Kant's understanding of Cosmopolitan Right, elaborated in the Third Article of his essay on "Perp... more Kant's understanding of Cosmopolitan Right, elaborated in the Third Article of his essay on "Perpetual Peace" and The Metaphysics of Morals, enjoys considerable attention today under the current conditions of the refugee crisis and globalization. Geneva Convention's principle of "non¬refoulement" concerning the Status of Refugees mainly relies on Kant's claim that first entry should always be granted to those who are in danger. The paper will focus first on the distinction Kant makes between "the right to be a permanent visitor" and the "temporary right of sojourn." Though the Kantian hospitality "is not a question of philanthropy but of right," yet it is confined to a claim to temporary residency.
The present paper aims at manifesting the weaknesses that arise from the ontological interpretati... more The present paper aims at manifesting the weaknesses that arise from the ontological interpretation and grounding of the radical imaginary in the work of Castoriadis. The perception of praxis as the incessant creation of a plethora of significations by means of the radical imaginary, as Habermas points out, allows neither praxis's interpretation in terms of an intersubjective practice nor the distinction between meaning and its normative validity. If the radical imaginary may give birth both to autonomy and heteronomy, good and evil, how can a normative account of the concept of praxis be given? The paper will attempt to argue that the role the imagination plays in the formulation of the reflective judgments in Kant's Critique of Judgment in light of H. Arendt's interpretation of Kant, overcomes the aporias of the Castoriadis's ontological grounding of the radical imaginary by linking the normative validity of judgments with the intersubjective communication of the social actors.
The aim of the paper is to reveal how T.W. Adorno's and W. Benjamin's criticisms of the Hegelian ... more The aim of the paper is to reveal how T.W. Adorno's and W. Benjamin's criticisms of the Hegelian dialectic lead directly to two divergent accounts of history which also imply different answers as to whether the hope for a better world might still exist. Both Adorno's and Benjamin's starting points have been the criticism of the Hegelian philosophy of history, the motto of which is the famous Cunning of Reason. According to that, violence and antagonisms are always aufgehoben, that is, 'converted' into an instrument of historical reason, contributing thereby, to the overall harmony of historical progress. However, although Adorno remains loyal to the Hegelian negativity and tries to correct its 'closure' by means of its own method, namely that of immanent critique, Benjamin subverts it by developing his concept of the 'now-time.' Although the Adornian insights on the 'totally administered world' can hardly signify the hope for the possibility of a better world, yet his Negative Dialectics, as the effort to disclose and 'correct' the inconsistency of the Hegelian dialectics by insisting on its open, never-ending and hence, subversive character, becomes the exercise of hope par excellence. By identifying itself however with the never-ending work of consciousness's critical self-reflection which unmasks the false harmony of the Hegelian system, Adorno's hope becomes an intellectual exercise. Benjamin's critique of Hegel on the contrary, leads to his materialist historiography of the dialectical images according to which historical fragments are removed from a context in which they were recorded as insignificant and constitute a constellation i.e. an image suggesting a new interpretation. The political synonym of the dialectical image which at the same is the historical token of hope is his idea of revolution interpreted in terms of 'Divine Violence.'
Historical Materialism-research in Critical Marxist Theory, 2005
The present paper was to a major extent stimulated by the genuinely fruitful debate between Debor... more The present paper was to a major extent stimulated by the genuinely fruitful debate between Deborah Cook and Gordon Finlayson in Historical Materialism. 1 The debate was about whether it is Habermas's or Adorno's version of the theory of modernity that can make the ...
Written shortly after the Hitler-Stalin pact, Benjamin's On the Concept of History could be viewe... more Written shortly after the Hitler-Stalin pact, Benjamin's On the Concept of History could be viewed as an attack on the ideology of progress both as the conceptual attire and the collective fantasy of the Enlightenment era that aspired to realize Reason in history, as well as the social democratic illusion that the immense development of the productive forces will automatically bring about the advent of a socialist paradise on earth. Benjamin's theses on history become a bitter comment on the belief, dominant since the eighteenth century philosophy of history, in the incessant progress of history in virtue of human Reason, and with this an unmasking of history as a fixed itinerary with its destination pre-given. While the account of history in modernity is a discourse of hope oriented toward a promising yet distant future, Benjamin's theses are the fragments of despair incarnated in the staring eyes and the open mouth of the "angel of history," inspired by P. Klee's Angelus Novus. 1 While modernity's linear time sets history on the railway tracks for the long journey to the "happy end" of humanity, each station of
The aim of the present paper is to disclose the structural affinities between Carl Schmitt and Fr... more The aim of the present paper is to disclose the structural affinities between Carl Schmitt and Friedrich Hayek regarding the concept of parliamentary democracy. Identifying Hayek's neoliberal thinking with Schmitt's theoretical justification of fascism would apparently be an a-historical overgeneralization. While Schmitt develops a model of absolute sovereignty relying on the sovereign's decision on the state of exception, Hayek envisages the historical realization of those conditions allowing the market competition to flourish. Schmitt's model subjugates market to an omnipotent state whereas Hayek views the latter as an engine abetting the free market competition. A closer reading, however, could discern affinities behind the seemingly opposed models of the two thinkers. Schmitt's model of an emergency dictatorship and Hayek's nomocracy are two different responses and attacks to the Left's attempt to construct a democratic welfare state in the Weimar Republic and postwar Europe. Schmitt advocates the concentration of political power in a totalitarian state as the sole "remedy" to the democratic contamination of liberalism induced by the politicization of civil society. Similarly, Hayek castigates any state intervention taking the form of the welfare state but endorses a powerful state entrusted with the role of securing the conditions of market competition.
Ο λόγος περί κοινωνικού κράτους στην πολιτική φιλοσοφία του Kant θα συνιστούσε μάλλον αναχρονισμό... more Ο λόγος περί κοινωνικού κράτους στην πολιτική φιλοσοφία του Kant θα συνιστούσε μάλλον αναχρονισμό. Η «χρυσή εποχή», κατά Hobsbawm[1], του κοινωνικού κράτους και η νομική του κατοχύρωση κυρίως μέσα από τα άρθρα 25 και 26 της Οικουμενικής Διακήρυξης των Δικαιωμάτων του Ανθρώπου του 1948, σύμφωνα με τα οποία «κάθε άτομο έχει το δικαίωμα σε ένα βιοτικό επίπεδο ικανό να εξασφαλίσει στο ίδιο και στην οικογένειά του υγεία και ευημερία» καθώς και «το δικαίωμα στην εκπαίδευση η οποία πρέπει να παρέχεται δωρεάν»[2] αναδύονται στον ερειπιώνα και τις στάχτες που άφησε ο Δεύτερος Παγκόσμιος Πόλεμος. Ψήγματα, ωστόσο, αρχών κοινωνικής προστασίας των απόρων και ευάλωτων ανιχνεύονται στην καντιανή φιλοσοφία του δικαίου, και κυρίως στη Μεταφυσική των Ηθών, θέτοντας επί τάπητος τη δισεπίλυτη σχέση μεταξύ οικονομικής και πολιτικής ανισότητας. Σημείο εκκίνησης της παρούσας μελέτης αποτελεί η ανάδειξη του λόγου ίδρυσης και του ρόλου που επιτελεί το κράτος, κατά Kant. Στη συνέχεια επιχειρείται η ανάδειξη της αντινομίας που ανακύπτει μεταξύ πολιτικής ισότητας και οικονομικής εξάρτησης στο καντιανό corpus παραπέμποντας ταυτοχρόνως σε ερμηνευτικές απόπειρες υπέρβασής της.
Kant's understanding of Cosmopolitan Right, elaborated in the Third Article of his essay on "Perp... more Kant's understanding of Cosmopolitan Right, elaborated in the Third Article of his essay on "Perpetual Peace" and The Metaphysics of Morals, enjoys considerable attention today under the current conditions of the refugee crisis and globalization. Geneva Convention's principle of "non¬refoulement" concerning the Status of Refugees mainly relies on Kant's claim that first entry should always be granted to those who are in danger. The paper will focus first on the distinction Kant makes between "the right to be a permanent visitor" and the "temporary right of sojourn." Though the Kantian hospitality "is not a question of philanthropy but of right," yet it is confined to a claim to temporary residency.
The present paper aims at manifesting the weaknesses that arise from the ontological interpretati... more The present paper aims at manifesting the weaknesses that arise from the ontological interpretation and grounding of the radical imaginary in the work of Castoriadis. The perception of praxis as the incessant creation of a plethora of significations by means of the radical imaginary, as Habermas points out, allows neither praxis's interpretation in terms of an intersubjective practice nor the distinction between meaning and its normative validity. If the radical imaginary may give birth both to autonomy and heteronomy, good and evil, how can a normative account of the concept of praxis be given? The paper will attempt to argue that the role the imagination plays in the formulation of the reflective judgments in Kant's Critique of Judgment in light of H. Arendt's interpretation of Kant, overcomes the aporias of the Castoriadis's ontological grounding of the radical imaginary by linking the normative validity of judgments with the intersubjective communication of the social actors.
The aim of the paper is to reveal how T.W. Adorno's and W. Benjamin's criticisms of the Hegelian ... more The aim of the paper is to reveal how T.W. Adorno's and W. Benjamin's criticisms of the Hegelian dialectic lead directly to two divergent accounts of history which also imply different answers as to whether the hope for a better world might still exist. Both Adorno's and Benjamin's starting points have been the criticism of the Hegelian philosophy of history, the motto of which is the famous Cunning of Reason. According to that, violence and antagonisms are always aufgehoben, that is, 'converted' into an instrument of historical reason, contributing thereby, to the overall harmony of historical progress. However, although Adorno remains loyal to the Hegelian negativity and tries to correct its 'closure' by means of its own method, namely that of immanent critique, Benjamin subverts it by developing his concept of the 'now-time.' Although the Adornian insights on the 'totally administered world' can hardly signify the hope for the possibility of a better world, yet his Negative Dialectics, as the effort to disclose and 'correct' the inconsistency of the Hegelian dialectics by insisting on its open, never-ending and hence, subversive character, becomes the exercise of hope par excellence. By identifying itself however with the never-ending work of consciousness's critical self-reflection which unmasks the false harmony of the Hegelian system, Adorno's hope becomes an intellectual exercise. Benjamin's critique of Hegel on the contrary, leads to his materialist historiography of the dialectical images according to which historical fragments are removed from a context in which they were recorded as insignificant and constitute a constellation i.e. an image suggesting a new interpretation. The political synonym of the dialectical image which at the same is the historical token of hope is his idea of revolution interpreted in terms of 'Divine Violence.'
Historical Materialism-research in Critical Marxist Theory, 2005
The present paper was to a major extent stimulated by the genuinely fruitful debate between Debor... more The present paper was to a major extent stimulated by the genuinely fruitful debate between Deborah Cook and Gordon Finlayson in Historical Materialism. 1 The debate was about whether it is Habermas's or Adorno's version of the theory of modernity that can make the ...
Written shortly after the Hitler-Stalin pact, Benjamin's On the Concept of History could be viewe... more Written shortly after the Hitler-Stalin pact, Benjamin's On the Concept of History could be viewed as an attack on the ideology of progress both as the conceptual attire and the collective fantasy of the Enlightenment era that aspired to realize Reason in history, as well as the social democratic illusion that the immense development of the productive forces will automatically bring about the advent of a socialist paradise on earth. Benjamin's theses on history become a bitter comment on the belief, dominant since the eighteenth century philosophy of history, in the incessant progress of history in virtue of human Reason, and with this an unmasking of history as a fixed itinerary with its destination pre-given. While the account of history in modernity is a discourse of hope oriented toward a promising yet distant future, Benjamin's theses are the fragments of despair incarnated in the staring eyes and the open mouth of the "angel of history," inspired by P. Klee's Angelus Novus. 1 While modernity's linear time sets history on the railway tracks for the long journey to the "happy end" of humanity, each station of
The aim of the present paper is to disclose the structural affinities between Carl Schmitt and Fr... more The aim of the present paper is to disclose the structural affinities between Carl Schmitt and Friedrich Hayek regarding the concept of parliamentary democracy. Identifying Hayek's neoliberal thinking with Schmitt's theoretical justification of fascism would apparently be an a-historical overgeneralization. While Schmitt develops a model of absolute sovereignty relying on the sovereign's decision on the state of exception, Hayek envisages the historical realization of those conditions allowing the market competition to flourish. Schmitt's model subjugates market to an omnipotent state whereas Hayek views the latter as an engine abetting the free market competition. A closer reading, however, could discern affinities behind the seemingly opposed models of the two thinkers. Schmitt's model of an emergency dictatorship and Hayek's nomocracy are two different responses and attacks to the Left's attempt to construct a democratic welfare state in the Weimar Republic and postwar Europe. Schmitt advocates the concentration of political power in a totalitarian state as the sole "remedy" to the democratic contamination of liberalism induced by the politicization of civil society. Similarly, Hayek castigates any state intervention taking the form of the welfare state but endorses a powerful state entrusted with the role of securing the conditions of market competition.
Ο λόγος περί κοινωνικού κράτους στην πολιτική φιλοσοφία του Kant θα συνιστούσε μάλλον αναχρονισμό... more Ο λόγος περί κοινωνικού κράτους στην πολιτική φιλοσοφία του Kant θα συνιστούσε μάλλον αναχρονισμό. Η «χρυσή εποχή», κατά Hobsbawm[1], του κοινωνικού κράτους και η νομική του κατοχύρωση κυρίως μέσα από τα άρθρα 25 και 26 της Οικουμενικής Διακήρυξης των Δικαιωμάτων του Ανθρώπου του 1948, σύμφωνα με τα οποία «κάθε άτομο έχει το δικαίωμα σε ένα βιοτικό επίπεδο ικανό να εξασφαλίσει στο ίδιο και στην οικογένειά του υγεία και ευημερία» καθώς και «το δικαίωμα στην εκπαίδευση η οποία πρέπει να παρέχεται δωρεάν»[2] αναδύονται στον ερειπιώνα και τις στάχτες που άφησε ο Δεύτερος Παγκόσμιος Πόλεμος. Ψήγματα, ωστόσο, αρχών κοινωνικής προστασίας των απόρων και ευάλωτων ανιχνεύονται στην καντιανή φιλοσοφία του δικαίου, και κυρίως στη Μεταφυσική των Ηθών, θέτοντας επί τάπητος τη δισεπίλυτη σχέση μεταξύ οικονομικής και πολιτικής ανισότητας. Σημείο εκκίνησης της παρούσας μελέτης αποτελεί η ανάδειξη του λόγου ίδρυσης και του ρόλου που επιτελεί το κράτος, κατά Kant. Στη συνέχεια επιχειρείται η ανάδειξη της αντινομίας που ανακύπτει μεταξύ πολιτικής ισότητας και οικονομικής εξάρτησης στο καντιανό corpus παραπέμποντας ταυτοχρόνως σε ερμηνευτικές απόπειρες υπέρβασής της.
The aim of the present paper is to disclose the structural affinities between Carl Schmitt and Fr... more The aim of the present paper is to disclose the structural affinities between Carl Schmitt and Friedrich Hayek regarding the concept of parliamentary democracy. Identifying Hayek’s neoliberal thinking with Schmitt’s theoretical justification of fascism would apparently be an a-historical overgeneralization. While Schmitt develops a model of absolute sovereignty relying on the sovereign’s decision on the state of exception, Hayek envisages the historical realization of those conditions allowing the market competition to flourish. Schmitt’s model subjugates market to an omnipotent state whereas Hayek views the latter as an engine abetting the free market competition. A closer reading, however, could discern affinities behind the seemingly opposed models of the two thinkers. Schmitt’s model of an emergency dictatorship and Hayek’s nomocracy are two different responses and attacks to the Left’s attempt to construct a democratic welfare state in the Weimar Republic and postwar Europe. Schmitt advocates the concentration of political power in a totalitarian state as the sole “remedy” to the democratic contamination of liberalism induced by the politicization of civil society. Similarly, Hayek castigates any state intervention taking the form of the welfare state but endorses a powerful state entrusted with the role of securing the conditions of market competition.
Key words: Liberalism, Neoliberalism, State of Exception, Democracy
Habermas' critical theory is partly an attempt to identify the limitations of critique and emanci... more Habermas' critical theory is partly an attempt to identify the limitations of critique and emancipation as espoused in the first generation critical theory of Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno. In their attempt to develop an interdisciplinary, reflexive, emancipatory and dialectical reason that is critical towards accepted realities, Horkheimer and Adorno in their monumental work The Dialectic of Enlightenment pictured a world trapped in instrumental rationality. Taking and revolutionizing traditional critical theory, Habermas argues that reason entails both emancipator as well as instrumental possibilities. Through an exposition of Habermas' critique of Horkheimer and Adorno in his discourse of modernity, this article argues that although Habermas successfully identifies the equation of the rational with the instrumental and offers an emancipator model in return; still he ends up not paying sufficient attention to aesthetic truth.
The book sheds light on the forms of neoliberalism's political rationality by highlighting the th... more The book sheds light on the forms of neoliberalism's political rationality by highlighting the theoretical foundations upon which they are built. It relies on Foucault's account of neoliberal reason in terms of a governmental rationality encompassing all aspects of human life, as well as Critical Theory's methodology. The book discloses the tensions and antinomies between the concepts neoliberalism resorts to for its own moral and theoretical justi@cation and the historical forms of its realization. By combining the rigor of the normative principles of political philosophy with contemporary historical material, the book shows how neoliberalism realizes itself by negating liberty in its own name, undermining democracy, and annulling rights via their transformation into the morals of the new global market. The core argument permeating the book is that crises are the very condition of neoliberalism's existence. It states that, paradoxically enough, neoliberalism is facing the crises it itself produces by touching off new ones. The book will appeal to students, scholars, and researchers of political science in general, and political theory, political philosophy, and political history in particular, interested in a better understanding of neoliberalism, democracy, and rights.
Uploads
Marcuse by Fotini Vaki
Papers by Fotini Vaki
A closer reading, however, could discern affinities behind the seemingly opposed models of the two thinkers.
Schmitt’s model of an emergency dictatorship and Hayek’s nomocracy are two different responses and attacks to the Left’s attempt to construct a democratic welfare state in the Weimar Republic and postwar Europe. Schmitt advocates the concentration of political power in a totalitarian state as the sole “remedy” to the democratic contamination of liberalism induced by the politicization of civil society. Similarly, Hayek castigates any state intervention taking the form of the welfare state but endorses a powerful state entrusted with the role of securing the conditions of market competition.
Key words: Liberalism, Neoliberalism, State of Exception, Democracy