The Archipolitics of Jacques Rancière

I. Perica
{"title":"The Archipolitics of Jacques Rancière","authors":"I. Perica","doi":"10.21827/krisis.39.1.36257","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The paper examines Jacques Rancière’s critique of Hannah Arendt, whom he considers as a proponent of liberal political philosophy. The fact that he finds in Arendt an advocate of the liberal, even conservative fixation of the borderline between the private and the public sphere and at the same time oversees her insistence on what he would call ‘dissenting’ politics – particularly her notions of beginning and revolution – demands the uncovering of possible tacit reasons of his rebuttal of Arendt. \nIn the center is the axis to which their two seemingly irreconcilable political-theoretical edifices are bound, around which they ‘twist’ and, although separated, are even able to supplement each other: the axis of the private and public, i.e. of the social and political, and the notion of arché as its balance point. The assumption is that Rancière’s radical posture against Arendt prevents him to also learn something from her purportedly juxtaposed position. Moreover, it seems that Arendt’s political thought even offers solutions for paradoxes into which he maneuvers himself. \nTherefore, and contrary to Rancière’s own insistence on the irreconcilable differences between them, Hannah Arendt represents for Rancière’s political thinking a theoretical forefield that precedes his own work and even anticipates its critique.","PeriodicalId":290939,"journal":{"name":"Krisis | Journal for Contemporary Philosophy","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Krisis | Journal for Contemporary Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21827/krisis.39.1.36257","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The paper examines Jacques Rancière’s critique of Hannah Arendt, whom he considers as a proponent of liberal political philosophy. The fact that he finds in Arendt an advocate of the liberal, even conservative fixation of the borderline between the private and the public sphere and at the same time oversees her insistence on what he would call ‘dissenting’ politics – particularly her notions of beginning and revolution – demands the uncovering of possible tacit reasons of his rebuttal of Arendt. In the center is the axis to which their two seemingly irreconcilable political-theoretical edifices are bound, around which they ‘twist’ and, although separated, are even able to supplement each other: the axis of the private and public, i.e. of the social and political, and the notion of arché as its balance point. The assumption is that Rancière’s radical posture against Arendt prevents him to also learn something from her purportedly juxtaposed position. Moreover, it seems that Arendt’s political thought even offers solutions for paradoxes into which he maneuvers himself. Therefore, and contrary to Rancière’s own insistence on the irreconcilable differences between them, Hannah Arendt represents for Rancière’s political thinking a theoretical forefield that precedes his own work and even anticipates its critique.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
本文考察了雅克·朗西弗勒对汉娜·阿伦特的批评,他认为阿伦特是自由主义政治哲学的支持者。他在阿伦特身上发现了一个自由主义的拥护者,甚至是保守主义对私人领域和公共领域之间边界的固定,同时监督着她对他所谓的“异议”政治的坚持——特别是她对开始和革命的概念——这一事实要求揭示他反驳阿伦特的可能的隐性原因。在中心是他们两个看似不可调和的政治理论大厦的轴心,他们围绕着它“扭曲”,尽管分开,甚至能够相互补充:私人和公共的轴心,即社会和政治的轴心,以及作为平衡点的arch概念。假设是,朗西的激进立场反对阿伦特阻止他也从她据称并列的立场中学到一些东西。此外,阿伦特的政治思想似乎甚至为他自己操纵的悖论提供了解决方案。因此,与朗西坚持两者之间不可调和的差异相反,汉娜·阿伦特为朗西的政治思想提供了一个理论前沿,这个前沿先于他自己的作品,甚至预示着对其的批评。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Thinking with Cormac McCarthy Shifting the Geography of Reason, with Respects to Spinoza Saltwater Insurgency: Drowning and Gender during the Middle Passage Something is Brooding Krisis Reports: Futuring Critical Theory, 13-15 September 2023
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1