Being together? obviously means something more, such as being with some third, someone not yet present. If we had to describe this novelty in the development of the ?In-statuere? (de)construction, we would begin from the number of acts continuously enlarged, increased by the reciprocal activity of multiple actors. A group of individuals gathers to address a problem, transparently design a solution, construct a general plan of action for providing help, and organize a series of future actions in a disciplined manner that are intended to bring about a given social change. An institution is impossible if there are no experiments or a universal solution to a general problem, one that affects everybody. There can be no institution without the organization of joint resistance, and a project of counter-institution.00Translated from Serbian by Edward Djordjevic.
My intention is to demonstrate how Hobbes' attempts to adapt two ancient institutions from Roman Law to his own time and knowledge of theology and philosophy. Treason (and the figure of the traitor) could be quite significant within the context of Hobbes' (but not only his) understanding of the figure of the sovereign and sovereignty. The central part of the text is an endeavor to ascertain the source and unconditional condition for treason as such, within the framework of Hobbes' theory of representation (representatio) which he writes about in Chapter 16 of the Leviathan. The act or performance in which we could perhaps recognize a traitorous gesture (or the dynamic of treason) could be found in the so-called paradox of representation. The "traitor" breaks the chain of the transfer of power and empowerment, thus stops representation, and puts an end to speaking in the name of the other. If it is possible to discover whether this is possible and whether speaking and acting in one's own name always carries elements of treason, then we can conclude that differing forms of "direct" speech and action ("in one's own name") are "acts of treason." In that case, what interests me is whether "treason" is found within the heart of representative democracy, and thus if it is de facto an integral part of a democratic order and society.
A partir da exposição realizada na Dickson Poon School of Law do King's College London (2016/2017) pelo artista e professor alemão da Universidade de Bonn, Werner Gephart, propõe-se aqui análise da obra "Produção babilônica de normatividade na Europa (2016)", em diálogo com "A Torre de Babel", de 1563 do artista belga Pieter Bruegel, o Velho, ambas cotejadas com os textos religiosos com os quais dialogam, com vistas a compreender as analogias feitas pelo autor da obra com história atual da Europa, sua unificação e os seus tantos dilemas mais contemporâneos. ; Based on the exhibition held at the Dickson Poon School of Law at King's College London (2016/2017) by the German artist and professor at the University of Bonn, Werner Gephart, we propose here an analysis of the work "Babylonian production of norms in Europe (2016) ", In dialogue with" The Tower of Babel ", from 1563 by the Belgian artist Pieter Bruegel the Elder, both collated with the religious texts with which they dialogue, in order to understand the analogies made by the author of the work with current European history , its unification and its many more contemporary dilemmas.
Parafraseada no título deste texto está uma nota feita por Hannah Arendt em agosto de 1952. Depois de ler Nomos da Terra de Carl Schmitt, Arendt tenta confrontar a ideia de Schmitt de uma guerra justa. No texto, busco reconstruir as leituras de Arendt de diferentes textos de filosofia política dentro do contexto de seu pensamento sobre a relação entre violência e poder, força e lei. A recusa de Arendt em aceitar a existência de uma violência que pode "conquistar" a liberdade e "criar" o direito e a democracia, contradiz a grande tradição dos seguidores de Marx, aos quais Arendt sem dúvida pertence: A violência revolucionária é algo possível? Se sim, como? Por fim, violência como resistência à injustiça traz justiça? ; Paraphrased within the title of this text is a note Hannah Arendt made in August 1952. After reading Carl Schmitt's Nomos der Erde, Arendt tries to confront Schmitt's idea of a just war. In the text I attempt to reconstruct Arendt's readings of differing political philosophy texts within the context of her thinking concerning the relationship between violence and power, force and law. Arendt's refusal to accept the existence of violence which can "conquer" freedom and "create" right and democracy, brings contradiction to the great tradition of the followers of Marx, to whom Arendt undoubtedly belongs: how is and is revolutionary violence even possible and does violence as resistance to injustice bring justice?
A partir da exposição realizada na Dickson Poon School of Law do King's College London (2016/2017) pelo artista e professor alemão da Universidade de Bonn, Werner Gephart, propõe-se aqui análise da obra "Produção babilônica de normatividade na Europa (2016)", em diálogo com "A Torre de Babel", de 1563 do artista belga Pieter Bruegel, o Velho, ambas cotejadas com os textos religiosos com os quais dialogam, com vistas a compreender as analogias feitas pelo autor da obra com história atual da Europa, sua unificação e os seus tantos dilemas mais contemporâneos. ; Based on the exhibition held at the Dickson Poon School of Law at King's College London (2016/2017) by the German artist and professor at the University of Bonn, Werner Gephart, we propose here an analysis of the work "Babylonian production of norms in Europe (2016) ", In dialogue with" The Tower of Babel ", from 1563 by the Belgian artist Pieter Bruegel the Elder, both collated with the religious texts with which they dialogue, in order to understand the analogies made by the author of the work with current European history , its unification and its many more contemporary dilemmas.
El propósito del presente trabajo consiste en reflexionar sobre la disciplina como categoría (por oposición a otras posibilidades, tales como noción, estructura, norma, protocolo, etc.) y explicar el uso de comillas en el título, en la medida en que siempre pueden suponer una ampliación y una corrección de la palabra disciplina. mi intención es reconstruir la resistencia, que se ha extendido durante décadas, a la disciplina (como castigo, control, pedagogía violenta, militarismo, fanatismo, masculinidad, falta de libertad), así como descubrir el origen del elogio de la auto-disciplina, de la falta de disciplina y de la interdisciplinariedad. Asimismo, querría ofrecer algunos argumentos en favor de la disciplina como uno de los protocolos más importantes de la ontología social y como la incondicionada condición de la cooperación, la vida y el trabajo en grupo. La disciplina es el aprendizaje conjunto, así como la producción y el enriquecimiento del conocimiento que constituye y sostiene una institución. La cuestión es si, de hecho, la disciplina de los individuos hace de manera necesaria que una institución sea mejor o más justa.
El propósito del presente trabajo consiste en reflexionar sobre la disciplina como categoría (por oposición a otras posibilidades, tales como noción, estructura, norma, protocolo, etc.) y explicar el uso de comillas en el título, en la medida en que siempre pueden suponer una ampliación y una corrección de la palabra disciplina. Mi intención es reconstruir la resistencia, que se ha extendido durante décadas, a la disciplina (como castigo, control, pedagogía violenta, militarismo, fanatismo, masculinidad, falta de libertad), así como descubrir el origen del elogio de la auto-disciplina, de la falta de disciplina y de la interdisciplinariedad. Asimismo, querría ofrecer algunos argumentos en favor de la disciplina como uno de los protocolos más importantes de la ontología social y como la incondicionada condición de la cooperación, la vida y el trabajo en grupo. La disciplina es el aprendizaje conjunto, así como la producción y el enriquecimiento del conocimiento que constituye y sostiene una institución. La cuestión es si, de hecho, la disciplina de los individuos hace de manera necesaria que una institución sea mejor o más justa. ; In this paper I would like to reflect on discipline as a category (as opposed to other possibilities, such as notion, structure, norm, protocol, etc.), and explain the quotation marks in the title, as they can always follow and amend the word discipline. My intention is to reconstruct a decades-long resistance to discipline (as punishment, control, violent pedagogy, militarism, fanaticism, masculinity, unfreedom), and to uncover the origin of praise for self-discipline, un-discipline or interdisciplinarity. Further, I would like to offer a few arguments in favor of discipline as one of the most important protocols of social ontology, and the unconditioned condition of cooperation, life and group work. Discipline is joint learning, as well as production and a nurturing of knowledge that constitutes and sustains an institution. The question is whether individuals' discipline indeed makes an institution necessarily better or more just.
In this paper I would like to reflect on discipline as a category (as opposed to other possibilities, such as notion, structure, norm, protocol, etc.), and explain the quotation marks in the title, as they can always follow and amend the word discipline. my intention is to reconstruct a decades-long resistance to discipline (as punishment, control, violent pedagogy, militarism, fanaticism, masculinity, unfreedom), and to uncover the origin of praise for self-discipline, un-discipline or interdisciplinarity. Further, I would like to offer a few arguments in favor of discipline as one of the most important protocols of social ontology, and the unconditioned condition of cooperation, life and group work. Discipline is joint learning, as well as production and a nurturing of knowledge that constitutes and sustains an institution. the question is whether individuals' discipline indeed makes an institution necessarily better or more just. ; El propósito del presente trabajo consiste en reflexionar sobre la disciplina como categoría (por oposición a otras posibilidades, tales como noción, estructura, norma, protocolo, etc.) y explicar el uso de comillas en el título, en la medida en que siempre pueden suponer una ampliación y una corrección de la palabra disciplina. mi intención es reconstruir la resistencia, que se ha extendido durante décadas, a la disciplina (como castigo, control, pedagogía violenta, militarismo, fanatismo, masculinidad, falta de libertad), así como descubrir el origen del elogio de la auto-disciplina, de la falta de disciplina y de la interdisciplinariedad. Asimismo, querría ofrecer algunos argumentos en favor de la disciplina como uno de los protocolos más importantes de la ontología social y como la incondicionada condición de la cooperación, la vida y el trabajo en grupo. La disciplina es el aprendizaje conjunto, así como la producción y el enriquecimiento del conocimiento que constituye y sostiene una institución. La cuestión es si, de hecho, la disciplina de los individuos hace de manera necesaria que una institución sea mejor o más justa.
If we attempt to find signs of messianism within the rebellion as such, if, for example Korah, "contrary to" but always "together with" Benjamin, is the "first left oppositionist in the history of radical politics," then the final and divine violence carried out by God would, in fact, be Benjamin's pure revolutionary violence perpetrated precisely against this first revolutionary. The circulation of the alternative title of this text ("Benjamin's 'Divine Violence' and the case of Korah") within the subtitle ("The Rebellion against Moses as the First Scene of Messianism [Numbers, 16]"), and conversely, is an accurate description of the "misunderstanding" in connection to the understanding of revolution in Benjamin, because the one who carries out revolutionary violence is not found where we, all this time, had expected him to be. Is it precisely this betrayed expectation that constantly brings us back to Benjamin's "Critique of Violence"? But what exactly do we expect? Do we expect a final violence of catastrophic proportions negating every future violence and time of expectation? Do we expect the subject of this positive violence – the noble [edle] subject of the revolution?
Che cosa sono "oggi" - nell'età globale - i diritti umani? Quali le loro implicazioni etico-giuridico-politiche? In che senso a essi si applica l'attributo di "umani"? Si può ancora parlare, in proposito, di un "proprio" dell'uomo, al di là di essenzialismi o naturalismi metafisici? I diritti umani sono universali o particolari? Rappresentano, come taluni sostengono, una lingua franca dello spazio politico internazionale o costituiscono la via obliqua della riaffermazione di vecchie e nuove asimmetrie o esclusioni (individuali, sociali, culturali)? Possiamo rinunciare ai diritti umani o essi possiedono ancora la valenza di un indispensabile strumento critico? Il volume si propone di affrontare, in una prospettiva filosofica, i problemi sottesi a tali interrogativi, secondo i diversi punti di vista che si intrecciano nella discussione attuale e nei saggi degli autori.
Since its first publication in French in 1988, Race, Nation, Classe. Les Identités ambiguës has been translated into nine languages, sparking an intriguing variety of discussions. How were Balibar and Wallerstein's theses expanded, adapted, and criticized? How can the questions raised in the book be connected with their manifold reverberations still found today? How have they shifted in diverse local contexts? Published alongside the symposium Dangerous Conjunctures. Resituating Balibar/Wallerstein's "Race, Nation, Class" the contributions to this publication reflect the book's reception and the relevance of its topics for both past and present. Authors from diverse local contexts worldwide—from Argentina through South Africa and Palestine to India and Japan—investigate its impact in relation to local political and social developments. Furthermore, workshops that took place between November 2017 and January 2018 in Ankara, Belgrade, Berlin, Buenos Aires, Kolkata, and Cape Town, discussed the current conjuncture of racism, class relations, and nationalisms. Together, the essays and findings of the workshops provide a basis for a "practice of theory" that Race, Nation, Class advocates, and which is urgently needed in the current global predicament.
The Author defines four main features of imperial wars, conceived as eternal wars that produce no nomos: the existence of asymmetric powers; an «outside» which is not on the margins but inside and in different places; the use of military police action and expeditions; the constant changing of laws and norms. These four elements are analyzed through the imaginary encounter between the «emperor» and the «pirate». By reading Carl Schmitt's Der Begriff der Piraterie (1937), it is argued that «pirate» becomes the confusing and complicated name for the space outside, which is the paradoxical premise for the constitution of an Empire, league of nation or world government.
