Liaisons dangereuses:
Alliances, misalliances and false friends



Consensus in a liberal-democratic society is always the expression of a hegemony and the crystallization of power relations. The frontier it establishes between what is legitimate and what it is not is a political one, and therefore contestable. Consensus is only a contingent and temporary hegemonic articulation of the people through a regime of exclusion-inclusion.
Chantal Mouffe


If you can’t be with the one you love love the one you’re with
Stephen Stills


What happens after the emotional and collective climax of the revolt when it comes to reordering the future? When revolution is replaced by a process of negotiating very different social interests? What, then, when the time of uprising is over and now faces a process of supposed normalisation? What negotiations are conducted when, after a phase of collective rebellion, social injustices are unchanged and need to be transformed by newly elected players? How does this transformation take place, the profound change of society when patriarchy, gender and generation relations come under scrutiny? In times of upheaval, how strong are the forces that – for want of alternative structures and models, among other things – necessarily fall back on supposedly well-established systems, running the risk of reproducing existing power structures? Although these questions refer to the situation of the world at large, they are just as relevant when we take a look closer to home, concerning, as they do, the fundamental questions of political, social and private action: what alliances, old boy networks, coalitions, compromises are entered into in order to carry through visions and goals?

In 2013 again, steirischer herbst will continue on its familiar tack through the web of art, politics and society, asking questions as to (relational) systems undergoing change and the vicissitudes of power. For the “gravity of relations” can be observed nowhere as clearly as in people’s relationships with themselves, with others, with their work, the public, and criticism of the same, as well as in the coalitions, misalliances, compromises, pacts and elective affinities that they enter into. What alliances do we seek and with what goal? But Liaisons Dangereuses are also unions that are aware of the potential of the moment, that are passionate and explosive, destructive and potent. Fragile relationships not made for eternity. Unions full of emotion that comprise forms of love, hatred, religious, moral and political enthusiasm, forged in the dynamic context of social norms and ethics.

At the same time, Liaisons Dangereuses can be conceived very differently – as strategic alliances of very different social and political forces, as dangerous coalitions founded on reason, as a balancing act between strategy and realpolitik and collective utopias. Belgian political scientist Chantal Mouffe, for example, argues against the possibility of a universal rational consensus and in favour of the antagonistic nature of politics. In her critical analysis of the current situation of western democracies, in this sense Mouffe describes consensus and the principle of coalition, that have long been the maxim of European politics, as a source of danger for democracy, as it levels down social differences, sacrificing them to the consensus of the major parties, and thus rendering themno longer visible and negotiable. Seen like this, consensus would be a species of a political liaison dangereuse which, once contracted for supposedly good reasons, has now become a danger for political coexistence as a result of lethargy and inflexibility (thus paving the way ipso facto for a radicalisation of a society’s antagonisms).

But what if we begin to lose sight of the other party, if it becomes increasingly unclear how our private lives, work, and politics actually blend into one? If we can no longer tell how “marriages of convenience”, alliances and coalitions which we enter into for what is perceived to be a “good cause” turn against themselves? What scales and disparities are reflected in old boy networks, “forced marriages” of all kinds? What capital is created by and in these unions? And what if the line between coalition and corruption gets thinner and thinner?

But what are the opportunities and the emancipatory potential of alliances? Is the yearning for relevance and the ability to act actually practicable in everyday dealings? Are collective movements fed by individual crises, and vice versa? As always, it is more questions than answers that move us. While the foregoing steirischer herbst was a group photo and a long shot, in 2013 it will focus on close-ups: views of relational systems in motion.

wukonig.com