Abstract
This article argues that a politics against domination needs to take on oppression (violence, exploitation, marginalization, powerlessness, cultural imperialism, and epistemic injustice) and that doing so requires attending to the rage and resistance of those oppressed. Politics against Domination does not. However, the adaptive approach to political theory, which Ian Shapiro advocates and models in the book, could lead us to modifications of the institutions and practices of politics against domination if it were more thoroughly informed by the politics of rage and resistance cultivated into and in social movements. Politics against Domination is full of cautions against progressives' institutional proposals (strengthening separation of powers, courts, and deliberation in the Senate) because they may not consistently create obstacles to domination, but rather be conduits for it or obstacles to redressing it. Proceeding cautiously given this concern, I offer some institutional renovations that might support the hearing of marginalized views.
