Cultural hegemony, or "cultural leadership", "leadership", its Greek and Latin are Egemon and Egemonia, respectively. Raymond Williams In "Keywords), Raywords (Keywords) examined the generation and development of" cultural hegemony "from the perspective of the phrase source. Williams pointed out that the word of cultural hegemony was originally from Greek, refers to the rulers from other countries. After the nineteenth century, it was widely used to refer to the political domination or control of another country. In the Galanxi Hand, this term has a new meaning, which is used to describe the dominance relationship between the various classes of society. However, this dominance or ruling relationship is not limited to direct political control, but attempts to become a more universal domination, including specific viewing world, human characteristics and relationships. As a result, leadership is not only expressing the interests of the ruling class, but also penetrates into the public's consciousness, which is accepted from the class or the public or "common sense".
According to Peli Anderson's research, the concept of cultural leadership is from Pleuhanov in 183 and 1884 As part of the strategy of overthrowing the Trien system, it is first proposed, involving the proletariat in the joint other groups, such as bourgeoisie, farmers, and intellectuals who want to overthrow Tria. Later, Lenin is "What should I do? "In the two strategies of the Social Democrats in the Democratic Revolution," cultural leadership "is used to use the concept of" cultural leaders ", pointing out that there is not to avoid the bourgeois revolution, do not hand over the leadership of the revolution to the bourgeoisie, should be both With the identity of theoretist, the identity of the propagandist is both in the identity of the people, and the organization of the organizers "to the all class" of the residents ", leading the society to strive to overthrow the victory of the Tsar rule. Emphasis on publicity participation of the public, also emphasized that he did not give up the leadership of the bourgeois revolution. Lenin's awareness has played an important role in the evolution of cultural hegemony. However, only Grani, cultural hegemony truly as a concept, and formed the most affected cultural hegemony theory of Granssi.
In "Southern Southern Problem", Glacesi first explicitly uses the concept of "cultural hegemony". Later, in the letter written in the "Jailing Notes", Glavi is clearly distinguished from "rule" (suppression) and "leaders", emphasizing such a side of cultural hegemony: the general agreement The way. Gerazzi pointed out that a social group must also begin to exercise "leadership" before winning the regime, this is one of the first conditions for winning the regime; when it exercises the regime, it will eventually become the ruler, but it is firm Mastering the political power must continue the "leadership" in the past. Granxi made a detailed investigation of Western capitalist society, divided into the upper building of capitalist society into "civil society" and "political society" or country. Civil society consists of political parties, trade unions, churches, schools, academic cultural groups, and various news media, and political society or country is composed of violent institutions such as military and prison. Gerazzi pointed out that Western capitalist society, especially advanced capitalist society, and its rule is no longer vary of violence, but through propaganda, through its leadership in morality and spirit, Let the vast people accept their series of legal systems or worldviews to achieve their utmost purposes, this is the "cultural hegemony" that Grani said.
The primary of the cultural hegemony is not a problem that competes for the "leadership", but a problem for the "right", it is whether your leaders can be accepted, can you Legalized problem. Therefore, the rule of ruling class or the rule of the group must obtain the legal power of the rule, it is necessary to obtain the voluntary agreement of the rule of the rule, not by pressing or violence. But to win the public's consent is not a simple thing, this will inevitably need the negotiations between the two sides, and there is a problem with the negotiation or compromise, which is not a party for the other side. Simple infusion and implications are the results of both parties negotiations or negotiations. In this way, cultural hegemony is given to us is not a static or static ruling mode, but a dynamic rule, everything is in progress, a changing dynamic balance between rule and resistance Or, such as the "balance in the movement" of Granxi.
So, how can the ruling class or group win the consent of the people who are ruled by the people? Garandi pointed out that the rule group must win the consent of the public, and it must have certain conditions. This is to transcend its economic limitations. From the economic community stage, the economic cooperation phase has been transitioned to "the purest political stage", That is, the cultural hegemony phase. At this stage, from the previous social group or "political parties" confrontation and conflict in this confrontation and conflict, and finally cause a series of basic social groups The leadership of the social group has brought the consistency of the entire socio-economic and political goals, but also causes the unity of spirit and morality, although this is only temporary.
For Granssi, although cultural hegemony needs to transcend economic stages, it reflects a spiritual and moral rule, but this does not mean to abandon the economic foundation, even with economic foundation. . Cultural hegemony must also belong to economic categories, which must be based on the decisive functions implemented by the leading group in the fundamental center of economic activities. Therefore, in this sense, cultural hegemony is a comprehensive ruling project, both a culture or political issue, and an economic issue.
In the competition of leadership, Granxi believes that this is a long-term and complex project. In his words, it is a "position battle". In this, intellectuals, especially "organic intellectuals" play an important intermediary role.
Granxi cultural hegemonic theory is of great significance to cultural research, especially mass cultural research, which provides a integrated framework for mass culture, opening up the field of mass cultures. Let us look at the mass culture with a dual focus, that is, neither the public culture is anesthetic. It is the tool of corroding and fooling the public (the view of the Frankfurt School), nor is it to cheer a popular culture (the view point of cultural populism But a place to see it as a conflict, a place for national ideology and public struggle, mutual consultation and negotiation, so that we can understand the mass culture to understand the mass culture, and understand the mass culture for us. A new perspective is provided.
For the cultural hegemonic theory of Granxi, the representative of Marxism is Raclau and Mouffe have made revisions and criticize the theory of words. For the two "essentialism" in the theory of Granxi Cultural Hegemony, one is to adhere to the class subjectivity of leadership, and neglect the struggle between non-class social forces. In the view of Raclau and Murphy, leadership is not at the center, and it is a different system, which is the struggle that different social power is in confrontation. The second nature of the theory of Granxi Cultural Hegemonic Theory is to excessively emphasize the centrality of leadership in social struggle, and in the view of Raclau and Murphy, there may be diversified in specific social forms. Leadership: such as feminist movement, peace, environmental protectionism, etc., rather than a single bourgeoisie and proletariat struggle, and the social struggle presents complex multi-diverse tendencies, while in every struggle The leadership center may be formed, and the socialist revolution is only one of this.
It should be acknowledged that Roclau and Murphi have certain truth to the criticism of GlaxzC.C. people, eliminating some traditional, rigid understanding and thinking, and doing the development of cultural hegemony theory. Out of important contributions, these are their forms of new struggles in the capitalist society, such as ecologicalism, feminist, anti-racial discrimination, etc. In this case, cultural hegemony turns from the class struggle to a more diverse struggle, which is the extension, freedom, and multi-democratic struggle. However, we should also see that the struggle of cultural hegemony is unlimited to almost all social struggles, which undoubtedly ignores the class struggle that still exists, and cannot be used for the social structure, ideology and state power. More in-depth critical analysis, this is what we should fully recognize.