Political Emotions in the Classroom: How Affective Citizenship Education Illuminates the Debate Between Agonists and Deliberators

This is a response to Ásgeir Tryggvason’s argument that the deliberative critique of the agonistic approach to citizenship education is based on a misreading of the main concepts in agonistic theory—a misreading that has important implications for any attempt to bring closer agonism and deliberation in citizenship education. My aim in this response is to offer some clarifying comments and questions and suggest some further ideas for expanding Tryggvason’s analysis, highlighting in particular two perspectives that, in my view, deserve further attention in citizenship education: first, the consequences of cultivating agonistic emotions in the classroom; and, second, the possibilities and limitations of acknowledging what has been called affective citizenship as an important element of citizenship education. My response concludes by discussing how affective citizenship education illuminates the debate between agonists and deliberators