares enough conceptual grammar with interpersonal domination for it to be seen as a species of domination or if structural forms of un-freedom should be kept distinct either in terms of the un-freedom characterised by positive liberty or using the concept of oppression. The panel will also examine the normative potential and possible areas of political critique the concept of structural domination can provide republican thought. The panel will determine whether republicanism has sufficient radical credentials to diagnose political, economic, and social un-freedom without the concept of structural domination.