The term was first used in this context by Stephen K. White, professor of politics at the University of Virginia, who ascribes this approach to thinkers such as William E. Connolly, George Kateb, Judith Butler, and Charles Taylor.
[2] Eight years later, in his 1995 work Ethos of Pluralization, Connolly expands his thesis, elaborating his famous claim that all political interpretations are, in fact, "ontopolitical".
Or it might deflate this theme of stable human interests while striving to draw us closer to a protean abundance that enables and exceeds every socially constructed order.
Hence, every interpretation of political events, no matter how deeply it is sunk in a specific historical context or how high the pile of data upon which it sits, contains an ontopolitical dimension.
Political interpretation is ontopolitical: its fundamental presumptions fix possibilities, distribute explanatory elements, generate parameters within which an ethic is elaborated, and center (or decenter) assessments of identity, legitimacy, and responsibility.