In Hegemony and the language of contention, William Roseberry puts forth several crucial directions for comprehending hegemonic dynamics using Gramsci’s Notebook section. According to the last part of the entry, hegemony works in a specific way. The character suggests that people utilize the idea to understand conflict rather than agreement. Hegemony, therefore, establishes a common tangible and substantive foundation for living, criticizing, and responding to social arrangements marked by dominance. The notion’s significance for Gramsci in this specific moment, more specifically the collapse of northern-led Italian political development, is rooted in its illumination of vulnerability, of coalitions and class constituents unable to make their personal preferences be the interests of a larger community.
My personal hegemonic experiences might include the observations of skyscrapers in the business centers of the cities. Thousands of companies compete with each other for a fair share of the market. As a result, among the ways to show their dominance and leadership is through their headquarters. Skyscrapers are especially preferred by many, and the higher the building, the better. Another example of hegemony can pertain to a modern political situation that involves one country trying to show dominance over others. For example, while reading the news, I found out about the invasion of one country by a neighboring country.
Hence, according to Roseberry and his narration, Gramsci grasped and stressed, more explicitly than his interpreters, the intricate interdependence of force and agreement in contexts of control. In Gramsci’s use, hegemony was a much more material and political notion than it seems to have become. He recognized its instability, imperfection, dynamic aspects, and fluctuation. Hegemony, therefore, refers to strength and leadership, though it remains a complex subject.