Infavor-of-laser

First of all, congrats! I'm doing my PhD right now, a bit jealous over here ;).

Anyways, I'm a bit sceptic regarding Habermas, and the application of his theory. He has a very European way of dealing with discourses. Rationalism at the centre, and consensus being the main goal of any public negotiation (decisionism, pragmatism etc. providing alternatives here). How did you cope with this bias, especially because of reddit's global backdrop? What about new kinds of voicing/silencing reddit makes possible?

Unfortunately, your PhD's PDF cannot be accessed right now, so this one may be rather stupid, but: why do you use the neoliberalism-term to judge a public? Plus, what is a "traditional" neolib.?

Looking forward to reading the book. Good luck for your future work!

Thanks for your reply; sorry for a rather late answer, post-christmas kept me busy.

Your answer helped a lot, indeed. I, however, find your/Dean's definition of neoliberalism a bit "problematic", to use one of your favourite terms ;). I feel that this term is too broad to be used to study something – it's in fact too easy to apply, and the outcome is too powerful (even though it's not entierly wrong, as it were).

Let me try to show you what I mean. Apart from reading your thesis I found it very interesting to study the user's reaction here on Reddit (especially on r/KiA – by the way, I had no idea what this was about and, indeed, went to the car manufacturer's subreddit first). Maybe I can put this more clearly. The notion of "critique" you embody is destructive; you are too far away from the field while, at the same time, act as if you are very close. That's weird.

To clarify, my background is pragmatism (a natural enemy of Frankfurt, some say), and the new sociology of (!) critique. However, I know some classic critical theory quite well, gave a course on it at the university (I'm German, btw), and I like to dive into Adorno's Minima Moralia every now and then (it's well positioned in my bathroom ;)). So – what are the odds? – my main reference is Bruno Latour but I enjoy reading a good Marxian study as well. In your study I'm missing a link to the domain of the production side of the political economy (of reddit). Because in my understanding… that's what critical theory is about? You, however, stick with reddit constructing false "fantasies" – having "no real" influence on society. Instead, I feel that reddit has a great impact, especially when it's of a neoliberal kind. It's teaching people something (cf. Massanari's notion of play).

Last but not least, this neoliberalism you are referring to is not the traditional one I am thinking about when hearing the word traditional – this should be Hayek, Mont Pelegrin, or Chicago School. This is just for future references; someone outside the US may be confused as well ;). And, honestly, I think using this term is to no avail in academia. And in public as well. It has run out of steam. Why not seek alternatives such as post-, degrowth, convivialism, aceleration, etc?