The Crisis Paradigm: the concept of "crisis" and its limits in Lukacs, Koselleck, Arendt and Habermas

Submission note: A thesis submitted in total fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy to the Department of Social Inquiry, School of Humanities and Social Sciences, College of Arts, Social Sciences and Commerce, La Trobe University, Victoria.

“Crisis” has been a recurrent paradigm of political and social discourse since the late 18th century. Recently, crisis-talk has again become almost ubiquitous in the aftermath of the “Global Financial Crisis”, as well as a host of other proclaimed crises (such as the Eurozone crisis, refugee crises, the climate crisis, and so on) affecting the world today. Contemporary academic treatments of crisis can be divided into two broad categories: first, diagnostic and prescriptive interventions which formulate accounts of crisis that mobilize the rhetorical and normative force of crisis semantics in order to further political agendas or social projects, and second, critical interrogations of the concept of crisis itself, its role in social and political discourse, its rhetorical effects and its semantic associations. This thesis falls into the latter category. I examine the paradigm of crisis as it appears in the work of four thinkers—Georg Lukacs, Reinhart Koselleck, Hannah Arendt and Jurgen Habermas; each chosen because they demonstrate an exemplary level of critical reflexivity towards the way crisis is used both within their own work and in the work of others. Through examining these thinkers individually over four chapters, I reconstruct the crisis paradigm as an intellectual and political tradition which operates by disclosing a world wherein there is the possibility of failure. This paradigm is able to put the considerable semantic connotations and cultural resources of crisis to use in coming to diverse insights and placing various demands upon the political and social life of modernity. While this thesis illustrates the aporias and limitations of the crisis paradigm, as well as its potential utility for social control and ideological manipulation, I conclude that despite its shortcomings the crisis paradigm remains a potentially fruitful means for furthering theoretical innovation and facilitating democratic politics.

This thesis was a recipient of the Nancy Millis Award for theses of exceptional merit.