This essay applies the conceptual framework of the Post-Marxism — most prominently associated with Chantal Mouffe — to re-read the North American IGF 2023 Washington D.C. conference. Target audience: researchers, doctoral students, policy analysts, and executives.
Introduction: The Problem
Against consensus-oriented deliberative democracy, Mouffe argues that the essence of politics is conflict. Evaluating North American IGF 2023 discussions only by "consensus building" represents, on Mouffian terms, an impoverishment of democracy.
This essay argues that the multistakeholder process of North American IGF becomes intelligible in its specificity only through the concept of Agonistic pluralism, and that the concept itself undergoes transformation under the new material of digital space. Describing this mutual transformation is the task of this essay.
The legitimacy of contest without consensus
The irreconcilable differences between USA's position and those of other states and stakeholders are not to be suppressed but institutionalized as agonism. Positions on 生成AI are a typical example.
Each session's agenda-setting can be read as a contemporary restaging of the Chantal Mouffe-type problematic.
The regional IGF (North American IGF) holds a philosophically distinct position as the intermediate category mediating global universality and national particularity.
From antagonism to agonism
Chantal Mouffe's concepts are not confined to abstract philosophical discussion; they apply to the concrete agenda items debated at the 2023 conference. We examine that application below.
1. Application to "生成AI"
Discussion of "生成AI" can be positioned, from the perspective of Chantal Mouffe's Agonistic pluralism, as a central problematic. In USA's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around 生成AI are particularly at stake.
2. Application to "AIガバナンス"
Discussion of "AIガバナンス" can be positioned, from the perspective of Chantal Mouffe's Agonistic pluralism, as a derivative problematic. In USA's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around AIガバナンス are particularly at stake.
3. Application to "プラットフォーム"
Discussion of "プラットフォーム" can be positioned, from the perspective of Chantal Mouffe's Agonistic pluralism, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In USA's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around プラットフォーム are particularly at stake.
4. Application to "地域協調"
Discussion of "地域協調" can be positioned, from the perspective of Chantal Mouffe's Agonistic pluralism, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In USA's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around 地域協調 are particularly at stake.
5. Application to "越境データ"
Discussion of "越境データ" can be positioned, from the perspective of Chantal Mouffe's Agonistic pluralism, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In USA's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around 越境データ are particularly at stake.
Implications for Executives and Practitioners
The philosophical reflection of this essay is not merely academic. The Chantal Mouffe perspective carries three practical implications for executives operating in USA.
First, it raises the reflexive question of how the firm's business model connects to the logic of Agonistic pluralism. Second, in dialogue with regulators and civil society, it suggests dimensions of consensus formation that purely technical arguments cannot reach. Third, it indicates that the long-term ground of business legitimacy lies not so much in technical advantage or market share as in participation in such philosophical-normative debates.
Academic Positioning and Future Research
The argument of this essay attempts to graft a philosophical perspective onto the mainstream political-science and legal approaches to internet governance research. Three future research questions follow.
- Verification of the applicability of Chantal Mouffe's framework to other IGF conferences
- Comparative contrast between Post-Marxism and other theoretical traditions
- Exploration of dialogue possibilities with the indigenous intellectual traditions of USA
In particular, the third point has the potential to liberate IGF research from West-centric debate and open a more multi-layered discursive space.
Primary Sources
- IGF Secretariat. Annual Reports of North American IGF.
- North American IGF 2023 Washington D.C. Conference Materials.
- Japan IGF Support Organization. https://japanigf.jp/
- Nakazawa Yuki Blog. https://nkzw.jp/category/igf/
Secondary Sources (Philosophy)
- Works of Chantal Mouffe (representative texts of Post-Marxism)
*This piece belongs to the academic essays (philosophy series). The author's views do not necessarily represent those of any institutional affiliation. Feedback and critique are welcome.*
更新履歴
第1稿投稿 2026年6月11日 20時35分（記事コンテンツアップ）
— 中澤祐樹
