Abstrakt
The aim of the paper is to link Mad Studies (and Mad Movement) with the concept of radical democracy. Whereas Mad Studies challenge dominant understandings of mental illness' (preferring the term 'madness' instead) and call for acceptance of those who differ in terms of feelings, perceptions, ideas, or behaviour - in ways usually described as disordered and often leading to exclusion and/or marginalisation - radical democracy as an approach means including the right to difference or dissonance in the very basic understanding of democracy and justice.
The perspective of radical democracy leads to the notion that in the name of consensus, liberal democracy tends to silence and oppress certain voices. Connecting the theoretical bases of Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe with the specific examples of everyday oppression as described by Mad Studies scholars such as Brenda LeFrancois together with my own fieldwork data, the paper aims at making the two phenomena shed light on each other as well as widen the traditional viewpoint to include people with psychiatric labels among those more traditionally perceived as marginalised and/or oppressed (based on class, gender, gender identity, sexuality, age etc.)