The author uses the heidegger debate to juxtapose adorno's modernism to the 'postmodernism' of heidegger and others, Including rorty and lyotard. In contrast to heidegger, The author finds adorno's modernity to be more informed by enlightenment categories. Starting with adorno's suggestion that "ratio" must "transcend" the self-Preservation of instrumental thought, The author interprets adorno as moving in a somewhat universalist direction. According to this interpretation, Although adorno would agree with heidegger's critique of "identifying thought," he would find the category of (...) "rational identity" something much more positive than did heidegger. In contrast to heidegger, Adorno's critique of instrumentality has a strong ethical component. (shrink)
The complex figure of Theodor Adorno has made a lasting impact on modern political and philosphical development. Deeply interested in the flowering of modern art and an accomplished musician who was close to Schoenberg's circle, he was profoundly affected by revolutionary Marxism, although he always resisted its institutionalized manifestations. Adorno sought to highlight the negative characteristics of the Enlightenment while at the same time emphasizing its positive and empancipatory aspects. In both politics and philosophy he preferred the spontaneous to the (...) orthodox, the experimental to the conventional. His life's work rejects the capitalist system of the twentieth-century while at the same time acknowledging and affirming its creative cultural achievements. Hauke Brunkhorst's book is the first English-language assessment of Adorno's life and work. He stresses the links between Adorno and the dialectical thinking of Hegel and Marx, but also emphasizes the connection between Kant and Adorno. The book sheds new light on Adorno's negative dialectic and is an important contribution to the debate on this celebrated philosopher. (shrink)
The paper starts with a thesis on the dialectical structure of modern law that goes back the European revolutionary tradition and constitutes a legal structure that is at once emancipatory and repressive. Once it became democratic the modern nation states has solved more or less successfully the crises that emerged in modern Europe since the 16th Century. Yet, this state did not escape the dialectical snares of modern law and modern legal regimes. It’s greatest advance, the exclusion of inequalities presupposed (...) the exclusion of the internal other of blacks, workers, women etc, and the other that stemmed from the non-European world that furthermore was under European colonial rule or other forms of European, Northamerican and Japanese imperial control. Yet, the wars and revolutions of the 20th Century let to a complete reconstruction, new foundation and globalization of all national and international law. The evolutionary advance of the 20th Century was the emergence of world law, and this enabled the construction of international and national welfarism and the global expansion of the exclusion of inequalities. Nevertheless the dialectic of enlightenment came back again and led to new forms of postnational domination, hegemony, oppression and exclusion. The final section tries to detect some ideas and principles how to overcome the crisis. (shrink)
Let me first thank Bill Scheuerman for his long and rich argument on my different considerations of global and European constitutionalism and democracy. It was an inspiring reading, and I have learnt a lot by it. I agree with most of his basic assumptions, and even with some of his more critical remarks. Here, I will first take the opportunity to make some revisions and clarify some conceptual misunderstandings. I will then make some additional remarks on my theoretical framework, and (...) the ideas of law and constitution which are fundamental for it. In the last section I discuss again the issue of state and constitution about which Scheuerman and I already had a short controversy in Constellations last year.1 This time, however, I will discuss the development of modern society in a broader historical, or evolutionary, perspective. Keywords: state; world state; monopoly of power; co-evolution; nation; national identity; territory; cituzenship; modern society (Published: 10 March 2009) Citation: Ethics & Global Politics. DOI: 10.3402/egp.v2i1.1940. (shrink)
The European Union today finds itself in the midst of its greatest crisis. The crisis is due not only to one of the greatest breakdowns in the history of the global economy, but also to the fascinating internal evolution of the European constitution since its beginning, shortly after World War II. Parallel to the growth of constitutional law, latent legitimation problems began to arise and grow cumulatively. However, once the big global banks, corporations and hedge-funds began a concerted attack on (...) the European periphery, the long lasting neoliberal turn from democratic capitalism to capitalist democracy has reached whole Europe, and the legitimation crisis becomes manifest. (shrink)
The author of Critical Theory of Legal Revolutions discusses three major fields of objection against his outline of an evolutionary theory of public and international law. In the first part he discusses problems of action theory. There are at issue, first, the role of negation and moral resentment for the constitution of a normatively relevant social praxis, then the emergence of social systems within and from the context of the life-world, and the relation of revolutionary and gradual learning processes. The (...) second part discusses the relation of his theory to postcolonial and feminist studies. Finally, the debate centers in part III on the dialectic of Enlightenment. The problem of alienation and negativity is at stake, closely related to the negative aesthetic of law and the intertwinement of repression and emancipation within the legal form. In the end, it is an open question if we today still can rely on the negative aesthetic and hidden utopian form of law, or if we have already fallen back to constitutional kitsch and façade. (shrink)
In this collection, philosophers, social psychologists, and social scientists approach contemporary social reality from the viewpoint of solidarity. They examine the nature of solidarity and explore its normative and explanatory potential.