1 What is Hegemony?

      Hegemony describes a form of societal leadership whereby those under its influence give assent to domination by a particular group, class, or state. It is used to analyse the informal recognition achieved by certain agents, ideas or arrangements beyond any official status they might claim. Being ‘hegemonic’ is not merely to occupy power, it is to benefit from widespread acceptance of one’s right to rule. In modern political theory, power is usually discussed with reference to particular concepts and principles – for example, authority, legitimacy, rights, and so on – that formally establish and limit it. Hegemony, however, focuses more on actions and processes than principles. It suggests that, fundamentally, relations of power and domination are precarious and endure only by an active ingredient that ‘leads’ by projecting a unifying purpose and direction.

In recent political theory, hegemony has been something of a ‘dissident’ concept, employed to expose and challenge, rather than justify, power relations. It is a favoured term of radical critics opposed to dominant social structures and unquestioned beliefs. Focusing on leadership puts the onus on the strategies and techniques by which some agent seeks to transform rivals and opponents into supporters. More than just a description of bare power, then, hegemony invites enquiry into unacknowledged conditions – the social alliances and cultural resources of leadership – that help to institute power relations and make them acceptable, perhaps even desirable. That enquiry is usually undertaken with an understanding that the grip of such leadership can be weakened and domination can be dismantled. Hegemony can also name the objective of those who resist power and seek an alternative, fairer or emancipated, society.

      This book introduces some of the notable ways in which hegemony has been used in political theory to analyse power relations and to imagine their transformation. These include reflections on revolutionary strategy, examinations of the capitalist state and its cultural underpinnings, Post-Marxist arguments about ‘discourse’ and radical democracy, and analyses of world order. In addition to surveying theories, however, it draws attention to important differences in the perceived scope, application, and implications of the concept. Hegemony has been regularly reinvented, refreshed, and reapplied in new contexts. In the process, new formulations emerge, as do questions and conflicts about what type of enquiry it is and to what ends it might be employed.

      In tracing the evolution of hegemony as a form of critical enquiry, I underline its role in helping us to ask questions about the conditions of power and domination. More than simply providing answers, hegemony challenges us to reflect on how people are implicated in structures of domination and how they might realistically challenge them. So, before sketching the content of the chapters that follow, let me return to the basic analytical issues that underpin hegemony.

Domination as Leadership?

The underlying implication of hegemony is a paradoxical notion: namely, that domination can be experienced as leadership – that is, as a situation to which people give approval despite their apparent subordination. But how can this be so? Usually, domination describes an imbalance of power in which people are subject to a rule that constrains their choices without their express agreement. Of course, domination need not always be ‘direct’ (imposed on us personally) or exercised by one group or individual alone: states, economic systems, and social arrangements generally entail structures of domination. But what does it