This paper focuses on Habermas's notion of cosmopolitan democracy. Reconfiguring the basic ideas of democracy in postnational terms is inevitable if social and political integration is to succeed on a supranational level. In exploring Habermas's ideas, we draw on Ranciere, whose thought stands in a complex relationship to Habermas. On the one hand, Ranciere largely shares Habermas's diagnosis of the present. Both bemoan the erosion of the political caused by post‐democracy and censure the rise of right‐wing extremism in Western societies. On the other hand, and in contrast to Habermas, Ranciere holds that these problems should be addressed not primarily by strengthening political institutions and reaching a consensus between conflicting parties, but by rethinking conflict and resistance. We show that Habermas's and Ranciere's propositions can be productively brought in dialogue by focusing on the paradigmatic types of political subjectivity involved in their accounts: the citizen (Habermas) and the plebeian (Ranciere)

中文翻译：

---

公民与平民：尤尔根·哈贝马斯 (Jürgen Habermas) 和雅克·朗西埃 (Jacques Rancière) 中的后国家政治人物

本文重点讨论哈贝马斯的世界民主概念。如果社会和政治一体化要在超国家层面上取得成功，就不可避免地要在后国家层面重新配置民主的基本理念。在探索哈贝马斯的思想时，我们借鉴了朗西埃，他的思想与哈贝马斯有着复杂的关系。一方面，朗西埃在很大程度上赞同哈贝马斯对当下的诊断。两者都哀叹后民主造成的政治侵蚀，并谴责西方社会右翼极端主义的兴起。另一方面，与哈贝马斯相反，朗西埃认为，解决这些问题的主要方式不是加强政治制度和在冲突各方之间达成共识，而是重新思考冲突和抵抗。我们证明了哈贝马斯和朗西埃